The Project Gutenberg eBook of History of Merchant Shipping and Ancient Commerce, Volume 4 (of 4)
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: History of Merchant Shipping and Ancient Commerce, Volume 4 (of 4)
Author: W. S. Lindsay
Release date: September 8, 2024 [eBook #74393]
Language: English
Original publication: London: Sampson Low, Marston, Low, and Searle, 1874
Credits: Melissa McDaniel and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORY OF MERCHANT SHIPPING AND ANCIENT COMMERCE, VOLUME 4 (OF 4) ***
HISTORY
OF
MERCHANT SHIPPING
AND
ANCIENT COMMERCE.
BY
W. S. LINDSAY.
_IN FOUR VOLUMES._
VOL. IV.
With numerous Illustrations.
LONDON:
SAMPSON LOW, MARSTON, LOW, AND SEARLE.
CROWN BUILDINGS, 188 FLEET STREET.
1876.
[_All Rights reserved._]
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.
[Illustration: “GREAT EASTERN” STEAM-SHIP.
BUILT BY MESSRS. J. SCOTT RUSSELL AND CO., MILWALL, 1857.]
[Illustration: VIEW OF DECK.]
[Illustration: WHEEL HOUSE AND STEERING APPARATUS.]
[Illustration: LAYING CABLE.]
[Illustration: AT SEA.]
LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS.
DIMENSIONS AND CALIBRE.
Length (between the perpendiculars) 680 feet
Length (on the upper deck) 692 ”
Breadth (from side to side of hull) 83 ”
Breadth (across the paddle-boxes) 120 ”
Depth from deck to keel 58 ”
Length of forecastle 140 ”
Height of forecastle 8 ”
Total length of principal saloons 400 ”
Height of saloons on lower deck 13 feet 8 inches
Number of saloons 5
Height of saloons on upper deck 12 feet
Number of saloons 5
Length of upper saloons 70 feet
Width of upper saloons 30 ”
Length of lower saloons 60 ”
Number of decks 4
Aggregate length of saloons and berths 350 feet
Length of berths 14 ”
Width of berths 7 feet 8 inches
Height of berths 7 feet 4 inches
Number of main traverse bulkheads or water-tight
compartments 12
Ditto partial 7
Longitudinal bulkheads running fore and aft at
a distance of 35 feet apart for a length of 350
feet 2
Width of space between the two skins of ship 2 feet 10 inches
Thickness of iron plates in keel 1 inch
Ditto inner and outer skins ¾ ”
Bulk heads ½ ”
Iron deck ½ ”
Plates of iron used in the construction of the
hull 30,000
Average length of plates 10 feet
Number of rivets in fastening the plates 3,000,000
Weight of iron used in the construction about 10,000 tons
Tonnage 22,500 ”
Capacity for coals and cargo 18,000 ”
Weight of iron in the hull 8,000 ”
Weight of ship, engines, &c., as at its 12,000 ”
launching
Immersion of this weight 15 feet 6 inches
Draught of water laden 30 feet
Draught of water light 20 ”
Accommodation for passengers, 1st class, 800 }
Accommodation for passengers, 2nd class, 2000 } 4,000
Accommodation for passengers, 3rd class, 1200 }
Accommodation for troops alone 10,000
Number of anchors 10
Weight of anchors, cables, &c. 253 tons
Number of boats 20
Number of masts 6
Quantity of canvas under full sail 65,000 square yards
_Paddle-Engines._
Nominal power 1,000 horses
Number of cylinders 4
Diameter of cylinders 74 inches
Weight of cylinders (each) 26 tons
Length of stroke 14 feet
Number of boilers 4
Weight of boilers (each) 50 tons
Weight of water (each) 40 ”
Furnaces for boilers 40
Area of heating surface of boilers 4800 square feet
Number of tubes 400
Diameter of paddle-wheels 58 feet
Weight of paddle-wheels (each) 90 tons
Length of floats 13 feet
Width of floats 3 ”
Number of floats to each wheel 30
_Screw-Engines._
Nominal power 1600 horses
Number of cylinders 4
Weight of cylinders (each) 30 tons
Diameter of cylinders 84 inches
Length of stroke 4 feet
Number of revolutions per minute 50
Number of boilers 6
Weight of boilers 57 tons
Weight of water in them 45 ”
Furnaces for boilers 72
Area of heating surface 5000 square feet
Number of tubes 420
Number of auxiliary engines 2
Number of donkey engines 10
Diameter of screw 24 feet
Number of blades to screw 4
Length of screw shaft 160 feet
Weight of shaft about 60 tons
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I. Pages 1-59
Earliest modes of propulsion—Suggested partly by nature—Hero of
Alexandria, B.C. 120—Dancing steam ball—Æolipile—Application of
science to superstitious purposes—Revival of learning—Robertus
Valturius, 1472—Blasco de Garay—Story of his experiment,
1543—Disproved by Mr. MacGregor’s investigations, _note_—Progress
of invention—Bourne—Solomon de Caus, Marquess of Worcester,
&c.—Morisotus’ _vessel with paddle-wheels_—Hollar’s drawing—Absurd
patents—Phillips and his windmill—Papin and Morland—Savery—Jonathan
Hulls—James Watt’s engine—Matthew Wasborough—Marquis de
Jouffroy—Bramah’s screw-propeller—Mr. Miller of Dalswinton—Mr.
Symington and Mr. Taylor—The _Charlotte Dundas_—Rumsey and Fitch—J.
C. Stevens—Oliver Evans—Robert Fulton and Mr. Livingston—Plan really
derived from the English experiments of Symington—Fulton builds
steamers in the U.S.—The _Clermont_—Merits and demerits of Fulton—At
all events the first to “run” a steam-vessel regularly and to develop
its power and usefulness—First steamboat on the St. Lawrence, 1813.
CHAPTER II. 60-120
Progress of steam navigation in Europe—Clyde mechanics take the
lead—James Watt, 1766—Henry Bell, 1800—Correspondence between
Bell and Fulton—Letter from Bell to Miller of Dalswinton—The
_Comet_ steamer, 1811, plies between Glasgow and Greenock, and
afterwards on the Forth—Extraordinary progress of shipbuilding on the
Clyde—Great value and importance of the private building yards—J.
Elder and Company; their extensive premises, _note_—Steam between
Norwich and Yarmouth, 1813; between London and Margate, 1815—The
_Glasgow_—Early opposition to the employment of steam-vessels—Barges
on the Thames—First steamer between Liverpool and the Clyde—H.
M. steam-ship _Comet_—The _Rob Roy_ and other vessels, 1818—The
_United Kingdom_, 1826—First idea of iron ships, 1830—Proposals
of Trevethick and Dickenson, 1809-1815—The _Vulcan_, 1818—The
_Aaron Manby_, 1821—The Shannon Steam Packet Company, 1824—Mr. John
Laird and Sir William Fairbairn—The _Elburkah_, 1832, and _Garry
Owen_, 1834—The _Rainbow_, 1837—Messrs. Tod and MacGregor—The
_Great Britain_, 1839-1843—Advantages of iron ships—Action of
salt water on iron inconsiderable—Durability, strength, and safety
of iron—Affords greater capacity for stowage—Admiralty slow to
adopt iron for ships of war—Mr. Galloway’s feathering paddles,
1829—Story of the screw-propeller—Joseph Bramah, 1785—Mr. J.
Stevens, 1804—Richard Trevethick, 1815—Robert Wilson, 1833—Captain
Ericsson, 1836—The _Francis B. Ogden_, though successful, fails to
convince the Admiralty—Mr. T. P. Smith—The _Archimedes_—Her trial
with the _Widgeon_, Oct. 1839, and its results—The _Rattler_ and the
_Alecto_, 1843—The _Rattler_ not as successful as expected—Captain
Robert F. Stockton efficiently supports Ericsson’s views—His vessel,
a complete success, and the first “screw” used for commerce in
America—Superiority of Mr. Woodcroft’s “varying” propeller, 1832—In
building fit vessels, the trade in which they are to be employed must
be considered
CHAPTER III. 121-162
Steam-ships of the United States—Improvements in form of
hull—Natural facilities for Steam Navigation in America—Her
lakes—Canals—Harbours—Rivers—Seaboard—Bays and roadsteads—Rapid
increase of steam-vessels—First vessels built for the western rivers
and lakes—Dangers of River Navigation—Number of steamers lost by
“snags,” ice, fire, and collision, 1831-1833—Peculiar description of
wharves and _levees_—Description of steamers employed—Boats of the
Mississippi—Boatmen—Engines of the steamers—Different construction
of the steamers on the Atlantic rivers—Great speed of American
lake and river steamers—Peculiarity of construction—Steamer _New
World_—Details of her construction—The _Daniel Drew_—Her enormous
speed—Pacific Steam-ship Company started, 1847—Cost of establishing
it—Speed of its vessels—Difficulties to encounter—Number of its
steamers—Services performed—China and Japan line—“Law” line of
steamers—South American Steamship Company—Mr. Randall’s projected
large American steamer—Details of proposed ship—Two sets of
paddle-wheels—Principle of construction—Advantages to be derived from
vessels thus built—Mr. Randall’s experience of steamers employed on
the lakes, and the Pacific
CHAPTER IV. 163-220
Struggle between Great Britain and United States for the Atlantic
carrying trade—English shipowners cleave to Protection—“Baltimore
clippers” and “American liners”—The _Savannah_, the first American
Atlantic steamer, 1819—The _Curaçoa_, 1829—The _Royal William_, 1833,
from Quebec—The _Sirius_ and _Great Western_, 1838—Successful voyages
of these vessels—Details of _Great Western_—The _Royal William_,
second of that name, the first steam-ship from Liverpool, 1838,
followed by the _Liverpool_—Origin of the Cunard Company—Contract
for conveyance of mails—Conditions—Names and particulars of
the first steamers in this service—The _Britannia_—Comparative
results of different vessels—Building (1839) and loss (1841) of the
_President_—Building of the _Great Britain_ in 1843—Advantages
of iron ships—American auxiliary screw steamer _Massachusetts_,
1845—American line of steamers to Europe, 1847—First ocean race
won by the English—Not satisfied with Cunard line, the Americans
determine to start one of their own—Reasons for so doing—American
shipowners complain justly of the “Protective” policy of their own
Government—Nevertheless adopted—Collins line established—Original
terms of subsidy—Dimensions of their steamers—Mr. Faron’s visit
to England—Details of the build of these vessels—Engines—Frame
sustaining engines and dead weight—Cost of steamers greatly
increased by demand for increased speed—Further details of competing
lines—Speed obtained and cost—Great competition, 1850-1852—Results
of it
CHAPTER V. 221-250
Dangers of Atlantic Navigation—Collision of _Arctic_ and _Vesta_,
1854—_Arctic_ founders—Loss of _Pacific_, 1856—Renewed exertions
of the Collins and, also, of the Cunard Company—Launch of the
_Persia_—Collins line relinquished, 1858—_Scotia_—Her great
strength and speed—_Russia_, first Cunard iron screw-steamer,
1862—_Bothnia_ and _Scythia_, 1874—Their construction, outfit, and
cabin accommodation—Vessels now owned by Cunard Company—Comparison
of _Britannia_ and _Bothnia_—Cunard Company never lost a
life nor a letter during thirty-five years—Reasons—Value of
punctuality—Admirable discipline in their ships—Regulations of the
Company—Most disasters may be prevented by foresight—Success depends
on fitting means—Cunard line shows what can be done
CHAPTER VI. 251-291
Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company—_City
of Glasgow_, 1850—_City of Manchester_, 1851—Speed of _City of
Paris_ and _City of Brussels_—Exertions of Mr. Inman to improve
and facilitate cheap emigration to the United States—Large number
of emigrants carried in the Inman steamers—_City of Chester_,
1873—_City of Berlin_, 1875—Ocean steamers to Canada, 1853—First
mail contract, 1852—Allan line of steamers, 1856—Extent and capacity
of its fleet—Speed of these vessels—Galway line a failure—Loss
of _Connaught_, 1860—Rapid Passage of _Adriatic_, 1861—Struggles
between sailing-clippers and iron screw-ships—National Steam
Navigation Company, 1863—Their splendid ships—Old Black Ball
line—The Guion line, 1863—Mississippi and Dominion Company—White
Star line, 1870—Strict regulations for safety—_Britannic_ and
_Germanic_—Their great speed—Details of _Britannic_ and form of her
screw—Difficulty of estimating real cost of steamers—Pennsylvania
Company, 1873—Anchor line from the Clyde, 1856—Prodigious range of
their trade operations—The _Victoria_—Hamburg American Steam Packet
Company—North German Lloyd’s
CHAPTER VII. 292-313
Royal West India Mail Steam Packet Company, 1841—Number of their
ships—Conditions of mail contract—Large subsidy—Heavy loss during
the first year of their operations—Capital of the Company—Liberal
concessions by Government—Complaints of the public—Improved
prospects of the company from improved management—Contract renewed,
1850—Its conditions—Fresh conditions, 1857—Contract again renewed,
1864—Further renewal, 1874—The steam-ship _Forth_—Losses of
various ships of the company—Causes of these losses—Loss of the
_Amazon_—Terrible sufferings—Loss of the _Demerara_—Additions to
their fleet, and superior class of vessels
CHAPTER VIII. 314-335
Pacific Steam Navigation Company—First steamer on the Pacific,
1825—Mr. Wheelwright—Obtains a charter, 1840—First vessels,
the _Chili_ and _Peru_—Warm reception at Valparaiso—The Company
persevere—Appointment of Mr. Just, 1846—Extension of contract,
1850—Marked improvement in the prospects of the Company, 1860—New
lines—Vast increase of capital, 1867—Further increase of capital to
3,000,000_l._, 1871—Capital increased to 4,000,000_l._, 1872—Extent
of fleet, _Iberia_ and _Liguria_—_Chimborazo_, 1871—Too rapid
increase—Loss arising therefrom—Modification of mail contract and
reduced services—West coast steamer _Bolivia_—Future prospects of the
Company—Trade with Mexico—First line of steamers from Liverpool to
Chagres—West India and Pacific Steam Navigation Company—Liverpool,
Brazil, and River Plate Steam Navigation Company
CHAPTER IX. 336-375
Steam to India and overland routes—East India Company establish a
Tátar post between Constantinople and Baghdad—First public meeting
in London to promote steam communication with India, 1822—Captain
Johnston—Calcutta meetings, 1823—The _Enterprize_, first steamer to
India by Cape, 1825—Sold in Calcutta to East India Company—Other
steamers follow—Pioneers of overland route viâ Egypt—Sir Miles
Nightingall in 1819 and Mount-Stuart Elphinstone in 1823 return home
by this route—Mr. Thomas Waghorn visits England to promote the
Cape route, 1829-30—Returns to India by way of Trieste and the Red
Sea—Still advocates Cape route, 1830—Mr. Taylor’s proposal—Reply
of Bombay Government and discussion of the question—Supineness
of the Court of Directors—Their views—Official report of the
first voyage of the _Hugh Lindsay_, 1830—Report of the Committee
of 1834—Decision of the House of Commons Committee influenced by
political considerations—Admiralty packets extended from Malta
to Alexandria—Steamers of the Indian navy—Modes of transport
across the Isthmus of Suez—Great exertions of Waghorn in the
establishment of this route—Suez Canal—Popular errors on this
subject—M. de Lesseps—His great scheme—Not fairly considered
in England—Commencement of M. de Lesseps’ works in 1857—General
details—Partial opening of Canal, April 18th, 1869—Finally opened by
Empress Eugénie, November 17th, 1869
CHAPTER X. 376-415
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company—Its founders and
origin—Messrs. Willcox and Anderson—Mr. James Allan—How the
Peninsular mails were originally conveyed—Proposal of Peninsular
Company for their conveyance—Contract concluded August 29th,
1837—Conveyance of mails to India previously to 1839—Government
applies to the Peninsular Company and accepts their proposals, though
reluctantly—Proposed direct line from Falmouth to Calcutta—First
vessels hence, on Indian postal service to Alexandria—Original
postal service from Suez to Bombay—Contract for mails between Suez
and Calcutta, September 1842—Further proposals made by the East
India Company and Government, but finally rejected by the East
India Company—Further contracts for mail service to China and
Singapore—Peninsular and Oriental Company undertake the line between
Bombay and Suez, 1854—House of Commons Committee on Australian mail
service, 1849—Eastern Steam Navigation Company and Peninsular and
Oriental Company tender for it, but the Peninsular and Oriental
succeed—The _Himalaya_ built—New contract with Peninsular and
Oriental Company, January 1853—Failure of Service during the Crimean
War—Proposals for an independent Australian mail service—Tender of
European and Australian Company accepted—Their entire failure—Speech
of Lord Overstone, March 24th, 1859—Royal Mail Company undertakes
the Australian service and fails—New tenders invited—That of
Peninsular and Oriental Company accepted, 1859—Consolidation of
services in the Peninsular and Oriental Company—Its present condition
and fleet of ships—Terms of the contract now in force—Revenue and
expenditure—Coals required—Descriptions of vessels—Screw steamer
_Khedive_—Particulars of this ship—Uniform and regulations of the
Company
CHAPTER XI. 416-446
Changes produced by the opening of the Suez Canal—Sailing
fruit-clippers—Introduction of steamers into the Mediterranean
trade, 1840—Establishment of various steam lines, 1850—That of
Messrs. Frederick Leyland and Co., &c.—Their fleets—Messageries
Maritimes Company—Its origin and management—First contract
for the conveyance of the oversea French mails, 1851—Extension
of contracts, 1854-56—Brazil line, 1857—Vast extent of its
fleet—Largest vessels—Trade viâ the Suez Canal—Presumed advantage
of auxiliary engines—Not borne out by the results—Conveyance of
the Australian mails—Peculiar conditions of contracts—Failure of
the service—Stringent penalties—Australian steam services—Mr.
Alfred Holt’s line of steamers to China—Its success—Messrs.
Gellatly, Hankey, and Company—Messrs. Green and Company—Messrs.
Rathbone Brothers—Messrs. George Smith and Sons—Letter from Mr.
George Smith—Messrs. Smiths’ ships and their voyages to and from
India—Changes in the mode of conducting commerce with India and
China—Number of vessels through Suez Canal since its opening, and
their nationality
CHAPTER XII. 447-485
First application of steam-vessels on the rivers and coasts of India,
1825—S.S. _Diana_—S.S. _Burhampooter_ and _Hooghly_, 1828—Arrival
in India of Lord William Bentinck as Governor-General—His efforts to
promote Steam Navigation—Voyages of the S.S. _Hooghly_ up the Ganges,
1828, 1829 and 1830—Other vessels recommended to be built—Two of
them of Iron—Steam Companies formed, 1845—Steam Committee, 1857,
and rapid progress of steam-vessels from this date—Improved troop
steamer for the Lower Indus—Sea-going steamers of India—S.S. _John
Bright_—British India Steam Navigation Company established, 1857—Its
fleet, and extent of its operations—Origin of this Company—Its early
difficulties, and rapid extension—Number of ships lost—Effect of
the opening of the Suez Canal on the trade of this Company—The _Holy
Ship_, _note_—Netherlands Steam Navigation Company, 1866—Its fleet,
and how employed—Irrawaddy Flotilla and Burmese Steam Navigation
Company, 1865—Services of this Company—Extent of inland trade—Fleet
of the Company—Interior trade of China—The Yang-tse-Kiang—Its source
and extent—Opened to trade, 1860—First steam-ship direct from Hankow
to England, 1863—Passage of the _Robert Lowe_ and her cargo—Number of
steamers employed on the Yang-tse 1864 and in 1875—S.S. _Hankow_—Her
power and capacity, _note_—Chinese Steam Navigation Company—Proposed
Imperial fleet of steamers—Increase of trade with China—The
resources of the interior—Mode of conducting business—“Hongs” or
Guilds—Chinese Bankers—River and coasting trade of China—Japanese
line of steamers—How employed
CHAPTER XIII. 486-515
Eastern Steam Navigation Company—Detailed proposals of the
directors—Capital subscribed to build the _Great Eastern_—Relative
size and speed of sailing-ships—Mr. Brunel proposes to build a ship
five or six times as big as any existing vessel, and is supported in
his views by Mr. Scott Russell—Plan of construction, size, &c.—Mr.
Atherton considers the views of the directors are not supported by
their data—The _Great Eastern_ commenced May 1, 1854—Details of her
dimensions and mode of construction—Practically, one ship within
another—Compartments and bulkheads—Floor—Construction of the iron
plates for hull—The deck and its strength—Enormous steam-power
from combination of paddle and screw—Paddle-wheel, auxiliary, and
screw-engines—Donkey-engines—Proposed accommodation for passengers,
&c.—View of deck, &c.—Saloon—Intended to carry twenty large boats
and two steamers—Compasses—Size of sails—Magnetic apparatus of Mr.
J. Gray—Apparatus for steering—Rudder and anchors, and _note_—The
ship itself a marvel, though commercially, a failure—Preparations for,
and details of, the launching of the _Great Eastern_
CHAPTER XIV. 516-543
Commencement of launch of the _Great Eastern_, November 3rd,
1857—Christened by Miss Hope—Comparative failure—Renewed efforts
scarcely more successful—Hydraulic ram bursts—Floats of her own
accord, January 31st, 1858—The whole scheme of this launch a thorough
mistake—Difficulties of the Company—Offer to Government wisely
declined—Further proposal to employ her as a cable layer—Makes
her first sea trip, September 9th, 1859—Accident off Hastings,
and the opinion of the pilot—Reaches Holyhead; and details of her
voyage—Makes her first voyage across the Atlantic, June 1860—Second
voyage, May 1861—Third voyage, to Quebec, July 1861—Fourth voyage,
September 1861—Heavy gale off S. W. coast of Ireland, and compelled to
return to Cork—General remarks on the sea-going qualities of different
ships, and on the effect of wind in causing “rollers”—Real truth
about “momentum”—Very large ships not so safe as smaller ones, as
their damages are less easily repaired—Chief later use of the _Great
Eastern_ as a cable layer, but not, even here, remunerative—Concluding
remarks.
CHAPTER XV. 544-584
River and coast trade of Great Britain—The _Iona_, paddle
steamer—First screw collier _Q. E. D._—The _King Coal_ collier—Her
dimensions and crew, _note_—Improvement in care of seamen—Leith and
London traders—Dublin and Holyhead Mail-Packets—Their great speed
and regularity—Dimensions, power, capacity, and cost—Dover and
Calais Mail-Packets—The _Victoria_—Her speed—Proposed tunnel and
other modes of crossing the Straits of Dover—Mr. Fowler’s plan—The
_Castalia_—The _Bessemer_—Her swinging saloon—The cigar-ship built
at Baltimore, 1858—Similar ship built on the Thames, 1864—Perkins’s
economical steam-engine and proposed fast boat—The Engine of the
_Comet_—Modifications in the construction of Marine Engines—Ratio
of speed to power—The Compound Engine more economical than the
simple—Great skill required for building perfect ships, and especial
importance to England of having the best ships—But her ships not yet
perfect, though great progress has been made during the last half
century
APPENDICES.
PAGE
APPENDIX No. 1 587
APPENDIX No. 2 591
APPENDIX No. 3 593
APPENDIX No. 4 594
APPENDIX No. 5 595
APPENDIX No. 6 599
APPENDIX No. 7 600
APPENDIX No. 8 601
APPENDIX No. 9 603
APPENDIX No. 10 606
APPENDIX No. 11 608
APPENDIX No. 12 609
APPENDIX No. 13 611
APPENDIX No. 14 612
APPENDIX No. 15 613
APPENDIX No. 16 614
APPENDIX No. 17 617
APPENDIX No. 18 633
APPENDIX No. 19 634
APPENDIX No. 20 635
APPENDIX No. 21 637
APPENDIX No. 22 637
APPENDIX No. 23 639
APPENDIX No. 24 641
APPENDIX No. 25 643
APPENDIX No. 26 644
APPENDIX No. 27 645
INDEX 647
ILLUSTRATIONS.[1]
PAGE
S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” (LONGITUDINAL SECTION AND SCALE) Frontispiece.
S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” VIEW OF DECK Frontispiece.
S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” WHEEL-HOUSE AND STEERING
APPARATUS Frontispiece.
S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” LAYING CABLE Frontispiece.
S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” AT SEA Frontispiece.
THE PAPER NAUTILUS 3
HERO’S STEAM CAULDRON (FIRST IDEA OF THE POWER OF STEAM,
B.C. 120) 5
HERO’S STEAM ÆOLIPILE (FIRST STEAM MACHINE) 6
FIRST VESSEL PROPELLED BY WHEELS (SEVENTH CENTURY) 10
ILLYRIAN BARGE WITH OXEN DRIVING PADDLE-WHEELS 19
CURIOUS VESSEL BUILT IN ROTTERDAM, A.D. 1653 20
FIRST STEAM-BOAT (BY JONATHAN HULLS OF CAMPDEN, GLOUCESTERSHIRE),
1736 26
MURRAY RIVER STEAMER 27
WATER-WHEEL 33
MILLER’S TREBLE VESSEL, TO WHICH A STEAM-ENGINE WAS APPLIED,
1787 33
SECTIONAL VIEW OF THE S.S. “CHARLOTTE DUNDAS” 37
FIRST AMERICAN STEAM-BOAT BY JOHN FITCH, U.S., 1786 42
SECOND AMERICAN STEAM-BOAT BY JOHN FITCH, FIRST USED, 1790 44
S.S. “CLERMONT” BY ROBERT FULTON, U.S. FIRST STEAM-VESSEL
USED SUCCESSFULLY IN AMERICA, 1807 51
S.S. “COMET.” FIRST PASSENGER STEAMER ON THE RIVER CLYDE,
SCOTLAND, 1812 66
THAMES SAILING BARGE 75
STATIONERS’ COMPANY’S SAILING BARGE 76
S.S. “UNITED KINGDOM” (LONDON AND EDINBURGH) 81
GALLOWAY’S PATENT PADDLE-WHEEL 99
DIFFERENT FORMS OF SCREWS 101
SCREW STEAMER “ROBERT F. STOCKTON” 114
WOODCROFT’S VARYING-PITCH SCREW-PROPELLER 117
EARLY AMERICAN LAKE SCREW-PROPELLER 133
AMERICAN RIVER STEAMER “NEW WORLD” 145
LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE MIDSHIP SECTIONS OF PROPOSED
LARGE AMERICAN STEAMER 158, 159
FIRST CUNARD STEAM-SHIP “BRITANNIA” 182
STEAM-SHIP “GREAT BRITAIN” 188
AUXILIARY U.S. STEAM-SHIP “MASSACHUSETTS” 191
AMERICAN STEAM-SHIP “WASHINGTON” 196
COLLINS’S U.S. STEAM-SHIP “ATLANTIC” 206
CUNARD’S STEAM-SHIP “SCOTIA” 229
CUNARD’S STEAM-SHIP “BOTHNIA” 233
HARFIELD’S STEAM WINDLASS 234
SALOON CABINS S.S. “BOTHNIA” AND “SCYTHIA” 236
INMAN’S SCREW STEAM-SHIP “CITY OF MANCHESTER” 252
INMAN’S SCREW STEAM-SHIP “CITY OF CHESTER” 258
WHITE STAR STEAM-SHIP “BRITANNIC” 278
SCREW-SHAFT OF S.S. “BRITANNIC” 280
MIDSHIP SECTION OF “BRITANNIC” 281
ANCHOR LINE S.S. “VICTORIA” 289
ROYAL MAIL WEST INDIA S.S. “FORTH” 303
ROYAL MAIL WEST INDIA S.S. “AMAZON” 306
PACIFIC COMPANY’S S.S. “PERU” 319
PACIFIC COMPANY’S S.S. “CHIMBORAZO” 325
PACIFIC COMPANY’S S.S. “SANTA-ROSA” 328
S.S. “ENTERPRISE.” FIRST STEAMER THAT DOUBLED THE CAPE
OF GOOD HOPE 340
MAP OF SUEZ CANAL AND SURROUNDING DISTRICT 364
PENINSULAR AND ORIENTAL COMPANY’S S.S. “ROYAL TAR” 380
PENINSULAR AND ORIENTAL COMPANY’S S.S. “KHEDIVE” 411
LEYLAND AND COMPANY’S S.S. “BAVARIAN” 420
LINDSAY’S AUXILIARY STEAM-SHIPS 429
SWIRES’ YANG-TSE STEAMER “HANKOW” 471
CHINESE TEA-BOAT 475
JAPANESE CARGO-BOAT 485
PLATFORM ON WHICH S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” WAS BUILT 497
TRANSVERSE MIDSHIP SECTION OF “GREAT EASTERN” 498
TRANSVERSE MIDSHIP SECTION OF ENGINE-ROOM OF “GREAT EASTERN” 501
GRAND SALOON CABIN OF “GREAT EASTERN” 506
S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” READY TO BE LAUNCHED 517
S.S. “GREAT EASTERN” AT SEA UNDER FULL SAIL 527
MODERN SCREW COLLIER “KING COAL” 548
CHANNEL PACKET S.S. “VICTORIA” 556
FOWLER’S PROPOSED CHANNEL STEAM FERRY 559
CHANNEL PACKET S.S. “CASTALIA” 562
CHANNEL PACKET S.S. “BESSEMER” 565
PERKINS’ PROPOSED TRANSATLANTIC STEAM-SHIP 572
TRANSVERSE MIDSHIP SECTION OF DITTO 572
ENGINE OF THE FIRST CLYDE STEAMER “COMET” 574
LATEST AND MOST IMPROVED COMPOUND SURFACE MARINE STEAM
ENGINE 578
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The whole of these Illustrations have been re-drawn on block, and a
great many of them are original. It is, however, only due to the memory
of a truly good and unassuming man to state, more especially as he was
a thorough genius in the illustration of all nautical subjects, that
many of the drawings are reduced copies from those of the late Edward
Weedon, who, for many years, and up to his untimely death in 1874, was
one of the staff of artists of the _Illustrated London News_.
MERCHANT SHIPPING.
CHAPTER I.
Earliest modes of propulsion—Suggested partly by nature—Hero of
Alexandria, B.C. 120—Dancing steam ball—Æolipile—Application
of science to superstitious purposes—Revival of
learning—Robertus Valturius, 1472—Blasco de Garay—Story
of his experiment, 1543—Disproved by Mr. MacGregor’s
investigations, _note_—Progress of invention—Bourne—Solomon
de Caus, Marquess of Worcester, &c.—Morisotus’ _vessel with
paddle-wheels_—Hollar’s drawing—Absurd patents—Phillips and
his windmill—Papin and Morland—Savery—Jonathan Hulls—James
Watt’s engine—Matthew Wasborough—Marquis de Jouffroy—Bramah’s
screw-propeller—Mr. Miller of Dalswinton—Mr. Symington and
Mr. Taylor—The _Charlotte Dundas_—Rumsey and Fitch—J. C.
Stevens—Oliver Evans—Robert Fulton and Mr. Livingston—Plan
really derived from the English experiments of Symington—Fulton
builds steamers in the U. S.—The _Clermont_—Merits and demerits
of Fulton—At all events the first to “run” a steam-vessel
regularly, and to develop its power and usefulness—First
steam-boat on the St. Lawrence, 1813.
[Sidenote: Earliest modes of propulsion.]
Modern investigation has confirmed the opinion that the knowledge of
the ancients was more varied and extensive than has hitherto been
generally supposed, and that there is indeed “nothing new under the
sun.” Iron chain-cables, supposed to have been the invention of the
present century, were, as already shown,[2] used by the shipowners of
Tyre, while the iron-clad rams of to-day are but copies of the prows
of the war galleys of ancient Carthage, Rome, or Nineveh:[3] and,
although, on the sculptures of Egypt and Assyria there is no trace of
the application of wheels or machinery of any kind, as a propelling
power, the mechanical knowledge ancient inventions exhibit leads to the
conviction that other modes of propulsion than those of poles, oars,
and sails must have been understood in remote ages. Indeed, Nature
herself, at the dawn of knowledge, must have suggested to men widely
removed one from the other, appliances for lessening manual labour,
while some of these were undoubtedly carried into practice during the
earliest period of the existence of the human race.
[Sidenote: Suggested partly by nature.]
That such was the case may be reasonably inferred from the ancient
stone sculptures exhumed by Layard and others, showing as these do
beyond question that the people of Egypt, Assyria and Babylonia, when
floating on bundles of reeds or on inflated skins, propelled them by
the motion of their legs,[4] just as an animal swims by using its
limbs for the purpose of propulsion in the water which supports it. In
aquatic animals may be seen the types of almost every kind of machinery
now adopted by man to lessen bodily toil. The cuttle-fish moves forward
by fins, and backwards by ejecting water from a tube; whelks suggest
the art of punting and towing; the value of paddles may be learned from
ducks or other aquatic birds in their motion through the water, and the
use of a folding feather from the lobster; while the combined action of
the paddle-wheel and screw-propeller will be found in the microscopic
insects “Paramacium caudatum” and “Paramacium compressum.” The marine
animals “Vebella” and “Physalia,” familiarly known as the “Portuguese
men-of-war,” whose bodies resemble an inflated bladder, float on the
water and are propelled by the wind acting on their extended membranes.
Swans extend their feathers to sail with the wind; and, though that
fairy-looking, fragile thing, the paper-nautilus, seems to be the sport
alike of the gale and of the most gentle breeze, it possesses in itself
the power of propulsion by projecting water.[5]
[Illustration]
But the common fish of every sea would have suggested to man, in the
most remote ages, a mode of supplementing manual labour: the fin giving
him the idea of a paddle or of an oar, and the tail teaching him the
art of sculling, the principle in each case being the same: the tail,
moving from side to side, by oblique pressure on the water, propels the
fish forward along a diagonal line, the resultant of the forces acting
from the right and the left sides of the fish, and is, thus, the chief
instrument of motion, while the fins serve to direct and steady it.[6]
[Sidenote: Hero of Alexandria, B.C. 120.]
Nor, indeed, is there much doubt that the ancients were acquainted
with the power of steam, though they cannot be said to have applied
this knowledge to any useful purposes. A treatise is still in
existence “On Pneumatics,” by Hero,[7] a philosophic mathematician
who lived at Alexandria about B.C. 120, in which he gives an account
of seventy-eight miscellaneous experiments, most of them probably
adapted for the superstitious purposes of the heathen priesthood, but
some also as certainly foreshadowing the definite application of steam
as a motive force. The following, we notice as, in themselves, of
considerable interest.
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Dancing steam ball.]
[Sidenote: Æolipile.]
“First,” he says (exper. No. 45), “let there be a cauldron with water
in it and a covered top; and let a fire be lighted under it. From
the cover let a tube run upward, and place at its extremity a hollow
hemisphere, in like manner perforated. Then, if a light ball be cast
into the middle of the hemisphere, the vapour (steam) raised from
the cauldron through this tube will lift the ball so that it seems
suspended.” This is no doubt an ingenious and amusing philosophical
toy, but has no further value. His next experiment, however (No. 50),
is of greater importance, not only as showing a clear and distinct
appreciation of the motive power of steam, but because its principle
is embodied in the well-known mode of driving potters’ wheels and in
the modern turbine. He says, “Let a fire be lighted under a cauldron
with water in it and covered with a lid; and attach to this cauldron a
bent tube with the extremity fitting into a hollow ball. Opposite to
the extremity of this tube place a pivot fastened to the lid, and let
the ball have various tubes communicating with it at opposite ends of
the diameter, with their bendings at right angles (i.e., in opposite
directions). Then when the fire is lighted, the steam passing through
the first tube (i.e., from the cauldron) into the ball, will pass out
through the bent tubes towards the lid, causing the ball to revolve
after the fashion of dancing figures.”[8] This machine was called the
Æolipile.
[Illustration]
In these few words we have a clear indication of the power of steam,
of the nature and effect of a vacuum, and of a rotatory engine moved
by this force: we thus see that the ancients knew more than has been
generally admitted of the wonderful power which, in our own time, has
brought about the most extraordinary changes in the seats and centres
of maritime commerce, affording to mankind a facility of intercourse
between different nations, while at the same time increasing the
wealth, and, what is of much more importance, promoting the comfort and
happiness of the human race to an extent far beyond the dreams of the
most sanguine enthusiast of any age or of any country.
From the uncontroverted facts here stated, there can be no doubt that
Hero was the first to record, even if he did not invent, this mighty
civilising instrument, and, if so, that Egypt was the land of its birth.
[Sidenote: Application of science to superstitious purposes.]
But many centuries elapsed before its power was applied to any useful
purpose; indeed, as suggested, there is reason for supposing that this
science was misapplied by the priests, and used as a means of deceiving
the people by inducing them to believe it to be a miraculous power
granted only to the professors of the craft of idolatry. “A fire,”
says Hero (experiment No. 70), “having been kindled on a transparent
altar, figures will appear to dance” on a drum driven round by steam,
“emitting sounds similar to those of a stringed instrument,”[9] which,
according to Pausanias, “resemble the snapping of the strings of a
harp;” thus, while delighting the young people of those days, as the
ornaments in churches now do, these experiments became instruments of
make-belief in the hands of the priests, who propounded as strange
theories about their supernatural powers as the so-called philosophers
of our own days still do, when they attempt to deal with the unrevealed
mysteries of creation and of a still more mysterious hereafter.[10]
[Sidenote: Revival of learning.]
Although the Romans did nothing towards applying the knowledge of the
power of steam to useful purposes, and little enough generally for the
mechanical arts, the true value of the works of Hero and of the older
mechanicians came to be appreciated in the dawn which succeeded the
darkness of the Middle Ages. Then the youths of a generation, which had
cast aside many of the superstitions of the ancients, and had found in
the doctrines of Christianity a wider and nobler field for their genius
and aspirations, began to study how the power Hero had described could
be best applied for the benefit and happiness of mankind. Then, indeed,
was the advent of an era wherein the foundation was laid of a fabric
which, though slow in its erection, and not yet completed, is destined
to eclipse all the other works of man. There can be, therefore, no
subject affecting the transitory interests of the human race more
worthy of the pen of the historian than the development of the power
and usefulness of steam traced from that remote period to our own
time, when we see in every quarter of the civilised world this power
compassing land and ocean, affording profitable employment to myriads
of the human race, and giving to the people of every nation and tongue
rapid and easy intercourse.
[Sidenote: Robertus Valturius, 1472.]
“Although an old work on China,” remarks Mr. MacGregor,[11] “contains
a sketch of a vessel moved by four paddle-wheels, and used perhaps in
the seventh century, the earliest distinct notice of this means of
propulsion appears to be by Robertus Valturius in A.D. 1472, who gives
several woodcuts representing paddle-wheels,”[12] one of which is as
follows.
[Illustration]
There is, however, no mention of any vessel propelled by _steam_ till
M. de Navarette directed attention to this subject in a letter[13]
received by him from Thomas Gonzales, Director of the Royal Archives
of Simancas of Spain, with an account of an experiment of the year
1543, in which a vessel is said to have been propelled by something
resembling a steam-engine.
[Sidenote: Blasco de Garay, story of his experiment, 1543.]
The substance of this letter is to the effect that, in that year, one
Blasco de Garay, proposed to the Emperor Charles V., the construction
of an engine (_ingenio_) capable of propelling large vessels in a calm,
and without the use of sails or oars. In spite of the opposition this
project encountered, the Emperor consented to witness the experiment,
which was accordingly made in the _Trinity_, a vessel of 200 tons,
laden with corn, in the port of Barcelona, on the 17th June, 1543.
Garay, however, would not uncover his machinery, or exhibit it
publicly: but it was evident that it consisted of a cauldron of boiling
water (_una gran caldera de agua hirviendo_) and of two wheels set in
motion by that means, and applied externally on each side (_banda_) of
the vessel.
The persons commissioned by the Emperor to report on the invention seem
to have approved it, commending specially the readiness with which the
vessel tacked. The treasurer Ravago, however, observed that a ship with
the proposed machinery could not go faster than two leagues in three
hours; that the apparatus was complex and expensive; and that there
was danger of the boiler bursting. The other commissioners maintained
that such a vessel might go at the rate of a league an hour, and would
tack in half the time required by an ordinary ship. When the exhibition
was over, Garay removed the apparatus from the _Trinity_, depositing
the wood-work in the arsenal at Barcelona, but retaining himself the
rest of the machinery. Notwithstanding, however, the objections urged
by Ravago, the Emperor was inclined to favour his project, but his
attention at the time was engrossed by other matters.[14] Garay was,
however, promoted and received a sum of money, besides the expenses
of the experiment made at Barcelona. The letter concludes with the
following statement:—
“This is the substance of the despatches and of the original registers
preserved in the royal archives of Simancas, among the State papers
of the province of Catalonia, and of those of the Secretary of War
(department of land and sea), in the said year, 1543.”
Mr. MacGregor, greatly to his credit, desirous of ascertaining whether
this report (which, from the well-known accuracy of M. de Navarette on
other subjects, had been accepted as correct) could be depended upon,
visited Spain in September, 1857, and made a thorough investigation at
Simancas, Madrid, and Barcelona into this interesting subject, but his
inquiries (reported, at length, January, 1858, to the Superintendent
of Specifications at the Great Seal Patent Office, and printed in
Part II., “Specifications relating to Marine Propulsion”), convinced
him “that there was not one particle of reliable evidence” in M. de
Navarette’s assertion.[15]
An attentive consideration of the subject leads to the conclusion
at which Mr. MacGregor has arrived. Even in the present day it
would require an engine and boiler of considerable size to propel
a vessel of 200 tons three miles an hour; moreover, the novel and
bulky machinery with which the experiment is said to have been
made, could not have been erected in the ship or removed from her
without attracting considerable public attention. Indeed, had such an
experiment been made before the Spanish Emperor, and made successfully
as the narrative leads us to suppose, a matter so important could
hardly have lain dormant for any great length of time: whatever,
therefore, Blasco de Garay’s invention may have been, it was evidently
not a steam-engine practically applicable for any useful purpose.
Witzen, no doubt, in confirmation of Garay’s experiment, furnishes
an illustration of a “Spanish bark without oars or sails,” but as,
unfortunately, there is not a single line of letter-press beyond the
few words quoted to throw the faintest light upon his drawing, it can
only be supposed from the descriptive title that it referred to the
vessel which Garay is said to have propelled. Indeed, De Garay’s whole
story looks very much as if it was an invention of the Spaniards; Mr.
Scott Russell,[16] as well as Mr. MacGregor, is of this opinion, and
Mr. Woodcroft, no mean authority on such matters, states that, having
made diligent inquiries at Simancas, he could find no trace of these
documents, thus confirming the result of the more minute researches of
Mr. MacGregor.[17]
[Sidenote: Progress of invention; Bourne, Solomon de Caus, Marquess
of Worcester, &c.]
About this period, however, frequent mention is made of other modes
of propulsion besides those hitherto in use. J. C. Scaliger (who died
1558) published at Frankfort a short notice of a vessel to be propelled
without oars. Bourne, in 1578,[18] says, in his own quaint style,
“you may make a boate to goe without oares or sayle by the placing
of certain wheeles on the outside of the boat in that sort that the
armes of the wheeles may go into the water, and so turning the wheeles
by some provision, and so the wheeles shall make the boate goe.” I.
Bessoni, in 1582, describes a vessel with two prows, or rather two
separate vessels attached to each other (not unlike the _Castalia_, now
running between Dover and Calais), between which a frame is suspended
on gimbles carrying at its lower end a circular reel worked by ropes
and a winch whereby they can be propelled.[19] A. Ramelli, in 1588,
furnishes a design of a flat-bottomed boat with a wheel on each side,
turned by men working upon a winch handle.[20] Indeed, long before
this, the celebrated Roger Bacon (A.D. 1214-1296) speaks of a “vessel
which, being almost wholly submerged, would run through the water
against waves and winds with a speed greater than that attained by the
fastest London pinnaces.”[21] Baptista Porta (the inventor of the magic
lantern) published in his “Pneumaticorum Libri Tres,” Naples, 1601,
many curious experiments on the power of steam, on its condensation,
and on its relative bulk as compared with water. In one of these a
vacuum is clearly indicated, the water being forced up by the pressure
of the atmosphere from without.
David Rivault, Seigneur de Flurance near Laval, published “Les Éléments
de l’Artillerie,” first in 1605 and secondly in 1668—and in this work
he describes the power of steam in bursting a strong bomb-shell partly
filled with water, tightly plugged, and then heated.
In 1615, Solomon de Caus (Engineer to Louis XIII.) published a treatise
(“Les Raisons des Forces Mouvantes”) in which he shows he was well
acquainted with the motive power of steam—as, in his fifth theorem, he
says, “water will mount by the help of fire higher than its level:” he
also shows, by an experiment, how a column of water may be driven up
a tube to such a height as will balance the elasticity of the heated
air confined in the boiler; and Arago, in his “Éloge de James Watt,”
considers that this experiment, though of little practical use, “will
make a noble figure in the annals of the steam-engine.”
In 1629, Giovanni Branca, an engineer of Loretto, applied steam to blow
against vanes attached to the external rim of a wheel, and, doubtless,
machinery with due mechanical contrivances could have been impelled by
it. He gives a picture of his machine in “Le Machine,” vol. nuovo, Pl.
XXV.
In 1618, David Ramsay obtained a patent for an invention “to make
boates for carriages running upon the water as swift in calmes and more
safe in storms than boats full sayled in great windes;” and in 1630 he
patented a plan “to make boats, ships, and barges to goe against the
wind and tide;” and “to raise water from lowe pitts by fire”[22] (the
steam-engine).
In 1637, Francis Lin and others patented a plan “to use and exercise
upon the River Thames, and any other river within England and Wales,
according to their owne way and inventing the sole drauinge and
workinge up of all Barges and other vessels without the use of horses;”
and, in 1646, Edward Ford proposed a similar plan for the navigation
of rivers, and one whereby he could “bring little ships, barges, and
vessels in and out of havens without or against any small wynd or tide,
and transport souldiers and passengers without or against wynde yf the
seas be not rough.”[23]
In 1652 (July 30th), Thomas Grant, Doctor of Physic, obtained a patent
“for several instruments, whereof the first is an instrument very
profitable when co[~m]on winds fayle for a more speedy passage of
calmed shipps or other vessells upon the sea or great rivers, which may
be called the wynds māty.”
In the recital of the inventions of the Marquess of Worcester, 8th
February, 1661, reference is made to one which was “applicable to make
a boat that roweth or letteth, even against wind and stream to any part
of the compass which way soever the streame runs or wind blows, and yet
the force of the wind or stream causeth its motion.” But though the
Marquess has generally had the credit of having applied a power other
than manual or animal labour for the purpose of propulsion, it has been
doubted from the description of his invention if it was a steam-engine
which could be applied to drive a boat.[24]
Petty, in 1663, used a double boat with success.[25] Chamberlaine and
Bushnell, in 1678, had also their plans for propelling boats against
wind and tide, while Hooke, in 1661, described windmills in which “we
have all the main features both of the screw-propeller and feathering
wheel.”[26]
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Morisotus’ _vessel_ with _paddle-wheels_.]
From about this period much attention was directed to the use of
machinery for propulsion. Morisotus, moreover, who published his
views in 1643,[27] speaks of the paddle-wheel as a mode of propelling
vessels, known also, as he believed, to the ancients, and states that
the simple machinery employed was the same in fact as was in his day
used in mining operations in the Spanish Indies. Schefer, in his
instructive and interesting work, also makes mention of a remarkable
vessel described by Pancirolli (who wrote, in 1587, on naval and
military matters) as resembling what he had seen in an old bas-relief
of an Illyrian galley, a vessel apparently propelled by wheels similar
in character to those in the above wood-cut, from Morisotus.
[Sidenote: Hollar’s drawing.]
But, as no such clumsy vessel could have been employed in a seaway, her
movements must have been confined to rivers or inland waters. It is
just possible that such and similar vessels might at some period have
been used for ferrying rivers[28] or lakes. Very extraordinary notions,
however, appear to have been propounded about, and subsequently to,
this period, and, as a matter of curiosity, I furnish one of these
taken from Hollar’s engravings, which does not appear to have been
noticed by any writer on this interesting subject. The original
engraving, bearing date A.D., 1653, is to be found in the British
Museum. Various details[29] are furnished by the inventor.
[Illustration]
Besides the detailed explanation of this extraordinary looking craft,
which in “length is 72 feet, the height 12, the breadth 8,” there is
beneath the print the following description: “The true and perfect
form of the strange ship built in Rotterdam, 1653. The inventor of it
doth undertake in one day to destroy a hundred ships, it can go from
London to Rotterdam and back again in one day, and in six weeks to go
to the East Indies, and to run as fast as a bird can fly. No fire, nor
storme, nor bullets can hinder her unless it please God. Although the
ships mean to be safe in their havens, it is in vain, for she shall
come to them in any place. It is impossible for her to be taken unless
by treachery, and she cannot be governed by any one but himself” (the
inventor?). The motive power is not described, and there is no further
trace of the ship, of which the illustration is a vertical section.
She was built at the time when the Dutch were in the zenith of their
power, and most likely proved as worthless as numerous other inventions
since produced, though curious as showing the attention devoted at this
period to wheels as a mode of propelling vessels.
[Sidenote: Absurd patents.]
However, we find in the records of our own Patent Office, that
Englishmen were not behind the Dutch in curious and frequently very
absurd inventions. Thus, in 1675, one Miller[30] patented a windmill
fixed to a vessel’s deck to turn an endless rope, and thus, by “two
toothed wheels,” to drive a couple of paddle-wheels. Such commonplace
matters as storms at sea or adverse winds, still less the likelihood of
the whole of the top weight he proposed to erect on the deck of his
vessels being blown or rolled overboard, do not appear to have entered
into the fertile and imaginative brain of the inventor.
Again, in 1701, two gentlemen (whose names are not worth recording)
proposed to have “vanes or sails arranged between two wheels on the
same shaft,” the “sails or float-boards being so contrived as to be
able to play in a given space, being fixed perpendicularly on the wheel
and fastened by a cord or otherwise, so that when the wind blows from
any quarter three-fourths of the sails catch the wind, and, by driving
the wheel round, the sails, which are forced against the wind, come up
edgeways, but when past the centre immediately turn to the breeze, and
by that means produce a continued circular motion.”[31]
[Sidenote: Phillips and his windmill.]
About the same period another invention, of a somewhat similar sort,
was published by a person named Phillips, who proposed to erect between
two tall masts “a windmill of altogether an original description.”[32]
One is reminded when reading these grave proposals, of Don Quixote’s
ludicrous exploit with the windmill, and considering the care Mr.
Phillips seems to have bestowed upon his invention, he must have been
quite as enthusiastic and apparently as serious in his proposal as the
hero of Cervantes in his knight-errantry. But all these schemes, and
many others too numerous to mention, however impracticable and absurd
some of them may have been, had the germ of the great invention more or
less developed.
[Sidenote: Papin and Morland.]
During Papin’s residence in England, 1681, he witnessed one of the
interesting experiments made on the Thames, in which a boat constructed
from the design of the Prince Palatine Robert, fitted with revolving
oars or paddles, “left the King’s barge, manned by sixteen rowers, far
astern in the race of trial.” This experiment suggested to him, in
1688, the idea of an engine, and led to his proposal of using gunpowder
to create a vacuum under a piston, so that the piston would descend.
Two years afterwards, 1690,[33] Papin describes a steam cylinder, in
which a piston descends by atmospheric pressure when the steam below
it is condensed, and among the subsequent uses of such a machine he
mentions the propulsion of ships by “Rames volatiles” or paddle-wheels,
the axles of which, he thought, might be turned by several of his
cylinders acting alternately by the rack work shown in his drawing.[34]
In 1683, a little before Papin, Sir Samuel Morland, Master of Works
to Charles II., wrote a treatise on the “Élévation des Eaux par toutes
sortes de Machines,” &c., with four pages appended to it called “The
Principles of the New Force of Fire, invented by Samuel Morland in
1682, and presented to His Most Christian Majesty in 1683.” In this
work (still in MS. in the Harleian Collection of the British Museum),
it is stated that “water being converted into vapour by the force of
fire, these vapours shall require a greater space (about 2000 times)
than the water occupied, and sooner than be constantly confined would
split a piece of cannon.” It is remarkable that, so long before careful
experiments had been made on the expansibility of water when converted
into vapour, Morland should have given so near an approximation to the
true amount (about 1750 times).
[Sidenote: Savery.]
Thomas Savery, one of the most ingenious men of the age in which
he lived, proposed (1696) a mode of raising water and occasioning
motion “to all sorts of mill-work by the impelling force of _Fire_,”
adding,[35] “it may be very useful to ships, but I dare not meddle with
that matter, and leave it to the judgement of those who are the best
judges of maritime affairs.”[36]
In 1697, Papin (whose own invention had proved a failure) used
Savery’s engine, which had been greatly improved by Newcomen in 1705
to propel a _steam-boat_ on the Fulda.[37] In that year, too, Papin
proposed to drive a vessel by paddle-wheels turned by the stream, and
by boat-hooks which somehow pushed against or griped the bottom.[38]
Chabert, in 1710, described a vessel with large paddle-wheels working
in troughs cut through the hull;[39] and, in 1721, we read of a galley
built in France with revolving oars fastened to a drum or wheel with
paddle-vanes on hinges, capable of being set to any angle, and of being
worked by 200 men, the galley having three of these wheels on each
side.[40] John Allan, in 1722, proposed a mode of navigating a ship,
“by forcing water or some other fluid through the stern or hinder part,
at a convenient distance under the surface of the water, into the sea,
by proper engines placed within the ship.” He also proposed, as Papin
had previously done, a machine with the power of “firing gunpowder _in
clauso_,” with the view of navigating a ship in a calm.[41]
[Sidenote: Jonathan Hulls.]
In 1736, Jonathan Hulls made some practical progress in the idea so
long floating vaguely in the minds of his predecessors, and, on the
23rd December of that year, secured a patent for his invention “of a
machine for carrying ships and vessels out of or into any harbour or
river against wind and tide or in a calm,” of which the following is a
sketch.
[Illustration]
His specification[42] described how to drive a paddle-wheel by
converting a reciprocating rectilinear motion into a continuous
rotary one. But though Hulls’ mode of obtaining a rotary motion was
new and ingenious, and would, perhaps, enable a steam-boat in a calm
to be moved through the water, moreover is the first _steam-boat_
authentically recorded, it was probably not such as could be made
practically useful for the general purposes of commerce, and I have
been unable to find any record of this or of any such vessel having
been so used. At the same time, it must be added that boats not
unlike Hulls’ may now be seen trading in parts of the world remote
from each other, as, for instance, on the Murray in South Australia,
where various vessels, of which the following is an illustration, are
employed, and on the upper Thames where one, at least, to my knowledge
is now worked, which does not seem to be any very marked improvement on
the boat of Jonathan Hulls.[43]
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: James Watt’s engine.]
In 1756, Gauthier, a French mathematician, wrote a treatise on
“Navigation by Fire,” which attracted the attention of the Venetian
Republic.[44] But whatever merit some of these ingenious discoveries
may have possessed, it was not till the 5th January, 1769, when James
Watt obtained his patent, that any steam-engine could be effectually
adopted in marine propulsion.
Among various other improvements in the steam-engine patented by him,
the most important was one for causing the steam to act above the
piston, as well as below it, described as the “double impulse,” or,
now more commonly called, the double acting engine.[45] On the old
principle, when the weight of the atmosphere had pressed down the
piston, a valve opened in the bottom of the cylinder whereby a fresh
supply of hot steam rushed in from the boiler, which, acting as a
pressure in excess of that of the atmosphere above the piston, combined
with the weight of the pump rods at the other end of the lever, carried
that end down, and of course raised the piston in the steam cylinder.
The orifice for the emission of the steam having been then shut,
and the cock opened for injecting the cold water into the cylinder,
condensation took place, and another vacuum was made below the piston,
which was again forced down by the weight of the atmosphere: thus the
work was continued as long as water and fuel were supplied, and the
steam-engine rendered capable of successful application for pumping
purposes, a contrivance used even at the present day.[46] But the
method contrived by Watt rendered the power of the engine much more
effective by the use of a detached condenser, whereby the cooling of
the cylinders by the injection of water was prevented and considerable
economy obtained.[47]
[Sidenote: Matthew Wasborough.]
Matthew Wasborough, however, an engineer of the city of Bristol,
considering that something was still wanting to make the marine
engine a proper instrument of propulsion in concurrence with Watt’s
improvement of the double acting cylinder, obtained, on the 16th March,
1779, a patent for a practical mode of converting a rectilinear into
a continuous circular motion; one of his objects being to adapt his
invention “for moving in a direct position any ship or vessel.”[48]
His invention, however, did not answer, and was indeed superseded by
that of James Pickard, 23rd August, 1780, who, shortly afterwards
entering into partnership with Wasborough, patented a method of working
a mill with a rotary motion by means of the present connecting rod and
crank and a fly wheel, constituting the second important improvement
in the steam-engine, and enabling it to be of really practical service
in propelling vessels. In 1781 (25th October), James Watt obtained
another patent for his newly invented method of applying the vibrating
or reciprocating motion of steam or fire-engines to procure a continued
circular motion round an axis so as to turn the wheels of mills or
other machines. This invention is known as the “Sun and Planet”
motion.[49]
[Sidenote: Marquis de Jouffroy.]
In the same year (1781), the Marquis de Jouffroy is said to have
constructed a steam-boat at Lyons 140 feet in length, and to have
made with her several successful experiments on the Saone near that
city. Mr. MacGregor, however, has made particular inquiries[50] into
the authenticity of the claims of the Marquis, and, as no description
of the machinery of this vessel is discoverable earlier than that
given by himself thirty years afterwards, when he petitioned for
the use exclusively of steam-boats for fifteen years, these claims
are, to say the least, very questionable, while, in a report on his
improvements, the invention is said to be Rumsey’s, but more likely
that of his own countryman Gauthier, whose death prevented his plans
from being practically exemplified by the Venetian Republic. The French
Revolution, however, supervening, the Marquis had not an opportunity of
prosecuting his undertaking.
[Sidenote: Bramah’s screw-propeller.]
In 1785, Joseph Bramah, a man of great genius, and the inventor of the
hydraulic press, obtained a patent for an hydrostatical machine and
a boiler on a peculiar principle, in which the power of air, steam,
or any other elastic vapour, might be employed for the working of
engines. Another of his inventions is a mode of propelling vessels
by the improved rotatory engine described in the specification,
through the medium of either a paddle-wheel or what may be called a
screw-propeller. Bramah shows a vessel with a rudder placed in the bow,
and describes in his specification the nature of the “screw-propeller”
and of its mode of action in minute and specific terms.[51]
Although there is no record of Bramah having put his proposal into
practice, the description lodged by him at the Patent Office is
interesting, as showing clearly an indication of the now so well-known
screw-propeller. Moreover, in this invention, he obviously intended
that steam should be used so as to give circular motion to the
propeller shaft. Previously, however, to the time when he patented his
invention, the rotatory screw as a mode of propulsion had been proposed
by Watt, who, in 1770, suggested the application of a screw-propeller
to be turned by a steam-engine.[52]
But more than half a century elapsed before the screw, now in almost
general use, was practically applied; indeed, the first authentic
record we possess of the marine engine itself having been successfully
worked by paddle or any other means on board any vessel, dates no
further back than 1787, although, between 1774 and 1790, Fitch and
Rumsey were experimenting in America on boats (to which I shall
hereafter refer) to _work against streams_.
[Sidenote: Mr. Miller of Dalswinton.]
In that year (1787) Mr. Patrick Miller, of Dalswinton in Scotland,
a gentleman of position and fortune, published a pamphlet (given at
length by Mr. Woodcroft[53] in his interesting and instructive work on
steam navigation, with copies of Mr. Miller’s drawings illustrative
of his scheme), on the subject of propelling boats by means of
paddle-wheels _turned by men_, working on a capstan with five bars,
each 5 feet long, which drove a water-wheel, having the same object in
view as Messrs. Fitch and Rumsey, then engaged on similar works on the
other side of the Atlantic.
This wheel, of which the following is a sketch, drove the vessel in a
calm from 3 to 4 miles an hour; and, as Mr. Miller judged the capstan
the best mode of turning the wheel, he rejected for a time all other
modes, believing manual labour so applied more to be depended on than
any mechanical contrivances. For the purpose of his experiments he
built, from first to last, eight boats of different kinds, expending
no less than 30,000_l._ on them and their machinery. One was a treble
vessel, or rather three boats fastened together, of which the following
is a transverse representation of the fore part with the lower floats
of the wheels at their full dip.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
According to a written statement laid before the Council of the Royal
Society, London, December 20, 1787, Mr. Miller made various excursions
in this vessel in the course of that year; being attended in most of
these by a Mr. James Taylor, the tutor in his family, who, being a man
of considerable genius, urged Mr. Miller to apply steam to drive the
wheels of his boat. At last Mr. Miller was induced to employ a young
hard-working operative engineer, named Symington, to carry out Mr.
Taylor’s suggestion, and the combination of capital, energy, and genius
with practical knowledge soon produced the desired results.
[Sidenote: Mr. Symington and Mr. Taylor.]
About this time Symington, who was employed at the lead mines at
Wanlockhead, had succeeded in constructing a small steam-engine of a
new description, originally intended for the purpose of propelling
wheeled carriages, which he patented June 5th, 1787.[54]
His specification, accompanied by drawings, relates, 1, to heating the
cylinder of a steam-engine; 2, loading the piston; 3, placing a fire
round the cylinder; 4, a boiler; and, 5, “when rotatory motions of
whatever kind are wanted, two ratchet wheels will be placed upon one
or the same axis in such manner that, while the engine turns forward
one wheel, the other will be reversed without impeding the motion or
diminishing the power so as to be ready to carry on the motion by the
time the other wheel begins to be reversed.”
As this engine was considered suitable for the purpose Mr. Taylor had
in view, Symington[55] undertook to perform the work and Mr. Miller
agreed to employ him. When completed it was mounted in an oak frame
and placed on the deck of one of Mr. Miller’s pleasure-boats, a vessel
25 feet long and 7 feet wide, with two wheels, to be tested on Loch
Dalswinton. The engine performed its work beyond their most sanguine
expectations, driving the vessel at the rate of 5 miles an hour, though
the cylinders were only 4 inches in diameter. After being used in
cruising about the lake for a few days, the engine was removed from the
boat and conveyed to Mr. Miller’s house, where it remained as a piece
of ornamental furniture for a number of years.
The accounts which appeared in the Scottish newspapers at the time[56]
state that the first experiment was made on the 14th November, 1788,
and with such success that it was resolved to repeat it on a larger
scale upon the Forth and Clyde Canal. A double engine with cylinders
18 inches in diameter was consequently ordered to be built at Carron
Iron Works, and, in November of the following year, it was fitted on
board of another of Mr. Miller’s vessels and tried on Dalswinton Loch.
As, however, the floats of the wheels gave way, it was not until the
26th of December, by which time stronger wheels had been procured,
that an opportunity was afforded for fairly testing the capabilities of
this engine. From the accounts in the local papers of the period[57]
the experiment appears to have answered thoroughly, though made under
many disadvantages; a speed having been obtained of from 6½ to 7 miles
an hour, which, in the words of the report, “sufficiently shows that a
vessel properly constructed might accomplish 8, 9, or even 10 miles an
hour easily.”[58]
Such was one among the first efforts made in steam navigation. That
they were considered to be of practical value may in some measure
be determined by the fact that Mr. Taylor’s widow was, a few years
afterwards, awarded an annual pension of 50_l._, and that, in 1837,
Lord Melbourne’s administration presented 50_l._ to each of his four
daughters, who were in reduced circumstances, Mr. Symington having
previously (1825), in answer to his memorial to the Treasury for a
pension (he, too, being almost penniless), been awarded 100_l._ as a
gift from the Privy Purse, and subsequently a further sum of 50_l_.
Poor Symington![59] What a miserable return for labours of such
inestimable value!
[Sidenote: The _Charlotte Dundas_.]
Mr. Miller having expended a large fortune on these experiments,
found it, no doubt, inconvenient to continue them, or having other
projects in view, gave orders to dismantle the vessel in which his last
experiment had been made, and laid her up with her engines at Bence
Haven, at that time his property. More than ten years elapsed before
Mr. Symington found another patron, indeed, it was not till 1801, that
Thomas first Lord Dundas, employed him to fit up a steam-boat for the
Forth and Clyde Canal Company, in which he was a large shareholder.
Having availed himself of the many improvements made by Watt and
others, Symington patented his new engine on the 14th of March of that
year,[60] and fitting it on board the _Charlotte Dundas_, named after
his lordship’s daughter, produced, in the opinion of most writers who
have carefully and impartially inquired into this interesting subject,
“_the first practical steam-boat_.”[61] Mr. Woodcroft has furnished a
sectional drawing of this vessel of which the following is a copy on
a reduced scale;[62] it resembled in many respects the description
of vessel suggested by Jonathan Hulls, but not till now practically
applied.
[Illustration]
In March 1802, the _Charlotte Dundas_ made her trial trip on the Forth
and Clyde Canal. Embarking at Lock 20 a party of gentlemen, including
Lord Dundas, and taking in tow two vessels or barges of 70 tons burden,
she accomplished the trip to Port Dundas, Glasgow, a distance of 19½
miles, in six hours, or at the rate of 3¼ miles per hour, although it
blew so strong a gale right ahead during the whole day that no other
vessel on the canal attempted to move to windward.[63] Lord Dundas
entertaining a very favourable opinion of the experiment, recommended
the adoption of Symington’s steam-boat in a letter of introduction
to the Duke of Bridgewater, who gave him an order to construct eight
vessels similar to the _Charlotte Dundas_ to ply on his canal.
Elated by his success, Symington returned to Scotland to make
arrangements for carrying out the orders of his Grace with the hope
of realizing the advantages his ingenuity and perseverance so well
merited; but he was disappointed in his hopes, the Duke of Bridgewater
died before the details of the agreement had been definitely arranged,
and the Committee who had charge of the affairs of the canal after
his death, came to the conclusion that it would not be advisable to
use steamboats on it for fear of injury to its banks. We may presume
that the Forth and Clyde Canal Company arrived at somewhat similar
conclusions, for the _Charlotte Dundas_ does not appear to have been
again used.
Here it may be desirable to add that the _Charlotte Dundas_ had an
engine with the steam acting on each side of the piston (Watt’s
patented invention) working a connecting rod and crank (Pickard’s
patented invention)[64] together with the union of the crank to the
axis of Miller’s improved paddle-wheel, thus combining for the first
time the essential characteristics of the existing marine engines:
nevertheless, she was laid up in a creek of the canal near to Bramford
Drawbridge, where she remained for many years exposed to public view,
as a curiosity—doubtless, also, as a warning to speculators![65]
Symington’s limited means were now nearly exhausted, and the little
that remained was expended in defending himself from attacks made
on him by the relations of Mr. Taylor for having patented, as they
alleged, the inventions of that gentleman. But the contentions of
rival parties, _inter se_, rarely deserve commemoration except for the
elucidation of the truth. It is, however, to be regretted that each
of those persons who respectively contributed to the maturity of this
invention, did not reap more material advantages from it in return for
the time and labour they bestowed in perfecting a machine which has
done so much for the benefit of mankind.
In 1797, an experiment in canal steam navigation, copied no doubt from
Symington’s original boat, was made in the neighbourhood of Liverpool,
which is alluded to as follows in the _Monthly Magazine_ for July of
that year:—“Lately, at Newton Common in Lancashire, a vessel, heavy
laden with copper slag, passed along the Sankey Canal without the aid
of haulers or rowers, the oars performing eighteen strokes a minute by
the application of _steam only_! After a course of 10 miles the vessel
returned the same evening by the same means to St. Helens whence she
had set out.”
While these experiments were being made with success in Great Britain,
and especially in Scotland, there were not wanting claimants—some
of them of somewhat earlier date—to this great invention in other
and distant parts of the world. To that of Gauthier we have already
referred. In 1776, a countryman of his, Guyon de la Plombiere,
suggested the use of a steam-engine for propelling a vessel;[66] and,
in that year, the Marquis de Jouffroy states he used, besides the one
already mentioned, a steam boat (40 feet long and 16 feet wide) on
the Doubs, with propellers moved by a chain from a single cylinder
and counterpoise, which opened and closed like louvre boards;[67]
applying, in 1780, an engine to his boat with a duck-foot propeller,
two cylinders, inclined at an angle, and turned by a chain round a
barrel.[68]
In 1782, Dixblancs sent to the Conservatoires des Arts et Metiers a
model of a steamboat moved by a chain of floats carried on wheels at
its sides turned by a horizontal cylinder;[69] and in 1796, it is
stated that one Seraffino Serrati, an Italian, had some time previously
placed a steam-boat on the Arno, near Florence.[70]
[Sidenote: Rumsey and Fitch.]
The Americans, as already stated, had, also, at an early period turned
their attention to new modes of propelling vessels. In 1784, James
Rumsey mentioned to General Washington a project of steam navigation,
but, having been refused a patent in Pennsylvania, came to England and
succeeded in inducing a wealthy countryman of his own, then resident
in London, and others, to disburse the expenses of an experiment, for
which he obtained a patent in 1788. The particulars of his plan are
given at length by Mr. Woodcroft[71] and will also be found in the
Rolls Chapel Reports.[72] They were altogether impracticable for any
useful purpose. In 1786, Mr. John Fitch, also an American by birth,
proposed to use vertical oars worked by cranks turned by a horizontal
steam-engine of which the following is an illustration.[73]
[Illustration]
Although the Legislature of the State of Pennsylvania had, in 1784,
turned a deaf ear to the applications of Messrs. Rumsey and Fitch,
these gentlemen, in the following year, obtained from the Legislatures
of Virginia and Maryland the exclusive right to run steamboats on the
waters of those States, while Pennsylvania and New York having, in
1786, granted to Mr. Fitch himself similar exclusive rights, he in
that year made a trial of his machine at Shepherdstown, Pennsylvania,
in a boat of 9 tons, obtaining, it is said, the speed of 4 or 5 miles
an hour against the current of the Potomac. In 1787, Mr. Fitch[74]
built another vessel, 12 feet beam, and 45 feet long, with a 12-inch
cylinder, the mode of propulsion being somewhat similar, in which he
is reported[75] to have made the trip from Philadelphia to Burlington
at an average rate of 7 miles an hour. In 1790, he completed another
and a larger boat, propelled in a different manner: and, by referring
to the _Federal Gazette and Philadelphia Advertiser_, of 26th July,
1790, the following advertisement will be found: “_The steam-boat_ sets
out to-morrow morning at ten o’clock from Arch Street Ferry, in order
to take passengers for Burlington, Bristol, Bordingtown, and Fenton:”
there is, therefore, no doubt that this boat actually traded with
passengers on the Delaware.
But a glance at the second boat built by Fitch, of which the following
is an illustration, will show that the grasshopper paddles which he now
employed, however well they may have answered for a time on the smooth
waters of the Delaware, were not adapted for the general purposes of
navigation any more than the treadles in his first invention.[76]
Indeed, Fitch himself did not follow up the line of steam service he
had commenced at so early a date, but on the invitation, as he alleged,
of the French Government, he soon afterwards visited Paris with the
view of constructing vessels on his plan. As he was not, however,
supplied with the necessary funds (no doubt arising from the fact
that the French engineers were not satisfied with the practicability
or desirability of his mode of propulsion) no vessel on his plan was
built in France, and he was obliged to return to the United States,
at the expense of the American Consul. As no further mention is made
of vessels fitted on the plans[77] suggested by Fitch, it may be
inferred that they were not adapted for practical or useful purposes,
or that the machinery was too complicated or too expensive to work
remuneratively.
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: J. C. Stevens.]
In 1791, John Cox Stevens, of New York, commenced improvements on
steam navigation; but it was not until 1804 that any of these were
carried into practice; and even after an expenditure, as he states,
of “twenty thousand dollars,” and the constant devotion “of thirteen
years of the best period of his life” to the project, he admits that
his attempts were on the whole unsuccessful. These consisted of a plan
for propelling a boat 25 feet long and 5 feet wide, by a rotatory
engine, on the axle of which revolved a wheel, like a windmill or
smoke-jack, worked at the stern, but he found it impossible to preserve
a sufficient degree of tightness in the packing of the engine. A second
modification of his rotatory apparatus proving on trial no better
than the first, he had recourse to Watt’s engine, omitting the beam,
and having a cylinder 4½ inches diameter with a nine-inch stroke; the
boiler, which was only 2 feet long, 15 inches wide, and 12 inches
high, consisting of no less than forty-one copper tubes, each an inch
in diameter. This boat (which is interesting as the first in which
we have a direct account of the use of tubular boilers) was tried
in May 1804, and attained a velocity of 4 miles an hour.[78] After
having made repeated trials with her, his son undertook to cross
from Hoboken to New York, when, unfortunately, as she approached the
wharf, the steam-pipe gave way. The boiler having also been damaged,
he constructed another with the tubes placed vertically, and for this,
perhaps the only portion of his invention worth securing, he, in the
year 1805, obtained a patent in England,[79] where he then resided.
[Sidenote: Oliver Evans.]
While Fitch and Stevens were employed in the manner I have described,
another American citizen, Oliver Evans, an ingenious mechanic, was
endeavouring to mature a plan for using steam of a very high pressure,
to be employed in propelling waggons on common roads, and in an account
of his plans which he published in 1786,[80] he suggests a mode of
propelling vessels by steam. From this circumstance he has been
regarded by some authors as the contriver of a practicable steam-boat:
his pretensions, however, rest solely on his own allegations. He states
that, in 1785, he placed his engine, used to cleanse docks, in a boat
upon wheels, the combined weight being equal to 200 barrels of flour,
which he transported down to the water, and, when it was launched, he
fixed a paddle-wheel to the stern, and drove it down the Schuylkill
to Delaware and up the Delaware to the city, “leaving all the vessels
going up behind me at least half-way, the wind being ahead.”
In 1794, one Samuel Morey, of Connecticut, is said to have built a
steam-boat which he propelled at 5 miles an hour on the Connecticut
River, and, in 1797, he built another, with side wheels, at Bordentown,
New Jersey, which was publicly exhibited and made a passage to
Philadelphia, but which does not appear to have been afterwards
employed.
[Sidenote: Robert Fulton.]
In 1793, Robert Fulton, of whose exertions in the development of
steam-engines and their early application to useful purposes[81]
the Americans are justly proud, is said to have conceived some time
previously the idea of propelling vessels by steam. It was not,
however, until 1796 that any of his inventions were brought under
notice: when, in that year, his plan for using small canals as a means
of transit and for raising and lowering vessels on them by inclined
planes was published. In the same year, 1796, it is said that he
also suggested and used an apparatus for propelling vessels under
water, to be employed in war,[82] but it was not until 1798 that he
tried successfully to propel a boat with a steam-engine and a four
bladed screw-propeller.[83] That he had shown an early taste for
mechanical pursuits there can be no doubt, and, in 1801, when Napoleon
contemplated the conquest of England, we know that Fulton made the
friendly proposal to convey the legions of French soldiers who were to
invade our shores by means of rafts propelled by steam; but, though
the Emperor rejected the proposal as chimerical, Fulton, by his
intercourse with the French Government, was afforded an opportunity
of becoming intimately acquainted with Mr. Livingston, at that time
Minister of the United States at Paris, with whom he frequently
conversed on the subject of steam navigation, these communications
having in the sequel very important results.
[Sidenote: And Mr. Livingston.]
Mr. Livingston, who had previously been associated with Stevens in the
United States in experiments and in various plans for promoting steam
navigation, entered readily into the proposals of Fulton, and, on his
suggestion, a boat was built on the Seine, the engine for which was
ordered in England. This experimental boat, 66 feet long, and 8 feet
wide, was completed in 1803. When on the point of making her first
trial, the weight of the machinery broke the boat in two and both sank.
They were, however, soon raised and the necessary repairs were shortly
completed, but, on trial, the boat did not move with as much speed as
Mr. Fulton expected.
[Sidenote: Plan really derived from English experiments of Symington.]
Before describing Fulton’s further experiments, it may be convenient
to direct attention to a statement made by Symington soon afterwards
in the newspapers of the period, which remains uncontradicted, for
the purpose of showing that whatever merit is due to Fulton, his
information was derived from others.
There is, indeed, no doubt that, in 1802, when Symington was conducting
his experiments under the patronage of Lord Dundas, a stranger came
to the banks of the Forth and Clyde Canal and requested an interview,
announcing himself as Mr. Fulton of the United States,[84] whither
he intended to return, and expressing a desire to see Mr. Symington’s
boat and machinery, and to procure some information of the principles
on which it was moved, before he left Europe. He remarked that, however
beneficial the invention might be to Great Britain, it would be of more
importance to North America, considering the numerous navigable rivers
and lakes of that continent, and the facility for procuring timber for
building vessels and supplying them with fuel; that the usefulness
of steam-vessels in a mercantile point of view could not fail to
attract the attention of every observer; and that, if he was allowed
to carry the plan to the United States, it would be advantageous to
Mr. Symington, as, if his engagements would permit, the constructing
or superintending of the construction of such vessels would naturally
devolve upon him. Mr. Symington, in compliance with the stranger’s
request, caused the engine fire to be lighted, and the machinery put
in motion. Several persons entered the boat, and along with Mr. Fulton
were carried from where she then lay, to Lock No. 16 on the Forth and
Clyde Canal, about four miles west, and returned to the starting-place
in one hour and twenty minutes, being at the rate of six miles an hour,
to the astonishment of Mr. Fulton and the other gentlemen.[85]
Mr. Fulton obtained leave to take notes and sketches of the size
and construction of the boat and apparatus; but he never afterwards
communicated with Mr. Symington. From the concurrent testimony of
Mr. Jacob Perkins, and the oaths of those present in the boat during
the experiment, it is evident that Fulton availed himself of the
information obtained from Symington, and ordered from Messrs. Boulton
and Watt of Birmingham, a steam-engine for propelling a boat intended
to be built in the United States.[86]
[Sidenote: Fulton builds steamers in the United States.]
In 1806 Mr. Fulton, in conjunction with Mr. Livingston, commenced
building a steam-boat in America, in the yard of Charles Brown on the
East (Hudson) River. She was decked for a short distance only at stem
and stern. The engine was open to view, and a house, like that of a
canal boat, was raised to cover the boiler and the apartments for the
passengers and crew. There were no wheel-guards. The boiler was set
in _masonry_. She was launched in the spring of 1807, and the engines
ordered from Boulton and Watt[87] were fixed in that boat. The engine
differed very little from that of the _Charlotte Dundas_, whose piston
had a four-foot stroke, with a cylinder 22 inches in diameter, while
that of the _Clermont_ (as the American boat was named, after the
residence of Mr. Livingston on the Hudson) had also a piston with a
four-foot stroke, and a cylinder 24 inches in diameter. Such similarity
in the dimensions of the engines could hardly have arisen from a mere
accident.
But whatever information Fulton derived from Symington, he claimed no
patent for the assumed discovery. On the first trial of the _Clermont_
her speed was 5 miles an hour. Fulton perceiving that her paddles
entered too deep into the water had them removed, and placed nearer
the centres of the wheels. He afterwards made a further trip in her,
leaving New York at one o’clock on Monday, and arrived at Clermont,
the seat of Mr. Livingston, at one o’clock on Tuesday, performing in
twenty-four hours a distance of 110 miles. On the voyage from Clermont
to Albany, a distance of 40 miles, the time was eight hours, equal on
the average of both passages to nearly 5 miles an hour.
[Sidenote: The _Clermont_.]
The _Clermont_ was soon afterwards lengthened and considerably improved
in appearance and usefulness—indeed, almost wholly rebuilt. Her hull
was covered from stem to stern with a flush deck, beneath which two
cabins were formed, surrounded by double ranges of berths, and fitted
up for comfort in a manner then unexampled. Her dimensions now were,
“Length, 130 feet; breadth, 16½ feet; with an engine of only eighteen
horse-power,[88] though her burden was 160 tons, the boiler being 20
feet long, 7 feet deep, and 8 feet broad; the axle of her paddle-wheel
was cast iron, but it had no outer support; the diameter of the
paddle-wheels was 15 feet, and the paddles were 4 feet long, dipping
into the water 2 feet.”
It appears from a paragraph in the _American Citizen_ (newspaper) of
the 17th August, 1807,[89] that Mr. Fulton’s original intention was to
ply with his boat on the Mississippi; but the passenger trade on the
Hudson then offered greater inducements. Various accounts have been
given of the performances of the _Clermont_, but, without referring to
these, it is better to furnish Fulton’s own description of the trial,
which he gave in a letter addressed to the above newspaper,[90] as this
is more likely to be accurate than any other account, and has never
been contradicted; indeed, had his statements been exaggerated, they
would certainly have been questioned at the time, the more so that
his great experiment was bitterly opposed by the owners of all the
sailing-vessels then employed on the Hudson.
The following is a representation of the _Clermont_ as she appeared on
the Hudson after being improved,[91] and where she continued to ply
with goods and passengers between New York and Albany for some years.
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Merits and demerits of Fulton.]
But though the _Clermont_ was unquestionably a great practical success,
and the first boat in the world regularly and continuously engaged in
passenger traffic, she encountered many difficulties in her commercial
operations.[92] In overcoming these difficulties and persevering
with his novel undertaking, much credit is due to Robert Fulton; and
though he was not, indeed he never claimed to be, the inventor of the
steam-engine as applicable to marine propulsion, the manner in which
various English authors of note have written,[93] and the tone in which
an eminent English engineer has spoken of him, do not become men in
their positions.[94] If we do not consider it necessary to be generous
to the genius or, rather, to the persevering industry of men of other
nations, we ought at least to be just, and not to overlook important
facts or allow our judgment to be biased, because the man whose labours
we are describing was not a countryman of our own.
[Sidenote: At all events, the first “to run” a steam-vessel regularly;]
Even when the fact is clearly established, and there is, without
doubt, every reason to suppose that Fulton borrowed largely from
Watt, Pickard, and Symington, and, it might be added, from his own
countrymen, Fitch and Rumsey, this ought not to detract from his
merit in putting all the inventions of these men and others together,
and in first applying them to practical and useful purposes. He did
what no other man had done before him; he commenced and _continued to
run_ the steam-ship which now traverses every river, every coast, and
every ocean, and which, of all the inventions of man, is the mightiest
harbinger of peace and good-will among nations the world has ever
seen. If his was a combination of the inventions of others, if he were
a “quack,” it was only on a small scale compared to those persons
who combine the inventions of men of all nations in the magnificent
steam-engines of the present day. Do we, however, think less of any one
of these engines when we see it in motion, and know that that beautiful
machine, more like a living thing than any other work of man, is not
the invention of any one man, or of any one nation? And ought we to
think less highly of Robert Fulton when we know the labour he bestowed
to collect the inventions of the age in which he lived, the hardships
he endured to put them into operation, and the difficulties he had to
overcome in applying them to useful purposes?
That these difficulties were very great, so great indeed that to most
men they would have been insurmountable, may be known from the fact
that the _Clermont_ was often, intentionally, run into by rival vessels
on the river Hudson, and that the legislature was compelled to pass
a law punishing by fine and imprisonment any person who attempted to
destroy or injure her. Nor did his troubles end here. When the State
of New York, convinced of the practical utility of his invention,
granted him the exclusive privilege of navigating its rivers for a
certain number of years, he was harassed by numerous law suits, and
at last so thoroughly broken down by the oppressive influence of men
of capital, who were either interested in the sailing-vessels, or in
other inventions, that the State, in deference to the opinions of
those sticklers who grudged him the merit of his labours, rescinded
its concession, and passed a resolution that the boats built by Fulton
were in substance the invention of his countryman, Fitch; a most unjust
decision, as both of Fitch’s models, as I have shown, were valueless,
while Fulton’s were practicable.
[Sidenote: and to develop its power and usefulness.]
But, to whomsoever the invention belonged, the merit of first
permanently developing its power and usefulness belongs to Robert
Fulton. He it was who showed how it could be made not merely an
instrument of vast importance to mankind, but also an immense source of
profit to all who adopted it, though he himself, if reports be true,
derived no advantage from it, but died in 1815 very poor and almost
broken-hearted through the persecution of jealous and narrow-minded
rivals, leaving his family in greatly embarrassed circumstances, but at
the same time leaving behind him an everlasting memorial of his energy
and perseverance, and an enduring stigma on those who had taunted him
with a “_Fulton’s folly_.”
The application of the new power to the propulsion of vessels was
rapidly followed up in America, and, in 1809, the first steamboat was
launched on the St. Lawrence of which an account at the time appeared
in the _Quebec Mercury_.[95]
[Sidenote: First steam-boat on the St. Lawrence, 1813.]
In the spring of 1813, a second boat of increased dimensions was
launched from the banks of the St. Lawrence. She was 130 feet in
length of keel, and 140 feet on deck with a width of 24 feet, and by
the account given by the _Mercury_ she made the passage from Montreal
to Quebec in twenty-two and a half hours, notwithstanding that the
wind was easterly the whole time and blowing strong. But though the
_Swiftsure_, for such was her name, beat the most famous of the sailing
packets on the line (fourteen hours in a race of thirty-six hours), her
owners do not seem to have been very confident of her movements under
all circumstances or of the number of passengers who would patronize
her, for she was advertised to “sail as the wind and passengers may
suit.” The success of the _Clermont_ for the purposes of passenger
traffic on rivers soon, however, spread to other countries.
FOOTNOTES:
[2] _Ante_, vol. i. Introd. p. xxxi. Arrian, Exped. Alex. 11, 21.
[3] Galley from Koyunjik, _ante_, vol. i. p. 276.
[4] See the bas-reliefs from Nineveh, British Museum.
[5] Owen’s “Lectures on Comparative Anatomy,” 2nd. ed. p. 605.
Carpenter’s “Physiology,” 645. “Woodcroft on Marine Propulsion,” note,
p. 1, and drawing of Nautilus in frontispiece to Woodcroft’s “Steam
Navigation.” See also an interesting paper, read at the Society of Arts
on the 14th of April, 1858, by John MacGregor, Esq., M.A., Barrister at
Law.
[6] There is little difference between the action of an oar in sculling
and that of the modern screw-propeller, which is fast superseding the
paddle-wheel in all ocean-going steamers: the one has an alternate
lateral motion, like the tail of a fish; the other is rotatory, but
with the same effect. It may be added that fishes often have the power
of “feathering” their tails, by puckering their lobes in their forward
motion, and expanding them on their return, so as to displace as
little water as possible, while they, at the same time, rely for their
advancement on the reaction of the water in the direction of their
body. These points have been carefully considered in the construction
and arrangement of the blades of the screw, as well as the important
fact that the tail of the fish or the sweep of an oar in their motions
displace a quantity of water, great in proportion to the length of the
instruments employed; and further, that it is by the resistance the
water makes to this displacement by the oar or tail, in their continued
oscillation, coming as these do from their extreme sweep to the axis of
the boat or fish, that either is urged forward.
[7] An edition of Hero’s “Pneumatics” has been published by Mr.
Woodcroft. Lond., 4th ed. 1851. His second experiment is referred to in
Muirhead’s “Life of James Watt,” 2nd ed. p. 107.
[8] The principle of Hero’s steam-machine depends on the physical
law that, when any fluid issues from a vessel in which it has been
confined, the vessel is acted on by a force equal to that with which
the fluid escapes, but in the opposite direction. Thus, if water
issues from an orifice, a pressure is produced behind the orifice
corresponding to the force with which the water escapes: hence, the
recoil of a gun when fired. If the muzzle were turned at right angles
to the length of the gun, the explosive gases would escape sideways,
and the shooter, instead of being forced back, would spin round. The
orifices in each case are exposed to the atmosphere, which tends to
rush in with a force of a little less than 15 lbs. on the square inch:
the force, therefore, with which the steam escapes represents the
excess of its elasticity over that of the atmosphere, which furnishes,
as it were, the fulcrum, and thus gives motion to the machine. Mr.
Bourne states that the principle of the Æolipile is the same as that
embodied in Avery and Ruthven’s engines for the production of rotatory
power. “These engines,” he says, “are more expensive in steam than
ordinary engines and travel at an inconvenient speed; but in other
respects they are quite as effectual, and their construction is
extremely simple and inexpensive.”
[9] In another experiment (No. 37), Hero shows “how temple doors may be
opened by fire on an altar.” He says, “Let the proposed temple stand on
a pedestal, on which is also a small altar. Through the altar insert
a tube, of which one mouth is within the altar, and the other nearly
at the centre of a globe. The tube must be soldered to the globe in
which a bent syphon is placed. Let the hinges of the doors be extended
downwards, turning freely on pivots, and from the hinges let two chains
running into one be attached by means of a pulley to a leaden weight,
on the descent of which the doors will be shut, let the outer leg of
the syphon bend into a suspended vessel and fill the globe half full of
water. When the fire becomes hot, the heated air in the altar expands
and, passing through the tube into the globe, will drive the liquid
through the syphon into the suspended vessel which, descending by its
weight, will tighten the chains and open the doors.”
[10] Although there may be a doubt how far the inventions recorded by
Hero were used for superstitious practices, there is no question that,
somewhat later, the agency of steam was employed for purposes anything
but legitimate. Thus Gibbon (c. xl.) gives an amusing account of how
Anthemius, the architect of Sta. Sophia at Constantinople, avenged,
himself on Zeno, the orator. “In a lower room,” says he, “Anthemius
arranged several vessels or cauldrons of water, each of them covered
by the wide bottom of a leathern tube, which rose to a narrow top, and
was artificially conveyed among the joints and rafters of the adjacent
building. A fire was kindled beneath the cauldron; the steam of the
boiling water ascended through the tubes; the house was shaken by the
effects of imprisoned air, and its trembling inhabitants might wonder
that the city was unconscious of the earthquake they had felt.” Still
later, Arago, in his “Éloge de James Watt,” notices an ancient Teutonic
god, called _Bustarich_, on the banks of the Weser, who was made by the
priests to show his displeasure through the agency of steam. The head
of the metal God was hollow and had within it a pot of water. Its mouth
and another hole having been plugged, a charcoal fire was cleverly
lighted under it, in such a way as not to be perceived by the expectant
worshippers. After a while, the imprisoned steam forced out the plugs,
with a loud report, followed by two jets of steam, which formed a dense
cloud round the god and concealed him from his astonished worshippers.
[11] Paper read at the Society of Arts 14th of April, 1858, by John
MacGregor, Esq., Barrister at Law.
[12] This work in Latin, printed at Verona, 1472, is the first book
with woodcuts printed in Italy.
[13] This letter is written from Simancas, and bears the date
27th August, 1825. It was published 1826, in Lack’s “Astronomical
Correspondence.”
[14] The interview with the Pope took place at Bupeto, 22nd of June,
1543, and the campaign against the duke of Cleves, the ally and general
of Francis, followed.
[15] “On the 23rd of September last (1857),” remarks Mr. MacGregor, “I
visited the town of Simancas, near Valladolid in Spain, with Captain
John Ussher, to inspect some letters of Blasco de Garay, which are
there preserved among the national archives.
“Having obtained the requisite Royal permission, I was allowed, after
much difficulty, to read (but not to copy) two letters signed by Blasco
de Garay, written clearly in Spanish and well preserved. One of these
was addressed from Malaga, the other from Barcelona; and both were
dated, A.D. 1543. They describe two separate experiments with different
vessels, both of them moved _by paddle-wheels turned by men_.
“One vessel was stated to be of two hundred Spanish tons burthen,
propelled by a paddle-wheel on each side, worked by twenty-five men.
The other vessel was moved in a similar manner by forty men (in all).
The speed attained is mentioned in the text, and is stated in a side
note (written in a different hand) to have been one league, about three
and a half English miles per hour. Various calculations, as to the
tonnage, the motive power, the cost, and other matters are contained
in the letters, and it is said that the vessel thus moved was found
to steer well, but could be propelled more easily for a long time by
oars. Also that, like other inventions, this would probably be improved
by the experience of further trials. We read the letters carefully
through, and neither of them contained any mention whatever of the use
of steam, or any expression to indicate that this was contemplated.
“The officer left in charge of the documents, Don Manuel Garcia, said
that he did not know of any other letters of Blasco de Garay, or of any
other authentic papers relating to his experiment; that he believed
most certainly Blasco de Garay did not invent or suggest the use of
steam for propulsion; and that the assertion he had made was ‘_un
mensonge historique_.’”
[Sidenote: Disproved by Mr. MacGregor’s investigations.]
On October 15th, 1857, and following days, Mr. MacGregor made diligent
inquiries at Barcelona respecting Blasco de Garay, and after writing
a letter inviting information on the subject to the _Diario de
Barcelona_, 19th October, 1857, Señor Michel Mayor undertook to satisfy
his inquiries. In the Archives of Aragon, the Director said that no
trace of any document relating to Blasco de Garay was to be found, and,
that the MSS. in that library were only by order of reigns, and not
by dates. With the assistance of Don Gregorio and Fidil Clares, Mr.
MacGregor states that he inspected the catalogue of the Bibliotheca
Publica and of the Bibliotheca Publica Episcopal without any better
result, the keepers of these libraries declaring they knew nothing
of any other letter of Blasco de Garay; one of these officers said
he believed that men only had been used to move the vessel, and the
Government Inspector of Mines assured him that he was of the same
opinion. But a Spanish engineer mentioned that some of the actual
_steam-engine machinery_ used in the vessels was still to be seen at
the School of Artillery; after, however, diligent inquiry there, Mr.
MacGregor could find no trace of any of these relics.
But after these investigations, it was reported to Mr. MacGregor
through Colonel Stopford, of Madrid, that there was another letter
of Blasco de Garay, in which he alludes to the steam-boat, and that
this document was kept secret at Madrid, which, as Mr. MacGregor adds,
“would not probably be the case if by its means the claim of a Spaniard
to the invention of the steam-boat could be substantiated;” and he
remarks in conclusion that, _if_ Blasco de Garay used a steam-engine
to propel a vessel, the evidence of this fact is not supported by his
two letters at Simancas, and, further, that it has not been produced,
if it is known there or at Barcelona, by the public officers and others
interested in supporting such a claim.
[16] “Steam and Steam Navigation;” and article, “Steam Navigation,”
_Encyclopædia Britannica_, 8th ed., vol. xx. p. 636.
[17] Since Mr. MacGregor’s visit, M. Bergenroth, who has done so much
towards the elucidation of the manuscript treasures at Simancas, has
been able at his leisure to copy the documents relating to De Garay,
preserved there, they are;—1. A holograph from him to the Emperor,
dated Malaga, September 10th, 1540, containing his report on the trial
of one of his paddle-wheel ships. 2. The report of Captain Antonio
Destigasura on the same trial trip. 3. The report of the Proveedores of
Malaga concerning the same trip, dated July 24th, 1540. 4. The report
of Blasco de Garay to the Emperor, dated July 6th, 1543, concerning
the trial trip of another of his paddle-wheel ships, made at Barcelona
in June, 1543. 5. A letter of Blasco de Garay to Carrs, dated June
20th, 1543. In none of these is any reference to steam-power to be
found—thus completely confirming Mr. MacGregor’s previous statements.
[18] “Inventions and Devises,” by William Bourne, p. 15; London, 1578.
[19] Woodcroft’s “Manuscript Collection” and “Marine Propulsion,” vol.
i. p. 7.
[20] “Marine Propulsion” from Patent Office, Woodcroft, vol. i. p. 8.
[21] Works of Roger Bacon, Hamburg, ed. 1598, pp. 74-75.
[22] “Woodcroft on Steam Navigation,” pp. 3 and 4.
[23] Ibid., p. 5.
[24] Although there is no evidence that the Marquess of Worcester
did employ steam to propel any boat, it must be allowed (in spite of
the perhaps natural desire of Mr. Muirhead to exalt the genius of
his relative, James Watt) that he was the first to make an actual
steam-engine. Certain important points are clear from his description,
viz., that the vessel in which the water was evaporated was distinct
from that containing the water to be raised; that there were two
vessels of similar description, the contents of which were alternately
raised by the pressure of the “water rarefied by fire;” and that
the water was lifted in a continuous stream by the aid of two cocks
communicating with these vessels, and with the boiler. Now this
is exactly the agency of steam at the present time, in that it is
generated in one vessel, and used for mechanical purposes in another:
indeed, it is just this distinction which shows the invention to have
been a true one—for had the action of the steam been confined to
the vessel in which it was produced, it would have been of no more
practical use than were the experiments of Hero, De Caus, or Rivault.
Complaint has been often made of the indistinctness and incompleteness
of the descriptions furnished by the Marquess in his famous “Scantlings
of one hundred Inventions,” but it may be doubted whether the author’s
intention was really to convey knowledge of the mechanism he used,
or even to indicate the physical principles on which they depend.
His statement, however, is sufficient to enable any one possessing
a knowledge of the mechanical qualities of steam, to understand the
general nature of the machine produced. It ought also to be remembered
that many of the ideas of inventions thrown out by the Marquess, as
stenography, speaking statues, combination locks, &c., &c., have been
since his time carried into effect.
[25] “Buchanan on Steam Propelling,” Glasgow, 1816, p. 161.
[26] “Bourne on the Screw-Propeller,” pp. 5 and 9.
[27] Morisotus, “Orbis Maritima,” Generalis Historia divisio, fol.,
1643.
[28] The ferry boats at Quebec plying between the opposite sides of the
river St. Lawrence were, at a very recent period, if they are not so
still, propelled by horses and oxen walking along circular platforms
so as to produce a power applied to the paddle-wheels of the boat. And
a boat of a somewhat similar kind was, in the course of the present
century, employed for some time between Yarmouth and Norwich in this
country.
[29] 1. The middle beam. 2. The end with iron bars wherein the strength
of the ship lyeth both ends alike. 3. Rudder of the ship. 4. The keel.
5. Iron bolts with screws. 6. Depth of the inner beam. 7. The wheel
that goeth round it hath its motion. 8. The scuttles or hatchways. 9.
The gallery where they walk.
[30] “Specifications relating to Marine Propulsion,” Woodcroft, Part I.
p. 29.
[31] Woodcroft, Part I. p. 51; and see Drawings, “Repository of Arts,”
vol. i. (second series), p. 11.
[32] “He was a foolish man,” says Dr. Arnott, “who thought he had
found the means of commanding always a fair wind for his pleasure
boat by erecting an immense bellows in the stern. The bellows and the
sails acted against each other, and there was no motion: indeed, in a
perfect calm, there would be a little backward motion, because the sail
would not catch all the wind from the bellows.”—Arnott, “Elements of
Physics,” p. 120.
[33] “Specifications of Marine Propulsion,” Woodcroft, vol. i. pp. 16
and 17.
[34] Papin was driven from France by the revocation of the Edict of
Nantes, and was associated with Robert Boyle in many of his experiments
on the air-pump—he was elected F.R.S. in 1681, and was for a time, the
secretary of the society. He was invited to Germany by the Landgrave
of Hesse, was some years Professor of Mathematics at Marburg and
died there, 1710; he seems the first to have clearly discerned the
necessity of the vacuum under the cylinder, and that the pressure of
the atmosphere alone is enormous. (A cylinder 1 foot in diameter, has
a surface of 113 square inches, hence, the atmospheric pressure in it
is 113 ⨉ 15 = 1695 lbs.). Papin first proposed to exhaust the air by
pumps, and in 1687 laid this plan before the Royal Society; but such a
plan would only have been a transference of power, the effect being the
same in character as that of lifting the water to the water-wheel. His
most important invention was that of a method of producing a vacuum by
the condensation of steam—the reversal, in fact, of the process of the
previous machines of De Caus and Lord Worcester. He drew the inference
that, if water in its conversion into steam swelled many hundred
times, it must follow that steam reconverted into water would shrink
into its primitive dimensions. He was also the first to suggest the
safety-valve, but he did not, strange to say, apply it to the machine
subsequently invented. It has been asserted, though not proved, by some
writers that Papin derived many of his ideas from Otto von Guericke,
who had invented an air-pump as early as 1654.
[35] The “Miners’ Friend,” &c. A paper published by Savery in 1702.
[36] Thomas Savery was born about 1650, and, in early life, served as
a military engineer; he then gave himself to the study of mechanics,
and constructed a clock still in existence. He also made a boat with
paddle-wheels, turned by a capstan, his object being, as he says, to
enable ships to be moved independently of the wind. He next invented
what he called his “Fire-machine,” and exhibited it to William III.
and the Royal Society in 1699. He applied his engine largely to the
pumping out of mines, and, though it was found ultimately to have too
little power, and was superseded by that of Newcomen, Savery may fairly
claim the credit of having constructed the first really practicable
steam-engine. He invented also a very ingenious plan for determining
the height of the water in the boiler of the steam-engine, which is
still sometimes used.
[37] Letters to Leibnitz, “Dictionnaire des Inventions,” Migne’s N.
Encycl., Paris, 1852, vol. xxxvi., art. “Vélocipèdes,” p. 317. Thomas
Newcomen was a working blacksmith in the town of Dartmouth (Devon). He
was assisted in his inventions by John Calley, a glazier of the same
place, with whom he subsequently entered into partnership, and erected
more than one engine which successfully pumped water from mines.
[38] “Acta Eruditorum,” 1737, p. 80.
[39] Ibid., 1709, p. 282.
[40] Gill’s “Technical Repository,” 1829, p. 251.
[41] “Specifications of Marine Propulsion,” Woodcroft, vol. i. p. 21.
[42] The reader will find this plan described at length in Woodcroft’s
“Specifications of Marine Propulsion,” pp. 23 and 34 (note). Hulls
“placed a paddle-wheel on beams projecting over the stern, and it
was turned by an atmospheric steam-engine acting in conjunction with
a counterpoise weight upon a system of ropes and grooved wheels”
(MacGregor).
[43] Jonathan Hulls was born at Campden, in Gloucestershire, in 1699,
and made his first experiments on the Avon at Evesham. In 1737 he
published a pamphlet entitled “A Description and Draughts of a New
Invented Machine;” in this he proposed to put a Newcomen engine on
board a tow-boat to work a paddle-wheel placed in the stern.
Mr. Smiles (“Lives of Boulton and Watt,” p. 63) observes, “It has been
stated that Newcomen took out a patent for his invention in 1705;”
but this is a mistake, as no patent was ever taken out by Newcomen.
It is supposed that Savery, having heard of his invention, gave him
notice that he would regard his method of producing a vacuum as an
infringement of his patent, yet the principle on which Newcomen’s
engine worked was entirely different from that of Savery.
[44] He died shortly after his arrival at Venice, and his plans were
never put into practical operation.
[45] The now well-known principle of a steam-engine is this: there is a
cylinder with its rod fixed to one end of a lever, which is worked by
the combined pressure of the atmosphere and the steam upon a piston, a
temporary vacuum being made below it by suddenly condensing the steam,
which had been let into the cylinder where this piston works, by a jet
of cold water thrown into it. A partial vacuum being thus made, the
weight of the atmosphere presses down the piston and raises the other
end of the straight lever, thereby drawing up water from a mine, or,
by the numberless improvements made of late years, communicating a
mechanical power which may set in motion every description of machinery.
[46] “Woodcroft on Steam Navigation,” p. 14; “Cabinet Cyclopædia,”
Mechanics, p. 258.
[47] Letter to Dr. Small, with a drawing; Muirhead’s “James Watt,”
London, 1854, vol. ii. pp. 4, 8, 11.
[48] There seems little doubt (see Lardner, p. 186, and Muirhead’s
“Life of Watt,” p. 273), that Watt was the real inventor of the crank
for which Mr. Wasborough obtained the credit. Mr. Watt says distinctly,
that, having noticed, in 1778 or 1779, certain defects in the “ratchet
wheels” invented by Wasborough, he proceeded to remedy them, but having
neglected to take out a patent for these improvements, a workman
employed to make Mr. Watt’s model told “some of the people about Mr.
Wasborough,” on which he took a patent for the application of the crank
to steam-engines.
[49] In the Patent Museum, London, may be seen now (1875), the same
“Sun and Planet” engine (a great curiosity), which Watt constructed in
1788 at Soho, near Birmingham.
[50] See “Specifications relating to Marine Propulsion” (Part II.), p.
109, in which the existing documents are recapitulated and described.
[51] There is more in Bramah’s inventions than at first appears,
and the scientific reader would do well to study that part of them
referring to the “boiler.” The following remarks have reference to the
screw:—
“Instead of the (paddle-wheel) A, may be introduced a wheel with
inclined fans or wings, similar to the fly of a smoke-jack, or the
vertical sails of a windmill: this wheel or fly may be fixed on the
spindle C alone, and may be wholly under water, where it would, by
being turned round either way, cause the ship to be forced backwards
or forwards, as the inclination of the fans or wings will act as oars
with equal force both ways, and their power will be in proportion
to the size and velocity of the wheel; allowing the fans to have a
proper inclination, the steam-engine will also serve to clear the ship
of water with singular expedition, which is a circumstance of much
importance. This “apparatus for working the ship” is fixed in or beyond
the stern, in or about the place where the rudder is usually placed,
and its movement is occasioned by means of an horizontal spindle or
axletree conveyed to the engine through the stern end of the ship.”
[52] See letter to Dr. Small (who replies he had tried it); Muirhead’s
“James Watt,” London, 1854, vol. ii. pp. 4, 8, 11.
[53] “Woodcroft on Steam Navigation,” p. 20, _et seq._
[54] “Specifications relating to Marine Propulsion,” Part I. p. 36.
[55] It is clear that Mr. Symington is entitled to the credit of the
application of steam-power to propel the paddles. Mr. Miller stuck to
the capstan and manual labour, but, on one occasion, having been to
see Symington’s locomotive, he told him of his own invention, and of
the difficulty he had with his paddles for lack of power. “Why don’t
you use the steam-engine?” was Symington’s immediate remark. Miller
at once assented, but first constructed a double vessel, with the
paddle-wheels worked by five men at the capstan amidships, and, in June
1787, the first experiment with her was deemed successful. A short time
subsequently steam was directly applied, but, whether in consequence
of Symington’s remark, is not certain. Mr. Taylor, who is said to have
suggested it, was an intimate friend and fellow-pupil with Symington at
Edinburgh 1786-7. (Smiles’ “Lives of Boulton and Watt,” p. 438.)
[56] Dumfries paper; _Edinburgh Advertiser_, and the _Scot’s Magazine_,
vol. 1. p. 566, November, 1788.
[57] _Caledonian Mercury_, _Evening Courant_, and _Advertiser_.
[58] In the Patent Office Museum, London, there may still be seen, “the
parent engine of steam navigation, made for Patrick Miller, Esq., and
used by him on the lake at Dalswinton, 1788.” It consists of two small
paddles, working one behind the other, to be fitted on the same side
apparently of a small boat.
[59] From the narrative given by Mr. Smiles in his “Lives of Boulton
and Watt,” it is certain that they discouraged what they considered
“speculative” adventures. Both were written to, with requests that
they would make engines for Mr. Miller, those constructed by Symington
not having answered as well as was expected, and both declined to have
anything to do with the scheme. (Smiles, p. 445.)
[60] “Woodcroft on Steam Navigation,” p. 54.
[61] “Encyclopædia Britannica” (eighth edition), vol. xx. p. 637.
[62] Mr. Smiles, in his interesting “Lives of the Engineers” (i.)
states that, in 1790, Lord Stanhope had proposed a mode of propelling
vessels by steam, and had been in communication with Mr. Rennie on
this subject, who, on the 26th April of that year, sent his Lordship
such information as he could obtain about Boulton and Watt’s improved
steam-engine. Lord Stanhope objected to the space occupied by the
condensing apparatus, to which Mr. Rennie replied that _high pressure_
could be applied, on which his Lordship constructed a vessel on that
plan which obtained a speed of 3 miles an hour (vol. ii. p. 237).
[63] Mr. Woodcroft observes that “this vessel might, from the
simplicity of its machinery, have been at work to this day with such
ordinary repairs as are now occasionally required for all steamboats,”
p. 53; and, again, “thus had Symington the undoubted merit of having
combined for the first time those improvements which constitute _the
present system of steam navigation_.”
[64] Patented 23rd August, 1780. An invention in which the
reciprocating motion of a beam acting on a connecting rod turns a
wheel. Woodcroft, “Marine Propulsion,” Part I. p. 32.
[65] It seems important to record that the success of Mr. Symington’s
engine consisted mainly in this: that, after placing in a boat a
double acting reciprocating engine, he _attached his crank to the
axis of the paddle-wheel_, a combination on which, as Mr. Woodcroft
justly observes, “there has been no improvement even to the present
time, either in this or in any other country.” The power thus applied
secured rotary motion without the interposition of a lever or beam. Mr.
Symington might fairly claim, as he does in his patent of October 14th,
1801, that “the principle of this invention comprehends any species of
machinery thus put in rotatory motion by a steam engine which may be
made use of to navigate boats, vessels, or rafts.”
[66] “Encyclopédie Moderne,” Paris, 1855, art. “Vapeur,” p. 171.
[67] See “Des Bateaux à Vapeur,” par Jouffroy (the son of the Marquis),
pp. 13 and 17; and “L’Universel Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de la
France,” Paris, 1845, vol. ix. p. 737.
[68] Ibid., p. 737.
[69] Stuart’s “Anecdotes of Steam Engines,” vol. ii. pp. 450 and 483.
[70] “Elements of Experimental Physics,” Florence, 1796, quoted by J.
Scott Russell on “Steam and Steam Navigation,” p. 238; also referred to
nine years previously in “Lettere di Fisica Sperimentale,” di Seraffino
Serrati; Firenze, 1787, 12mo., and quoted in “Biographie Universelle,”
Paris, 1856, art. “Fulton.”
[71] “Steam Navigation,” pp. 48-51.
[72] 6th Report, p. 179.
[73] See Brewster’s “Encyclopædia,” extracted from the _Columbian
Magazine_, Philadelphia, vol. i., December 1786.
[74] John Fitch, who was a remarkable genius, was born in Connecticut,
U.S., on the 21st January, 1743. His father, a small farmer, who
could not afford to give him more than a limited education, bound
him apprentice to a watch and clock maker. Afterwards he became a
silversmith at Trenton, New Jersey, and, during the early part of
the Revolutionary War, he was appointed by the “Committee of Safety”
armourer to that State. Dislodged by the approach of the British,
he fled to Bucks County, Pennsylvania; subsequently, he became a
sutler, and supplied the American camp at Valley Forge with goods and
provisions: he was also a land surveyor, and, in that capacity, the
idea first suggested itself to him (as, curiously enough, it had done
to Symington, in Scotland, about the same time) of propelling carriages
by steam, but he soon abandoned it on account of the roughness of the
roads in America, and turned his attention to propelling vessels by
that power on the rivers.
In a sketch of his life, which appeared in the “Philadelphia Dispatch”
of the 9th February, 1873, the writer, in describing the difficulties
Fitch had to encounter in raising money to finish his second
steam-boat, remarks: “In a letter to David Rettenhouse, when asking
an advance of fifty pounds to finish the boat, he says, ‘This, sir,
whether I bring it to perfection or not, will be the mode of crossing
the Atlantic in time for packets and armed vessels.’ But everything
failed, and the poor projector loitered about the city for some months,
a despised, unfortunate, heart-broken man. ‘Often have I seen him,’
said Thomas P. Cope, many years afterward, ‘stalking about like a
troubled spectre, with downcast eyes and lowering countenance, his
coarse soiled linen peeping through the elbows of a tattered garment.’
Speaking of a visit he once paid to John Wilson, his boat builder, and
Peter Brown, his blacksmith, in which, as usual, he held forth upon
his hobby, Mr. Cope says: ‘After indulging himself for some time in
this never-failing topic of deep excitement, he concluded with these
memorable words, “Well, gentlemen, although I shall not live to see
the time, you will, when steam-boats will be preferred to all other
means of conveyance, and especially for passengers; and they will be
particularly useful in the navigation of the river Mississippi.” He
then retired, on which Brown, turning to Wilson, exclaimed, in a tone
of deep sympathy, ‘Poor fellow! What a pity he is crazy!’”
The same writer states that Fitch, in 1796, after his return from
France, built, under the patronage of Chancellor Livingston, at New
York, “a yawl, which he moved by steam with a _screw-propeller_, on the
Collect Pond.” Poor Fitch died by his own hands in 1798. See also “Life
of John Fitch,” by Thompson Westcott, published by J. B. Lippincott,
Philadelphia, 1857.
[75] “New York Magazine” for 1790, p. 493.
[76] “History of Philadelphia,” by Thompson Westcott.
[77] Fitch himself thus describes the engines of his first boat in a
letter which appeared in the Philadelphia newspaper of the period:
“_Philadelphia, Dec. 8, 1786._
“SIR,—The reason of my so long deferring to give you a description
of the steam-boat, has been in some measure owing to the complication
of the works, and an apprehension that a number of drafts would be
necessary in order to show the powers of the machine as clearly as
you could wish. But as I have not been able to hand you herewith such
drafts, I can only give you the general principles. It is in several
parts similar to the late improved steam-engines in Europe, though
there are some alterations. Our cylinder is to be horizontal, and the
steam to work with equal force at each end. The mode by which we obtain
(what I take the liberty of terming) a vacuum is, we believe, entirely
new; as is also the method of letting the water into it, and throwing
it off against the atmosphere without any friction. It is expected
that the engine, which is a 12-inch cylinder, will move with a clear
force of 11 or 12 cwt., after the frictions are deducted; this force
is to act against a wheel of eighteen-inch diameter. The piston is to
move about 3 feet, and each vibration of the piston gives the axis
about forty evolutions. Each evolution of the axis moves twelve oars or
paddles 5½ feet (which work perpendicularly, and are represented by the
stroke of the paddle of a canoe). As six of the paddles are raised from
the water six more are entered, and the two sets of paddles make their
stroke of about 11 feet in each evolution. The cranks of the axis act
upon the paddles about one-third of their length from the lower end,
on which part of the oar the whole force of the axis is applied. Our
engine is placed in the boat about one-third from the stern, and with
the action and reaction turn the wheel in the same way.
“With the most perfect respect, sir, I beg leave to subscribe myself
“Your very humble servant,
“JOHN FITCH.”
[78] In a letter I received (May 2nd, 1875) from Commodore G. H.
Preble, Commandant U.S. Navy Yard, Philadelphia, to whom I am indebted
for much valuable information, he says, “John Stevens invented the
twin screw-steamer in 1804, which is still preserved in the Stevens’
Institute, Hoboken, N.Y.”
[79] The patent bears date 21st May, 1805, and was granted to “John Cox
Stevens, of New York, but now residing in New Bond Street, Middlesex.”
[80] Gill’s “Technical Repository,” 1829, vol. iv. p. 251 (for 1823),
where a paper by Evans is given, but no further authority.
[81] Fulton invented the drop and the double-ended steam ferry-boats
now in use in all the principal cities of the U.S.
[82] Stuart’s “Anecdotes of Steam-engines,” vol. ii. p. 478.
[83] Letter from R. Fulton in a memoir by E. Cartwright, London, 1843,
p. 142.
[84] Robert Fulton is said to have been born in Little Britain,
Pennsylvania, in 1765. He was trained as an engineer, but having
acquired some knowledge of portrait and landscape painting he came to
England and studied under his distinguished countryman, West, with whom
he continued to reside for several years; and, after quitting him,
he made painting his chief employment for some time. He afterwards
formed an acquaintance with Rumsey, and followed the profession of an
engineer. He died 1815.—“Biographical Treasury,” Longmans, 1873.
The following notice appears in the obituary of an American newspaper
of the period:
“At New York, aged about 34 (50 years?) Robert Fulton, Esq., a great
mechanical genius. He had been ill ten days, arising principally from
exposure to the weather, in the pursuit of objects calculated, as our
authority says, to increase the national greatness. These objects
were steam-vessels of war, and a safe and certain method of submarine
explosion. The first is so far completed, that it may be finished by
other hands. Mr. Fulton was the inventor of steam-boats as they are now
in use.”
See note, Appendix No. 1. p. 587.
[85] Woodcroft, pp. 64-65, Bourne, on “Steam Navigation,” p. 14; and
“Encyclopædia Britannica” (eighth edition), vol. xx. p. 638.
[86] Woodcroft, on “Steam Navigation,” pp. 65-67.
[87] Woodcroft, on “Steam Navigation,” with drawing of the vessel in
question, p. 60.
[88] The term horse-power is employed to express the magnitude or
capacity and power of an engine. It originated with James Watt from
the actual measure of the work which a horse could perform, in raising
33,000 lbs. one foot high per minute; but as any such measure must,
in the nature of things, be vague and fluctuating, it was replaced
by what is now known as “nominal horse-power,” a mode of measurement
based mainly upon the area of the cylinder, the number of strokes per
minute and the pressure. But this method is far from showing the actual
horse-power, as some modern engines will give an effective power three,
four, and even six times greater than the nominal; it serves, however,
as a commercial unit of capacity or power of performance and regulates
the price to be paid for an engine. But it is much to be regretted that
nominal power is not yet estimated by an uniform standard, as different
rules are still applied to condensing and non-condensing engines, and
these vary in different places.
[89] “Mr. Fulton’s ingenious steamboat, invented with a view to the
navigation of the Mississippi, from New Orleans and upwards, sails
to-day from the North Run, near States Prison and Albany, the velocity
of the steam-boat is calculated at 4 miles an hour. It is said that it
will make a progress of two against the current of the Mississippi and,
if so, it will certainly be a very valuable acquisition to the commerce
of the Western States.”—_American Citizen_, 17th August, 1807.
[90] “To the Editor of the _American Citizen_.
“New York, 21st August, 1807.
“SIR,—I arrived this afternoon at 4 o’clock in the steam-boat from
Albany. As the success of my experiment gives me great hope that
such boats may be rendered of much importance to my country, to
prevent erroneous opinions, and give satisfaction to the friends of
these useful improvements, you will have the goodness to publish the
following facts:
“I left New York on Monday, at 1 o’clock, and arrived in Clermont, the
seat of Chancellor Livingston, at 1 o’clock on Tuesday; time, 24 hours;
distance, 110 miles; on Wednesday I departed from the Chancellor’s at
8 o’clock in the morning, and arrived at Albany at 5 in the afternoon;
distance, 40 miles; time, 8 hours! The sum of this is 150 miles in 32
hours, equal near 5 miles an hour.
“On Thursday, at 9 o’clock in the morning, I left Albany, and arrived
at the Chancellor’s at 6 in the evening. I started from thence at
7, and arrived at New York on Friday, at 4 in the afternoon; time,
30 hours; space run through, 150 miles, equal to 5 miles an hour.
Throughout the whole way, going and returning, the wind was ahead; no
advantage could be drawn from my sails. The whole has therefore been
performed by the power of the steam-engine.
“I am, sir, your most obedient,
“ROBERT FULTON.”
[91] Stuart’s Anecdotes of “Steam-engines,” vol. ii. p. 488.
[92] Fulton’s second large boat on the Hudson was the _Car of Neptune_.
Besides these two vessels he constructed steam ferry-boats to run
between New York and New Jersey, also a boat for the navigation of Long
Island Sound, as well as others for the Hudson, and for the Ohio and
Mississippi.
[93] Mr. Woodcroft, in concluding his remarks about Fulton,
disparagingly says that, “If these inventions separately (those
borrowed from Watt, Pickard, and Symington) or, as a combination, were
removed out of Fulton’s boat, nothing would be left but the hull; and,
if the hull be then divested of that peculiarity of form admitted
to have been derived from Colonel Beaufoy’s experiments, all that
would remain would be the hull of a boat of ordinary construction....
Fulton’s patents and specifications must, therefore, be considered
either as mere importations, borrowed (in patent phraseology) from
‘foreigners residing abroad’ ‘or as barefaced plagiarisms.’”
[94] In this judgment Mr. Woodcroft is supported by Mr. Rennie,
who considered “Fulton a quack who traded upon the inventions of
others.”—Smiles’ “Lives,” vol. ii. p. 237.
[95] “On Saturday morning, at eight o’clock arrived here, from
Montreal, being her first trip, the steam-boat _Accommodation_,
with ten passengers. This is the first vessel of the kind that ever
appeared in this harbour. She is continually crowded with visitants.
She left Montreal on Wednesday, at two o’clock, so that her passage
was sixty-six hours, thirty of which she was at anchor. She arrived at
Three Rivers in twenty-four hours. She has at present berths for twenty
passengers, which next year will be considerably augmented. No wind or
tide can stop her. She has 75 feet keel, and 85 feet on deck. The price
for a passage up is nine dollars, and eight down—the vessel supplying
provisions. The great advantage attending a vessel so constructed is,
that a passage may be calculated on to a degree of certainty, in point
of time, which cannot be the case with any vessel propelled by sails
only. The steam-boat receives her impulse from an open, double-spoked,
perpendicular wheel, on each side, without any circular band or rim.
To the end of each double spoke is fixed a square board, which enters
the water, and, by the rotary motion of the wheel, acts like a paddle.
The wheels are put and kept in motion by steam, operating within the
vessel. A mast is to be fixed in her, for the purpose of using a sail
when the wind is favourable, which will occasionally accelerate her
headway.”
CHAPTER II.
Progress of steam navigation in Europe—Clyde mechanics take the
lead—James Watt, 1766—Henry Bell, 1800—Correspondence between
Bell and Fulton—Letter from Bell to Miller of Dalswinton—The
_Comet_ steamer, 1811, plies between Glasgow and Greenock, and
afterwards on the Forth—Extraordinary progress of ship-building
on the Clyde—Great value and importance of the private
building yards—J. Elder and Company; their extensive premises,
_note_—Steam between Norwich and Yarmouth, 1813; between London
and Margate, 1815—The _Glasgow_—Early opposition to the
employment of steam-vessels—Barges on the Thames—First steamer
between Liverpool and the Clyde—H. M. steam-ship _Comet_—The
_Rob Roy_ and other vessels, 1818—The _United Kingdom_,
1826—First idea of iron ships, 1830—Proposals of Trevethick
and Dickenson, 1809-1815—The _Vulcan_, 1818—The _Aaron Manby_,
1821—The Shannon Steam Packet Company, 1824—Mr. John Laird and
Sir William Fairbairn—The _Elburkah_, 1832, and _Garry Owen_,
1834—The _Rainbow_, 1837—Messrs. Tod and MacGregor—The _Great
Britain_, 1839-1843—Advantages of iron ships—Action of salt
water on iron inconsiderable—Durability, strength, and safety
of iron—Affords greater capacity for stowage—Admiralty slow to
adopt iron for ships of war—Mr. Galloway’s feathering paddles,
1829—Story of the screw-propeller—Joseph Bramah, 1785—Mr.
J. Stevens, 1804—Richard Trevethick, 1815—Robert Wilson,
1833—Captain Ericsson, 1836—The _Francis B. Ogden_, though
successful, fails to convince the Admiralty—Mr. T. P. Smith—The
_Archimedes_—Her trial with the _Widgeon_, Oct. 1839, and its
results—The _Rattler_ and the _Alecto_, 1843—The _Rattler_ not
as successful as expected—Captain Robert J. Stockton efficiently
supports Ericsson’s views—His vessel, a complete success, and the
first “screw” used for commerce in America—Superiority of Mr.
Woodcroft’s “varying” propeller, 1832—In building fit vessels,
the trade in which they are to be employed must be considered.
[Sidenote: Progress of steam navigation in Europe.]
During the progress in America of the art of practically applying
steam to marine propulsion the people of Europe were making slow but
important improvements in the models of their vessels, and in the
development of that art for the purposes of navigation.
[Sidenote: Clyde mechanics take the lead.]
[Sidenote: James Watt, 1766.]
In these improvements the mechanics on the Clyde took the lead,
establishing there a reputation for the construction of marine engines
and more especially of ships adapted to receive them, which they have
ever since maintained. In the early part of this century the river
Clyde in the vicinity of Glasgow was a scarcely navigable stream, with
few or no vessels at its chief port, and these, small craft of not
more than 40 tons, drawing, at most, only 5 feet of water when laden.
Indeed, my own recollection of that now important river goes back to
the time when one could wade across it among the stones at the foot
of the old Broomielaw Bridge, and when a small but lucrative salmon
fishery was carried on from the two “fishing huts,” then the site where
a dock now receives ships of the largest description, and where massive
quay walls and numerous warehousing sheds occupy the once verdant
grass banks of its southern shore. To the energy and intelligence of
the Corporation, and, in later years, through the laudable exertion
of a Trust, chosen from members of that body and other citizens of
Glasgow, may, in a great measure, be attributed the extraordinary rise
and prosperity of a city now possessing an inland navigation and a
stream harbour unsurpassed, perhaps, in Europe. Indeed, from the time
when James Watt, in 1766,[96] erected in Glasgow his first model of
a steam-engine and there laid the foundation of a power which has
since revolutionized the commerce of the world, its citizens seem to
have specially directed their genius to the development of this mighty
agency, their first and necessary step being the improvement of the
approaches to their city by the deepening of the Clyde.
[Sidenote: Henry Bell, 1800.]
But it was not till the beginning of the present century that any real
progress was made in the maritime pursuits of the people of Scotland.
In 1800, Henry Bell, then resident at Helensburgh, first laid before
the British Government his inventions for the improvement of steam
navigation. The Board of Admiralty, however, so far from expressing
any desire to promote his views, discouraged them, as they did
thirteen years afterwards, when the subject was again urged upon their
attention. Naturally anxious that his invention should be practically
tested on a scale sufficiently extended, Bell forwarded, in 1803, a
detailed account of his method of propelling vessels against wind and
tide by steam power, to most of the European Governments, and also to
the Government of the United States of America. He found, however, that
his plans were received no better abroad than at home: while it further
seems probable that the Government of the United States had either
given or shown them to Fulton, who was then engaged in endeavouring to
induce his countrymen to assist him in starting trading steamers on
their lakes and rivers, where such vessels were admirably fitted for
the profitable development of their vast natural inland resources.
[Sidenote: Correspondence between Bell and Fulton.]
Mr. Fulton evidently knew how Mr. Bell had been employed, for he opened
a correspondence with him, and, in the course of it, requested him to
call on Mr. Miller of Dalswinton, and on Mr. Symington, and to send
him a drawing and description of their last boat with the machinery.
These were sent out, and Fulton, some time afterwards, answered that
“he had constructed a steamer from the different drawings of the
machinery forwarded to him by Bell, which was likely to succeed with
some necessary improvements.” This letter Bell sent to Mr. Miller for
his information. As the matter, however, to which it refers is one of
considerable importance, it is desirable to state the facts as related
by Mr. Bell himself in a letter which appeared in the _Caledonian
Mercury_ in 1816, wherein he says, referring to the communication he
had received many years previously from Mr. Fulton:
[Sidenote: Letter from Bell to Miller of Dalswinton.]
[Sidenote: The _Comet_ steamer, 1811.]
“This letter led me to think of the absurdity of writing my opinion to
other countries, and not putting it into practice in my own country;
and from these considerations I was [a]roused (_sic_), to set on foot a
steam-boat, for which I made a number of different models before I was
satisfied. When I was convinced they would answer the end, I contracted
with Messrs. John Wood and Company, shipbuilders, in Port Glasgow, to
build me a steam-vessel according to my plan: 40 feet keel, and 10 feet
6 inches beam, which I fitted up with an engine and paddles, and called
her the _Comet_, because she was built and finished the year that a
comet appeared in the north-west part of Scotland. This vessel is the
first steam-boat built in Europe that answered the end, and is, at this
present time, upon the best and simplest method of any of them, for a
person sitting in the cabin will hardly hear the engine at work. She
plies on the Firth of Forth, betwixt the east end of the great canal
and Newhaven near Leith. The distance by water is 27 miles, which she
performs in ordinary weather in three and a half hours up, and the same
down.”
In another communication, Bell says, “when I wrote to the United
States’ Government on the great utility that steam navigation would be
to them on their rivers, they appointed Mr. Fulton to correspond with
me.”
No merit, as the inventor of the present system of steam navigation,
can, however, be conceded to Bell more than to Fulton; nor for any
progress beyond the improvements of which he had obtained cognizance
from the previous experiments of Messrs. Miller, Taylor, and Symington.
In fact, there can be no doubt, from existing drawings, that
Symington’s _Charlotte Dundas_ was superior in mechanical arrangements
to either Fulton’s _Clermont_ or Bell’s _Comet_. But what Fulton and
Livingston accomplished in the United States, Bell effected in his own
country; each was, therefore, instrumental in the introduction, for
commercial purposes, of steam navigation.[97]
[Sidenote: plies between Glasgow and Greenock,]
Though Mr. Bell had completed his _Comet_ in January, 1812, more than
six months elapsed before he announced to the public, through the
medium of an advertisement in the local papers of the period,[98] his
intention to employ her for trading purposes on the Clyde. The notice
is a modest but curious and interesting document. He does not profess
to make more than one passage each day between Glasgow and Greenock,
a distance of 22 miles, and, doubtful of its pecuniary success, he
informs the public that he intends to continue “his establishment at
Helensburgh Baths,” to which the _Comet_ will carry passengers on
her return journey from Greenock This little vessel, of which the
following is an illustration as she appeared on the Clyde passing
Dumbarton, was designed and constructed by Mr. John Wood, shipbuilder,
Port Glasgow. She was 40 feet in length of keel, and 10½ feet beam; her
engines (which cost 192_l._) were 4 horse-power; and her draught of
water 4 feet. She continued to ply for a short time between Glasgow and
Greenock, but under many difficulties.[99]
[Illustration]
Though the engine of the _Comet_ was only of 4 horse-power, driving two
small wheels, one on each side, it must, however, have performed its
work, on the whole, exceedingly well to have propelled a vessel of 30
tons burthen at the rate Mr. Bell states in his letter published in the
_Caledonian Mercury_.
[Sidenote: and, afterwards, on the Forth.]
But the _Comet_ does not appear to have proved remunerative to her
enterprising owner on the line on which he had placed her.[100] The
prejudice raised against steam navigation by rival interests, which
Fulton had previously experienced on the Hudson, was equally strong on
the Clyde, and seriously injured Mr. Bell’s first undertaking. He was
consequently obliged to withdraw her from this station and to employ
her for some months as an excursion-boat on the coasts of Scotland
and Ireland, extending his cruises to the shores of England when the
weather permitted, to show the superior advantages of steam-boat
navigation over other modes of transit to the public, many of whom
viewed her with feelings of mingled awe and superstition. Afterwards
he transferred her to the Forth, where she ran for a considerable time
between the extremity of the Forth and Clyde Canal and Newhaven, near
Edinburgh. Here she seems to have done her work most efficiently, for
Mr. Bell states that she made the voyage, a distance of 27 miles, on
the average, in three and a half hours, being at the rate of more than
7½ miles an hour.[101]
[Sidenote: Extraordinary progress of ship-building on the Clyde.]
Although the _Comet_ at first proved commercially unsuccessful, there
is no part of Europe where the progress in the construction of steamers
has been either so great or so astonishing as on the Clyde. From a
silvery salmon stream it has become in half a century by far the
largest and most important shipbuilding river in the world; but, alas,
its once limpid stream has long since ceased to be either silvery or
pure.[102] Ancient historians have told us that when the first Punic
war roused the citizens of Rome to extraordinary exertions in the
equipment of a fleet for the destruction of the maritime supremacy of
Carthage, the banks of the Tiber resounded with the axe and the hammer,
and that the extent of the ship-building operations then carried on
was a matter not merely of surprise, but of wonder. How insignificant,
however, was that sound when compared with that of the steam hammer and
the anvil and the din of the work now to be heard on the banks of the
Clyde. For miles on both sides of the river stupendous ship-building
yards line its banks, employing tens of thousands of hardy and skilled
mechanics earning their daily bread, as God has destined all men to
do, by “the sweat of their brow,” relieved from oppressive taxation,
and free from anything approaching the thraldom of slavery, the curse
of ancient Rome. Along those banks there is now annually constructed
a much larger amount of steam tonnage than in all the other ports of
Europe combined, those of England alone excepted. What a contrast to
the days of Henry Bell!—days almost within my own recollection.
By comparing the Clyde with the Tiber, both in themselves comparatively
insignificant rivers—the one made important by the power of the
Cæsars, the other by the wisdom and energy of the Clyde trustees,
it is to be hoped that more than one lesson may be learned from the
character of the employment on their respective banks. The clamour on
the Tiber when Rome resolved to achieve maritime greatness, indicated
war, terrible war, with Carthage; but the sounds on the Clyde proclaim
a mission of peace and good-will among nations, for nearly all the
ships constructed there are destined to carry to other lands the
fabrics of our workshops and the products of our mills, and with them
the civilizing and enlightening influence resulting from the skill and
genius of our artisans.[103]
[Sidenote: Great value and importance of the private building yards.]
Should, however, the necessity arise, these numerous ship-building
yards and thousands of mechanics could instantly be made available for
the construction of vessels of war. If, therefore, a large naval force
be still unhappily necessary, [and I am far from saying that it is
not], should we not take into consideration, when we frame our naval
estimates, the vast resources we have at our command in our private
yards,[104] (infinitely greater as these are than those of all other
nations in Europe combined), for producing on an emergency, whatever
extra number of vessels of war we may then require? Our private
building yards are in themselves the bases of a great fleet.[105]
But the Admiralty are slow to learn. At the commencement of the
century they declined even to consider the benefits to be derived
by the application of steam, and even forty years afterwards, when
everybody except themselves had become alive to its advantages, they
refused to apply this new and now mighty power to our war ships of the
line.
[Sidenote: Steam between Norwich and Yarmouth, 1813;]
[Sidenote: Between London and Margate, 1815.]
[Sidenote: The _Glasgow_.]
Happily, however, the great invention made its way without Government
aid. Private enterprise carried into execution what the Admiralty would
not even consider. In 1813 a steam-boat was built at Leeds, and was
started to run between Norwich and Yarmouth in the months of August or
September of that year. This was the second steam-vessel launched in
British waters. In the same year a steamer was launched at Manchester
and another at Bristol. In October 1814 another steamer commenced to
ply on the Humber. In December of that year the first steamer was seen
on the Thames; she was put in motion on the canal at Limehouse; and,
early in 1815, a vessel with a side lever engine of 14 horse-power,
constructed by Cook of Glasgow, made her way from that city to Dublin,
and thence round the Land’s End to London. Though encountering
great opposition from the Thames watermen, from time immemorial an
obstructive class of men, she, nevertheless, commenced and successfully
carried on a passenger traffic between that city and Margate. Cook
had, in the previous year, in association with Bell, built two other
steam-vessels, one of which, named the _Glasgow_, became in power and
efficiency the standard at that time for river steamers.
The public now began to appreciate the value of steamers. Prejudice
vanished and travellers by them increased with such rapidity that, in
1816, it was not unusual for 500 or 600 passengers to enjoy, in the
course of one day, water excursions on the Clyde.[106]
[Sidenote: Early opposition to the employment of steam vessels.]
It is, however, not a matter for surprise that steamers, when first
placed on rivers for passenger traffic, were viewed with great jealousy
by watermen, and that, on the Hudson and especially on the Thames, they
were strenuously opposed. The traffic on the Thames had for centuries
afforded profitable employment to large numbers of semi-seafaring men
who, though not “sailors” in the usual acceptation of the term, could
nevertheless be made much more useful on board our ships of war in
an emergency than any other class in the community. To suggest any
changes whereby their number might be reduced was sure, as has been
the case for ages, to rouse the patriotic feelings of the people of
England lest there should be a scarcity of men to man their fleets.
Thus, on the repeal of the navigation laws in 1849, the special clause
inserted in the Bill to reserve the coasting trade from the competition
of foreign ships and foreign seamen, was _solely_ on the ground of
“preserving a nursery for British sailors,” and five years elapsed ere
that clause was expunged. When, therefore, the British Legislature, at
so recent a period, considered it necessary to pass an enactment for
the preservation of seamen in England, as if any law could retain them
here if they were desirous of improving their condition by accepting
employment elsewhere, it is not surprising that the watermen, bargemen,
and others, who obtained their livelihood on the Thames, should have
found many sympathisers in 1815, when they affirmed that their “trade
would be ruined by the introduction of steamers.” Nor can we wonder
that men, in their humble position of life, could not see that the
greater facilities afforded for intercourse between London and Margate
and other towns on the banks of the river would, so far from reducing
their means of employment, tend very materially to increase them.
[Sidenote: Barges on the Thames.]
Previously to the time when David Napier introduced a steamer, the
_Marjory_, to ply on the Thames, the passenger traffic of the river
had been carried on by rowing boats, and sailing-craft of various
descriptions. Those which made the more distant voyages to Margate,
Ramsgate, and Deal were sailing-vessels, most of them carrying cargo
as well as passengers, while many were merely barges, called Hoys, of
which the following is an excellent illustration from Mr. E. W. Cooke’s
interesting collection of the vessels on the Thames. But the great
bulk of them were wherries, while the larger class having a mast and
sails, plied between Greenwich, Woolwich, Erith, or Gravesend. A few
were state barges—ornate structures—belonging to the Lord Mayor and
Corporation, or to the different livery companies or ancient guilds, in
which for centuries the members made frequent excursions to Richmond
or Hampton Court on the one hand, and Greenwich or Blackwall on the
other. Jovial pleasant parties they were, especially at that season of
the year, when the horse-chestnuts in Bushy Park were in bloom, and
whitebait was in its prime at Greenwich. One of these richly decorated
barges, almost rivalling the celebrated bucentaur of Venice, I have
copied from the drawings of Mr. Cooke as a relic of bygone days.
[Illustration: THAMES BARGE.]
[Illustration: THE STATIONERS’ BARGE.]
But these have all now passed away, though the cargo barges, and
some of the wherries may still be seen on the river. Steamers supply
their places, and from the time when Napier, in 1815, started his
“fire-boat,” steam navigation on the Thames, as on all other navigable
rivers, has made a steady, if not, at first, a rapid progress.
[Sidenote: First steamer between Liverpool and the Clyde.]
On the 28th June, 1815, the first steamer arrived at Liverpool from
the Clyde. She was built for the purpose of carrying on the passenger
traffic between the Mersey and Runcorn. On her passage round she called
at Ramsey, in the Isle of Man, whence she started early in the morning,
and arrived at Liverpool about noon of the same day. This vessel, the
particular dimensions and details of which it is difficult now to
trace, was noteworthy in more ways than one. She was not merely the
first regular steamer on the Mersey, but she was, also, in reality the
pioneer of the fleet of steamers which now ply with so much regularity
between Liverpool and the numerous ports on the English, Irish, and
Scotch coasts.
The second steamer, introduced to the waters of the Mersey in 1816,
was intended to supply communication for passengers and goods between
Liverpool and Chester by means of the canal, an object she effectually
accomplished.
The first application of steam for the purpose of towing vessels—now
an important and invaluable part of the numerous services rendered by
steam to navigation—was made in October 1816, when the _Harlequin_
was towed out of the Mersey by the _Charlotte_, a steamer which, in
the summer of the same year, had been placed as a ferry-boat to run
between Liverpool and Eastham. But the first steamer specially built at
Liverpool for the purpose of a ferry was named the _Etna_, which, early
in April of that year, began to ply between Liverpool and Tranmere.
She was 63 feet long, with a paddle-wheel placed in the centre, her
extremities being connected by beams, and her deck 28 feet wide over
all. This primitive vessel initiated the mode of transit by means of
the ferry-boats which now bridge the Mersey.
[Sidenote: H.M. steam-ship _Comet_, 1819.]
It was not, however, till the year 1819 that the Admiralty of the day
became alive to the importance of steam navigation, nor were they
likely, even then, to have awakened from their slumbers had not Lord
Melville and Sir George Cockburn urged on the Government the great
value of steam-power for towing their men-of-war.[107] In that year
the first steam-vessel was built for the Royal Navy. She was named
the _Comet_, and her dimensions were 115 feet in length, 21 feet in
breadth, and 9 feet draught of water, being propelled by two engines of
40 horse-power each, manufactured by Boulton and Watt.
[Sidenote: The _Rob Roy_ and other vessels, 1818.]
In 1818, Mr. David Napier, a name more associated than any other in
Great Britain with the early development of the marine engine, having
for some years previously been giving his attention to the propulsion
of vessels by steam, launched the _Rob Roy_ from the yard of Mr.
William Denny, of Dumbarton.[108] She was only 90 tons burthen, with
engines of 30 horse-power, but, to the credit of her builder, she
traded between Glasgow and Belfast, carrying with great punctuality
the mails and passengers for two consecutive years without requiring
any repairs; and although the first regular sea-going steamer which
had been built in either Europe or the United States of America, her
success was complete. Subsequently, the _Rob Roy_ was transferred to
the English Channel to serve as a packet between Dover and Calais. Soon
afterwards Messrs. Wood, of Port Glasgow, built for Mr. David Napier,
who had by this time removed to London, a boat named the _Talbot_,
of 120 tons. She was fitted with two engines of 30 horse-power each,
of his own construction, and proved in all respects the most perfect
steam-vessel of the period. This was the first vessel placed upon the
now celebrated line carrying the mails and passengers between Holyhead
and Dublin.
The value of the steam-engine having now been fully established as
a means of propelling vessels at sea with safety, and of performing
voyages with a regularity hitherto unknown, Mr. Napier found
comparatively little difficulty in inducing capitalists to join him in
the project of constructing various vessels for a regular line of steam
traffic between Liverpool, Greenock, and the city of Glasgow. Three
vessels were, consequently, built—the _Robert Burns_ of 150 tons,
the _Eclipse_ of 240 tons, each being fitted with two engines of 30
horse-power, and the _Superb_, also of 240 tons with two engines of 35
horse-power each. These vessels proved successful, and the line thus
established in 1822 has continued ever since.
New coasting lines soon followed, and, in lieu of the Leith smacks,
once so celebrated, the _James Watt_ was constructed to ply between
London and Leith. She was the largest steamer that had yet been built,
being 448 tons measurement, fitted with engines of 50 horse-power
each, by Boulton and Watt. Her paddles were moved, not directly by the
engines, but, through the interposition of toothed wheels, rendering
the number of revolutions of the axis considerably greater than that
of the paddles, so that, with the exception of the low proportion
of her propelling power to the tonnage, she possessed many, if not
most, of the qualities of the steamers of even the present day. The
_Soho_ followed the _James Watt_ on the same line, and proved equally
successful.
[Sidenote: The _United Kingdom_, 1826.]
In 1826 the first of the so-called leviathan class of steamers, the
_United Kingdom_ (of which the following is an excellent illustration)
was built by Mr. Steele of Greenock for the trade between London and
Edinburgh. She was 160 feet long, with 26½ feet beam, and engines of
200 horse-power by David Napier, and was considered the wonder of the
day. People flocked from all quarters to inspect and admire her.[109]
[Illustration: THE “UNITED KINGDOM,” LONDON AND EDINBURGH PACKET.—
FROM A DRAWING BY E. W. COOKE, R.A.]
Although these two lines of regular steam communication between
Liverpool and the river Clyde, and between London and Edinburgh were
now successfully established, and proved of considerable importance
in the encouragement of steam navigation elsewhere, some years
elapsed before those rapid strides were made in its adaptation as a
propelling power which have rendered it one of the wonders of the
present age. Indeed, this power would probably never have made such an
extraordinary advance had iron not been adopted instead of wood for the
construction of our ships.
[Sidenote: First idea of iron ships, 1830.]
Hitherto, and throughout all ages, timber alone had been used in
shipbuilding. The forests of Lebanon supplied the naval architects of
Tyre with their materials; Italy cultivated her woods with unusual
care, so that sufficient trees might be grown for the timber, planking,
and masts of the ships of its once powerful maritime republics; and,
in our own time, how often have we heard fears expressed that Great
Britain would not be able to continue the supply of sufficient oak
for her royal dockyards, much less for her merchant fleets! Yet, when
shrewd far-seeing men, no further back than the year 1830, talked about
substituting iron for the “ribs” of a ship instead of “timbers,” and
iron plates for “planking” instead of oak, what a howl of derision the
public raised!
“Who ever heard of iron floating?” they derisively enquired. It is
true they might have seen old tin kettles float on every pool of
water before their doors almost any day of their lives, nay, floating
even more buoyantly than their discarded wooden coal boxes; but such
common-place instructors were beneath their notice. Timber-built ships
had from time immemorial been in use by every nation and on every sea,
and had bravely battled with the storm from the days of Noah, and were
these, they sneeringly asked, to be supplanted by a material which in
itself would naturally sink? Such was the reasoning of the period; and
indeed, the best of the arguments against the use of iron rested on
scarcely more solid foundation.[110]
It could not be gainsaid that a frame of iron was infinitely stronger
than a frame of wood, which, in fact, has no strength in itself, for
the longitudinal timber ends are only butted to each other, and obtain
their power of resistance solely by means of the horizontal planks and
the trenails which bind them together. Nor could the obstructives deny,
though they argued the point, that the ribs when welded with the iron
plates riveted to them, formed a hull vastly superior in strength, and
much less liable to leakage than any similar body of wood, however
well constructed. They must also have seen, by its displacement of
water when afloat, that an iron hull was the more buoyant of the two.
But these arguments, however unanswerable, were long ere they produced
conviction; the fact that iron does not float, and the impression
that it could not be made to do so safely, offered almost insuperable
difficulties in the way of building vessels of that material; and when
it was argued that they would “rip up” if they struck upon a rock, or
bulge into a shapeless mass if driven on a sand bank, the opponents of
progress raised objections which could be answered only by practical
experience.
[Sidenote: Proposals of Trevethick and Dickenson, 1809-1815.]
[Sidenote: The _Vulcan_, 1818.]
Hitherto only a few very small vessels or barges had been constructed
of iron, and these neither on a scale nor of a class to practically
refute the objections which had been raised against the use of iron for
ship-building purposes. It is true that so far back as 1809 Richard
Trevethick and Robert Dickenson proposed a scheme for building “large
ships with decks, beams, and sides, of plate iron,” and even suggested
“masts, yards, and spars, to be constructed of iron in plates with
telescope joints or screwed together:”[111] and in 1815, Mr. Dickenson
patented an invention for vessels, or rather boats, “to be built of
iron, with a hollow watertight gunwale.”[112] But, as these inventors
or patentees did not put their ideas into practice, no other person
(if, indeed, any other person gave even a passing thought to the
subject) was convinced that any craft beyond a boat or a river-barge
could be constructed of iron, much less that, if made in the form
of a ship, this material would oppose more effectual resistance to
the storms of the ocean, or, if dashed upon the strand, to the angry
fury of the waves, than timber, however scientifically put together.
But though no available substance can withstand the raging elements
with less chance of destruction than plates of iron riveted together
in the form of a boiler (the principle on which iron ships are now
constructed), the public could not then appreciate their superior
value; and it was not until 1818 that the first _iron vessel_ was
built by Thomas Wilson, at Faskine, on the banks of the Monkland
Canal, eleven miles from Glasgow: this vessel, appropriately named the
_Vulcan_, is even now (1875) employed on the Clyde in the conveyance of
minerals from the Forth and Clyde Canal.
[Sidenote: _Aaron Manby_, 1821.]
Three years afterwards a steam-engine was, for the first time, fitted
into a vessel built of iron. She was named the _Aaron Manby_, and was
constructed in 1821 at Horsley, for the joint account of Mr. Manby and
Captain Napier, afterwards Admiral Sir Charles Napier. She was sent in
parts to London, where they were put together, and when complete was
despatched to France under the command of Captain Napier. Another iron
steam-vessel, intended for the navigation of the Seine, soon followed;
but, in consequence of the prohibitory French navigation laws, with
respect to foreign bottoms, the different parts of this vessel were,
in this case, sent to France instead of to London, and put together
at Charenton. Mr. Manby prepared in a similar manner two others, and
shortly afterwards the building of iron vessels was commenced by an
engineer at Paris for the same trade. The speculation, however, proved
unfortunate.
[Sidenote: Shannon Steam Packet Company, 1824.]
The Shannon Steam Packet Company was the next to employ iron steamers
in river navigation. The first, built by the Horsley Company in 1824,
proving very successful, was immediately followed by others.
[Sidenote: Mr. John Laird and Sir William Fairbairn.]
As the success of these vessels was gradually determining the problem
of the suitableness of iron to ship-building purposes, and was drawing
attention to the subject, Messrs. Fawcett and Preston established
at Liverpool a building yard in connection with their engine factory
under the direction of Mr. Page, and constructed several small vessels
entirely of iron.[113] Mr. Laird, of Birkenhead, proceeding upon
a larger scale, prosecuted this branch of naval architecture with
uninterrupted prosperity.[114] Mr. Fairbairn, afterwards Sir William
Fairbairn, also took part, at an early period, in cultivating the new
art; and ranks with those to whose influence and skill it was first
indebted for public confidence. Removing from Glasgow, where he had
commenced business, he established himself at Millwall, on the Isle
of Dogs, and there became one of the principal constructors of iron
vessels upon the Thames. His efforts proving successful, other eminent
engineers pursued the same branch of art with the like results; among
them may be mentioned Messrs. Miller and Ravenhill, whose vessels were
considered at the time to be of exquisite workmanship and beauty of
form; and Messrs. Ditchburn and Mare, who built a considerable number
of iron vessels, including the _Fairy_, the tender to the Queen’s
yacht, her form and speed gaining them a high reputation.
[Sidenote: The _Elburkah_, 1832, and _Garry Owen_, 1834.]
In 1832, Messrs. Laird were bold enough to carry into practice the
theory of iron vessels for ocean navigation; and in the course of that
year the firm of MacGregor, Laird, and Company built the _Elburkah_,
of 55 tons, as consort to the _Quorra_ in her expedition up the
Niger.[115] These enlightened firms justly considered that, whatever
objections might be urged against vessels built of iron, they would at
least possess equal sea-going qualities and, in some branches of trade,
peculiar advantages. Combining strength and lightness of draught, the
_Elburkah_ would be better adapted than any vessel built of wood for
the exploration and navigation of African rivers:[116] nor were they
deceived in their calculations. Immediately afterwards Messrs. Laird
of Birkenhead commenced the construction of another iron vessel, the
_Lady Lansdowne_ for the navigation of Lough Derg, River Shannon. In
1834 they built the _Garry Owen_, destined to run between Limerick
and Kilrush. This vessel (125 feet long and 21 feet 6 inches wide,
propelled by two engines of 45 horse-power each) was unfortunately,
or perhaps, under the circumstances, fortunately for the progress of
science, driven on shore with various other vessels during a strong
gale on her first voyage; she, however, sustained comparatively little
injury, while nearly all the others, which were built of wood,
were totally wrecked or seriously damaged: this important fact, as
a practical answer to one of the most reasonable objections raised
against iron vessels, gave remarkable impulse to their increase.
But strong prejudices, unreasonable doubts, and real difficulties had
still to be overcome before the suitableness of iron ships for ocean
navigation could be established. Another of the chief and more tenable
objections to the extended use of iron vessels was the perturbation
of the compass. Moreover, one or two unfortunate accidents had been
attributed to this cause, though this more, probably, served as a
plausible excuse for bad seamanship or negligence. In the course,
however, of a few years iron packets began to be used along our coasts;
and the art of building them advanced gradually towards perfection.
Iron vessels soon afterwards, therefore, acquired a merited confidence.
[Sidenote: The _Rainbow_, 1837.]
Their superiority had become apparent to the more intelligent persons
of the period who directed their attention to engineering and maritime
pursuits. In 1833 and 1834, Mr. Fairbairn launched two passenger
steamers of iron to ply on the Humber between Selby and Hull. Mr. Manby
also built one of considerable dimensions for general purposes; and
in 1837 Messrs. Laird built two iron vessels of about 350 tons and 60
horse-power each, ordered by the East India Company for the navigation
of the River Indus. In the same year Messrs. Laird constructed for the
General Steam Navigation Company an iron vessel, the _Rainbow_,[117] to
ply between London and the outports. In that year Muhammed Ali placed
upon the Nile an iron steamer built by the same firm, while they also
launched from their yard the iron vessels in which Colonel Chesney
explored the course of the Euphrates, and which, having been shipped in
pieces, were put together by Birkenhead artisans on the banks of that
river.
Though the value of iron was now fully established for shipbuilding
purposes, many years elapsed ere that material came into general use
for the construction of over sea _sailing_ vessels, the principal
objections being the greater liability of the compass to err,[118] and
the difficulty of preventing animalculæ and sea-weeds from adhering
to the bottom. But these difficulties were in time overcome, and
iron vessels propelled by sails are now nearly as common as steamers
built of that material. Experience by degrees successfully met almost
every objection; and science was again triumphant over prejudice
and ignorance. Iron had been made not merely to float, but to ride
buoyantly over the crest of the wave, amidst the raging elements.
[Sidenote: Messrs. Tod and MacGregor.]
Mr. Laird was followed by other builders of iron vessels at Liverpool;
the high estimation in which they were held having led to a constantly
increasing demand for them. About this time Messrs. Tod and MacGregor,
of Glasgow, began to take a leading position in this occupation;
the _Princess Royal_, long engaged on the line between Glasgow and
Liverpool, and launched from their yard, having been one of the finest
and fastest iron packets of her time.
[Sidenote: The _Great Britain_, 1839-1843.]
From that period iron shipbuilding on the Clyde increased with great
rapidity, but the most magnificent specimen of an iron ship of any
description produced at that time was the _Great Britain_, to which
reference will be made hereafter, constructed by Mr. Patterson at
Bristol, for the Great Western Steam Packet Company.
[Sidenote: Advantages of iron ships.]
[Sidenote: Action of salt water on iron inconsiderable.]
For the information of the general reader, I may here state that the
advantages of iron vessels consist principally in their durability,
strength and safety, increased capacity for stowage, greater economy,
and salubrity.[119] With regard to the perturbations of the compass,
Professor Airy, previous to the time when Mr. Evans made his report,
had published a very concise series of instructions for correcting
the compass on board of iron ships; and the progress of science now
bids fair to obviate any difficulty whatever ensuing from this cause.
Prior to experience it was apprehended that the saline property of
the sea-water would tend to corrode the iron, and, further, that this
metal would be rapidly destroyed by oxidation. But experience has shown
that the effect of salt water on iron _alone_ is so small as hardly to
bear a comparison with its effect upon iron in connection with wood.
This remarkable difference has been observed in iron vessels in which
timber had been used for the keel; the bolts driven through the keel to
form its proper connections having been so rapidly acted on as almost
to destroy them before the external iron plates of the hull had been
perceptibly diminished in thickness: it is further of importance that
the vessel should be kept in use rather than be laid up in ordinary.
Vessels built in the earliest stage of this art, subsequently to that
of building mere canal-boats, bore many years’ service with little need
of repair, and remained in a perfectly good condition for a longer
period than that to which the durability of wooden vessels ordinarily,
and under similar circumstances, extends. But there is a great
difference in iron plates, some are inferior and soon oxidize, while
others, as will be presently shown, last for many years. As the inner
surface of the plates may be almost wholly protected from oxidation,
it is only from the external wear that danger may be apprehended.
But, though the outer surface of the metal can be protected in a
great measure from corrosion, yet iron vessels are subject to the
disadvantage of having their speed diminished, after a short period of
service, by the adhesion and growth of animal and vegetable matter. A
coating of red lead is not a perfect preventive against this mischief,
and various other scientific substitutes have been used of late;
so that it cannot be doubted but this inconvenience will disappear
altogether before scientific appliances. A perfectly protective varnish
for the in sides of iron ships and a coating which shall effectually
prevent the adhesion of animal and vegetable substances to the
exterior, are desiderata of great value,[120] and will, we may hope,
continue to receive the careful consideration of scientific men.
[Sidenote: Durability, strength, and safety of iron.]
All the facts yet known with regard to the superior _durability_[121]
of iron ships are highly satisfactory. It is a consideration not to be
overlooked that large ships may be rendered more durable than small
vessels; for, as the weight of the hull is generally determined in a
certain proportion to the whole displacement, and the plates of iron
are much thicker in a large than in a small ship (the oxidizing causing
an uniform waste of metal), the durability will be in proportion to the
amount of wear the plates of the respective vessels can bear without
danger to the ship.
But the superior _strength_ of iron ships depends not merely upon the
quality of the material employed, but also on the mode of combining it.
The strength of wrought iron is well known and its power of resisting
strains in almost every direction is a matter of universal experience,
add to which, that its resistance to lateral pressure increases in a
much higher ratio than the quantity of material. Hence, almost any
amount of strength may be given to a large fabric; certainly, enough
to bear the pressures and strains to which ships are exposed, with
much less liability to injury than wood. With plates of iron of a
substance fitly proportioned to the magnitude of the fabric, and with
joints properly formed, the sides of ships have been found capable of
resisting, in a remarkable manner, forces for which the strength of
timber would be quite insufficient. A substance of plates sufficient
to constitute this amount of strength generally, is also able to bear
concussions of great force with much less hazard than timber. The
uninjured state in which the _Great Britain_ was found in Dundrum
Bay, after being wrecked and lying on the beach several months during
winter, exposed to various storms, proved the correctness of these
views, which more extended experience has since confirmed. Experience
has also demonstrated that unless the concussion takes place with
extreme violence, mere indentation of the metal is generally the
greatest injury sustained. Beyond this, the strain sometimes breaks off
the heads of a few rivets without opening the seam, but it is uncommon
for the rivets to be drawn if the metal and workmanship are good. In
the case where an iron ship strikes upon a sharp pointed-like crag of
rock or coral reef with considerable force, it frequently happens that
a hole is made through the plate; but even when such an accident occurs
the damage is generally _local_, the parts not immediately subject to
the concussion remaining unhurt. No general leakage is, therefore,
consequent on such an accident, as would be the case in all vessels
built of wood.
[Sidenote: Affords greater capacity for stowage.]
As the hull of an iron ship is both thinner and considerably
lighter[122] than that of a wooden ship, an iron ship of the same
external dimensions as a wooden one has both greater capacity for
stowage and greater power to support the weights which may be put into
her. These differences vary in some degree with the dimensions and form
of the ship, being greater in proportion to the increased dimensions
of the ship. They may, of course, be determined by computation; but,
in all cases, an iron ship will carry considerably more cargo than a
wooden one of the same external dimensions.
Again, the consideration of economy must not be omitted in any
comparison of the merits of ships built entirely either of timber, or
of iron. The economy begins with the construction, for the original
cost of an iron ship is less than that of a wooden one, and, apart
altogether from her superior capacity for cargo, it runs on with the
course of the ship’s service as the result of several causes; as, for
instance, the smaller amount and less expensive character of repairs:
moreover, as it is not even yet known how long iron ships will last,
the precise saving from their use cannot be estimated. On the other
hand, the period of service of mercantile timber-built ships is
defined. If they reach or exceed thirty years’ service, they must be
ships of the very highest class as to quality[123], and must, indeed,
within that period have undergone frequent and very expensive repairs.
As iron ships are not subject to the same decay, at the same time that
accidental damages are generally repaired at a much less cost, every
item saved by the diminished charge for repairs is clear profit.
[Sidenote: Admiralty slow to adopt iron for ships of war.]
But with all these advantages, a considerable time elapsed before the
Admiralty could be induced to consider the desirability of constructing
any Government steamer of iron, or of even allowing the large private
trading vessels engaged in the conveyance of the mails to be built of
that material. They had objections of their own applying specially to
the ships under their control, and very plausible objections too, in
their opinion, compared with those originally raised by an ignorant
public. A shot, they said, would penetrate an iron vessel with much
greater ease than a wooden one, while the shot holes could not be as
effectually plugged, if indeed they could be plugged at all. Wood, they
argued, when pierced, would rapidly contract and leave a very small
opening for water to get through, whereas a shot would make a clean cut
through an iron plate which could not be thus expeditiously filled, and
if it did not tear away the whole of the plate, would leave a gap as
large as a “barn door.” However, a little experience[124] soon showed
their arguments to be fallacious, and when they found that the engines
of a paddle-wheel steamer, and, especially, the paddles themselves,
offered conspicuous targets to an enemy, and that it was impossible
to make the stern-frames of their wooden ships sufficiently strong to
withstand, without serious leakage, the vibration of the screw, they
abandoned, though reluctantly, the paddle-wheel, and at length gave up,
also, vessels of wood for the purposes of war. These resolutions were,
however, only carried into practice after vast sums of money had been
expended on the “reconstruction” of a _wooden_ British Navy, for which,
in one year alone, and that so lately as 1861, when almost everybody
except themselves saw that iron must supersede timber, they demanded
from Parliament (and carried their vote) no less than 949,371_l._ to
replenish the stock of wood in the dockyards: a sum far in excess of
any previous vote for that material.[125]
[Sidenote: Mr. Galloway’s feathering paddles, 1829.]
[Illustration]
While the art of steam navigation made rapid progress, the ingenuity
of engineers had been constantly directed to the improvement of the
paddle-wheels; and the above drawing of one, with “feathering paddles,”
patented by Mr. Galloway in 1829,[126] represents the most perfect of
any wheel in use at that period, and has not been materially improved
on since then. But, at that time also, a substitute for the paddle was
seeking practical solution. The screw, as a means of propulsion, had
been suggested long before the steamboat had been brought into use.
Indeed, its principle was known at a very early period in the use of
an oar for sculling, and could, as already explained, be seen in the
movements of the tail of a fish.
[Sidenote: Story of the screw-propeller.]
Though my faith in the reports of the genius and early inventions of
the Chinese has frequently been rudely shaken in the course of my
investigation of their reputed discoveries, I may remark that Mr.
MacGregor, for whose opinions I entertain no ordinary respect, states,
in the paper he read to the Society of Arts,[127] that “the use of
the screw-propeller may be of an indefinite antiquity,” and adds that
“a model of one was brought from China in 1680, which had two sets of
blades, turning in opposite directions.” It was not, however, until
1729, that we have any authentic account of a plan of propulsion,
in any way approaching the valuable invention now so largely in
use. In that year an ingenious Frenchman, M. Du Quet, described a
contrivance by which a screw turned by the water in a stream, wound
up a rope for towing vessels, of which the annexed (p. 101) is an
illustration.[128] In 1745, Masson describes an apparatus for working
an oar at the stern of a vessel so as to give it a “sculling” motion;
in 1746 Bougner mentions that “revolving arms, like the vanes of a
windmill,” were tried for the propulsion of vessels, and, in 1770, as
already incidentally noticed, the celebrated Watt speaks of using a
screw-propeller, of which the annexed is a sketch, to be turned by a
steam-engine.[129]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Joseph Bramah, 1785.]
In 1779, Matthew Wasborough, to whose genius we are indebted for
many inventions in connection with marine propulsion, patented a
“new invented machine or piece of mechanism which, when applied to
a steam-engine or any reciprocal movement, produces a circular or
rotative motion without the medium of a water-wheel;” Joseph Bramah,
of whose invention I have already spoken in detail, speaks of (1785) a
wheel with inclined fans or wings, similar to the fly of a smoke-jack,
which may be turned round either way under water, causing the ship
to be forced backward or forward,[130] and, in 1798, he tested the
application of a screw in a boat, of which the annexed, copied from
Mr. MacGregor’s instructive paper, is an illustration.
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Mr. J. Stevens, 1804.]
[Sidenote: Richard Trevethick, 1815.]
In 1800, Edward Shorter patented an invention which he called “a
perpetual sculling machine,” having the action of a two-bladed
propeller, and which, two years afterwards, was experimented upon
in H.M. Ships _Dragon_ and _Superb_.[131] Various other experiments
followed. But, in May 1804, Mr. J. Stevens, of the United States,
put to sea with a steam-boat propelled by a screw, turned first by
a rotatory engine, and then by Watt’s reciprocating engine; and, as
this small craft steamed from Hoboken to New York, she has by some
writers been considered the first sea-going screw of which there is
any certain account. Richard Trevethick, in 1815, patented “a worm
or screw revolving in a cylinder at the head, sides, or stern of a
vessel,” as also a “_stuffing-box_, inclosing a ring of water.”[132]
In the following year Robert Kinder applied for a patent for a shaft
and screw (almost on the exact plan now in use) with “a shoulder formed
upon it so as to work in a water-tight manner through a stuffing-box
of the common or well-known form, which stuffing-box and shaft are
made to pass through the end of the vessel, just above its ordinary
water-line, and is thereby affixed to it.” (See “Specifications of
Marine Propulsion,” Part I. p. 64.)
[Sidenote: Robert Wilson, 1833.]
[Sidenote: Captain Ericsson, 1836.]
Many other proposals for propelling vessels by means of the screw
were subsequently made and most of them were patented.[133] Two were
tried on a small scale in France by Captain Delisle, a Frenchman, in
1823, and by a countryman of his, M. Frédéric Sauvage, in 1832.[134] In
1833, Mr. Robert Wilson, a Scotchman, afterwards manager of the firm
of Nasmyth and Co., at Patricroft near Manchester, brought under the
notice of the British Admiralty the screw “perfect in all its details”
as a means of propulsion, which he says he invented in 1827, and which
he states[135] the officers of the Woolwich Dockyard, in their official
report, rejected because “it involved a greater loss of power than the
common mode of applying the wheels to the side.” No great efforts,
however, seem to have been made to bring the screw into practical use
until 1836, when Captain John Ericsson, C.E. (a native of Sweden, who
had established himself in London in partnership with the Messrs.
Braithwaites), fully demonstrated its merits according to a plan which
he patented on the 13th of July of that year,[136] and carried out
successfully.
Instead, however, of launching to the public gaze a vessel on a large
scale fitted with his plans, he made a model boat of about 20 inches
in length, into which he placed a small engine, and floated her in a
large bath over which a steam boiler had been fitted for the supply
of hot water. From this boiler a pipe projected to within a foot of
the water, where it was branched off by a swivel joint and connected
with the engine in the boat. The steam when admitted put the engine in
motion, and also the propeller, which at once sent the boat forward
with considerable rapidity.
[Sidenote: The _Francis B. Ogden_, though successful, fails to
convince the Admiralty.]
Finding that his invention was likely to succeed when put into
practical operation on a larger scale, Ericsson’s next step was to
order Mr. Gulliver, a boat-builder at Wapping, to construct for him
a boat of wood which he named the _Francis B. Ogden_. She was 45
feet long and 8 feet wide, drawing 2 feet 3 inches of water. In this
vessel he fitted his engine and two propellers, each of 5 feet 3
inches diameter. The result of her first trial went far beyond his
most sanguine expectations. No sooner were the engines put at full
speed, than she shot ahead at the rate of more than 10 miles an hour,
and maintained that speed without a single alteration requiring to be
made in her machinery;[137] nor were her capabilities as a tug less
surprising. This miniature steamer, tested first by a schooner of 140
tons burden, towed her at the rate of 7 miles an hour during slack
water on the Thames; and afterwards by the large American packet-ship
_Toronto_, moving on with her astern at a speed of more than 5 miles
an hour. The next experiment was made in the presence of the Lords of
the Admiralty, who, accompanied by Sir William Symonds, Sir Edward
Parry, and Captain Beaufort, had embarked in their barge to witness the
novelty, and judge for themselves as to its efficiency and practical
value. They were minute in their inspection, and as they did not, and
in fact could not, offer any valid objections to his invention, Captain
Ericsson felt confident that they would soon order the construction
of a war-steamer on the new principle. In this, however, he was
disappointed, though he had given them a very practical proof of its
value by towing them in their barge at the rate of 10 miles an hour
for a considerable distance—a speed which must have astonished their
Lordships. The unseen and comparatively noiseless propeller, although
it had furnished the most convincing proofs of its power, failed to
propitiate their favour. Scientific theorists had informed the Board
that the invention was constructed upon erroneous principles, and full
of practical defects (one being that a ship thus propelled would be
unsteerable), while engineers as a body regarded its failure as an
event so certain as to preclude any speculations of its success. In a
word, when publicly discussed, the general opinion was that the vast
loss of mechanical power would prevent it from being employed as a
substitute for the now old-fashioned paddle-wheel![138]
[Sidenote: Mr. T. P. Smith.]
While Ericsson was making his experiments in the _Francis B. Ogden_,
Mr. Thomas Pettit Smith, who, on the 31st of May, 1836, had taken out
a patent for a “sort of screw or ‘worm,’ made to revolve rapidly
under water in a recess or open space formed in that part of the after
part of the vessel commonly called the dead rising or dead wood of
the stern,”[139] was also at work with his invention, and, in the
following year, put it into practical operation. His first trial,
made in a small vessel of 6 tons burden, with an engine the cylinder
of which was 6 inches diameter and 15 inches stroke, was considered
by a few far-seeing persons so satisfactory,[140] that they applied
for, and obtained on the 29th of July, 1839, an Act of Parliament
for incorporating a company called the Steam Ship Propeller Company,
to enable them to purchase “certain letters patent,” that is, the
screw-propeller of T. P. Smith.
[Sidenote: The _Archimedes_.]
[Sidenote: Her trial with the _Widgeon_, Oct. 1839,]
The first successful application of this screw-propeller, on a large
scale, was to a vessel called the _Archimedes_, constructed under the
direction of the patentee of the screw, Mr. Smith. Her burden was 237
tons, and her mean draught of water 9 feet 4 inches; the diameter of
the cylinder 37 inches, and the length of the stroke of the piston 3
feet; her screw-propeller consisted of two half threads of an 8 feet
pitch, 5 feet 9 inches in diameter; each was 4 feet in length, and
they were placed diametrically opposite to each other, at an angle of
about 45 degrees on the propeller shaft. The propeller itself passed
through a hole cut in the dead wood, immediately before the rudder; the
keel being continued under the screw. The performance of the engines
averaged twenty-six strokes per minute, the revolutions of the screw
at the same time being 138⅖. The calculations of the inventor were
that, provided there was no slip or recession, the vessel ought to
advance 8 feet for every revolution of the screw, or 12·60 miles per
hour. But the utmost speed ever obtained by the _Archimedes_, under the
power of steam alone, was 9·25 nautical miles per hour, showing a loss
by recession of rather less than one-sixth under the most favourable
circumstances. The _Archimedes_ was not, however, a fair illustration
of the screw-propelling principle, as her steam-power was not great
enough to drive a screw sufficient for the size of the vessel.
Nevertheless, in her subsequent trials from Dover to Calais against
the _Widgeon_, the fastest paddle-steamer on the station, the superior
value of the screw-propeller was proved. Although in the first three
or four experiments the _Widgeon_ had the advantage by a few minutes,
in the subsequent trials, both vessels having set the whole of their
sails, the _Archimedes_, carrying much more canvas than the _Widgeon_,
on a run of 26 miles from Dover to Calais, close hauled, accomplished
this distance in nine minutes less time than the _Widgeon_. Upon the
return voyage to Dover, with a fresh breeze abeam and all sail set,
the _Archimedes_, with a speed of ten knots per hour, performed the
distance in five and a half minutes less time than the _Widgeon_.
[Sidenote: and its results.]
These experiments decided the practical value of the screw. They
proved that the _Archimedes_ was slightly inferior to the _Widgeon_
in light airs, in calms, and in smooth water; but, as the steam power
of the former was ten horses less, and her burthen 75 tons more
than that of the _Widgeon_, it is evident that in _such_ vessels the
propelling power of the screw alone was equal, if not superior, to the
ordinary paddle-wheel. In this respect, therefore, Mr. T. P. Smith’s
invention might be considered completely successful. It was evident
from the second trial that, in steaming against even a light wind,
the low masts and snug rig of the _Widgeon_ gave her an advantage
over the _Archimedes_ with loftier masts and heavier rig; but, on the
last two trials, the power of the sails operated favourably for the
_Archimedes_, as she then beat the _Widgeon_, and made the passage
between Dover and Calais in less time than it had ever previously been
performed by any of Her Majesty’s mail packets. On this occasion the
_Archimedes_ went from Dover to Calais in two hours and one minute, and
returned in one hour and fifty-three and a half minutes.[141]
Although the successful performances of the _Archimedes_ brought the
screw into more general notice, it does not appear that she was ever
employed as a trading vessel. After several experiments she lay for a
long time in the East India Dock advertised for sale, and her spirited
proprietors, who had been so instrumental in promoting the introduction
of the screw-propeller, lost all the capital they had invested in this
important undertaking.
[Sidenote: The _Rattler_ and the _Alecto_, 1843.]
As the _Widgeon_ and _Archimedes_ differed materially in size and form,
an exact comparison could not be made by them between the performance
of the screw and that of the paddle; but the result of these trials
nevertheless showed (especially when the peculiar fitness of the screw
for war purposes was taken into consideration) the propriety of having
a further and fairer trial of this novel instrument. With this object
in view the _Rattler_ was ordered to be built,[142] and, that the
experiment might be conclusive so far as a trial could be made between
two vessels, she was constructed on the same lines as the _Alecto_ (her
after part being lengthened for the insertion of the screw), and fitted
with engines of the same power, and on a plan which had been previously
tried with paddle-wheel vessels.
The river trials of the _Rattler_ lasted from October 1843 to
the beginning of 1845, and showed that the screw-shaft might be
advantageously reduced in diameter, and the blades by about one-third
of their length, an alteration which greatly reduced the weight of the
screw, and facilitated the operation of shipping and unshipping it,
while rendering unnecessary the wounding to so great an extent of the
after part of the vessel. Before, however, this last point was decided
(it not being evident that the good performance of the shorter screw
was not attributable to the greater clearance which the reduction of
its length had caused), the screw aperture was partly filled up in a
temporary manner, so as to leave the shorter screw the same clearance
as the longer one had originally. The result of this experiment proved
that the aperture in future vessels might be constructed of very
moderate dimensions without lessening the propelling power of the screw.
[Sidenote: The _Rattler_ not as successful as expected.]
These trials clearly showed that the screw, as an instrument of
propulsion in smooth water, is not inferior to the paddle-wheel.
But further experiments were considered necessary to establish its
superiority in all respects. In the early part of the year 1845 the
_Rattler_ proceeded, in company with the _Victoria and Albert_ and the
_Black Eagle_, from Portsmouth to Pembroke. When rounding the Land’s
End, and steaming against a strong head wind, both these vessels, as
might be expected, showed a great superiority, their power being much
greater than the _Rattler’s_ in proportion to the resistance, and their
paddle-floats being constructed on the feathering principle. This
comparative failure of the _Rattler_ left an unfavourable impression as
to the efficiency of the screw against wind and sea in heavy weather,
and this impression continued for several years, although when next
tried in a run from the Thames to Leith, she showed in respect to speed
a decided superiority over one of the paddle-wheel vessels employed in
that trade, whose power as compared with her tonnage was greater than
that of her competitor. Before joining the squadron under the command
of Rear-Admiral Hyde Parker in July 1845, the _Rattler_ was employed
to tow the _Erebus_ and _Terror_ to the Orkney Islands on their fatal
expedition to the North Pole, and she seems to have performed that duty
to the entire satisfaction of Sir John Franklin.
[Sidenote: Captain Robert F. Stockton efficiently supports Ericsson’s
views.]
In following the progress of the screw as applicable to the propulsion
of merchant vessels, and its use in other countries, I must now recur
to the period when Ericsson was making his experiments on the Thames.
At that time an intelligent gentleman, Captain Robert F. Stockton,
of the United States Navy, was on a visit to London. Being of an
inquisitive turn of mind, like most of his countrymen, and fond of
scientific pursuits, he watched with great interest the trials with
the screw then in progress, and having obtained an introduction to
Ericsson, he accompanied him on one of his experimental expeditions
on the Thames. Unlike the Lords of the British Admiralty, who allowed
eight years to elapse before they built their first screw-propeller,
the _Rattler_, Captain Stockton was so strongly impressed with the
value and utility of the discovery, that, though he had made only a
single trip in the _Francis B. Ogden_, and that merely from London
Bridge to Greenwich, he there and then gave Ericsson a commission to
build for him two boats for the United States, with steam machinery and
propeller as proposed by him. Stockton, impressed with its practical
utility for war purposes, was undismayed by the recorded opinions
of scientific men, and formed his own judgment from what he himself
witnessed. He, therefore, not only ordered the two iron boats on his
own account, but at once brought the subject before the Government
of the United States, and caused various plans and models to be
made at his own expense, explaining the peculiar fitness of the new
invention for ships of war. So sanguine was he, indeed, of the great
importance of this new mode of propulsion, and so determined that his
views should be carried out, that he encouraged Ericsson to believe
that the Government of the United States would test the propeller
on a large scale; Ericsson, relying upon these promises, abandoned
his professional engagements in England, and took his departure for
the United States. But it was not until a change in the Federal
administration, two years afterwards, that Captain Stockton was able
to obtain a favourable hearing. Orders were then given to make the
experiment in the _Princeton_, which was successful. The propeller, as
applied to this war-vessel, was similar in construction to that of the
_Francis B. Ogden_, as well in theory as in minute practical details.
One of these boats, named, after her owner, the _Robert F. Stockton_,
was built of iron by Messrs. Laird of Birkenhead, and launched in 1838.
She was 70 feet in length, 10 feet wide, and drew 6 feet 9 inches of
water. Her cylinders were 16 inches diameter with 18 inches stroke,
and her propeller 6 feet 4 inches in length. On her trial trips on
the Thames, made in January of the following year, she accomplished
a distance of 9 miles (over the land) in 35 minutes with the tide,
thereby proving the speed through the water to be between 11 and 12
miles an hour. On her second trial, between Southwark and Waterloo
bridges, she took in tow four laden barges, with upright sides and
square ends, having a beam of 15 feet each, and drawing 4 feet 6 inches
of water. One of these was lashed on each side, the other two being
towed astern, and, though the weight of the whole must have been close
upon 400 tons, and a considerable resistance was offered, also, by
their form, the steamer towed them at the rate of 5½ miles an hour in
slack water, or in 11 minutes between the two bridges, a distance of 1
mile.
[Illustration]
These experiments having been considered in every way satisfactory, the
_Robert F. Stockton_, of which the following is an illustration, left
England for the United States in the beginning of April 1839, under the
command of Captain Cram, of the American merchant service. Her crew
consisted of four men and a boy, and, having accomplished the voyage
under sail in forty days, Captain Cram was presented with the freedom
of the city of New York for his daring in crossing the Atlantic in so
small a craft, constructed only for river navigation.
[Sidenote: His vessel a complete success;]
In 1840, Captain Stockton sold this vessel to the Delaware and Raritan
Canal Company, permission having been obtained (being British built)
by a special Act of Congress, to run her in American waters, and her
name was at the same time changed to that of the _New Jersey_. For many
years she was in constant work as a steam-tug on the rivers Delaware
and Schuylkill during the winter months, as she was capable of towing
through the drift ice, where paddle-wheel steamers are of little use.
[Sidenote: and the first “screw” used for commerce in America.]
If we except the small vessel tested by J. Stevens[143] between Hoboken
and New York in 1804, the _New Jersey_ was the first screw-propelled
vessel practically used in America, numerous experiments with the screw
having been previously made without success, and she certainly was
the first used for commercial purposes. The importance of the screw
as a propeller having now been fully admitted in America, 150 vessels
of a similar description were in less than ten years from that time
employed in the United States; most of which continued to be in active
operation in the carrying trade, returning large profits to their
owners, particularly those employed on the great North American Lakes.
Indeed, in 1848, thirteen screw-propelled vessels were employed on Lake
Ontario, and only nine paddle-wheel steamers.
[Sidenote: Superiority of Mr. Woodcroft’s “varying-pitch” propeller,
1832.]
It is not my province to decide to whom the honour of the invention
of the screw is due. It had engaged, as has been shown, the attention
of various men in different countries for more than a century
before it was applied to any useful purpose, and, like most other
great inventions, has evidently been the production of many minds.
I can, therefore, only deal with it as has been done in the case of
the steam-engine itself, in its application to marine propulsion,
by inquiring who it was that first, by practical tests, showed its
superiority to the paddle-wheel, and that, for the purposes to which
it has been applied, it could maintain such superiority over all other
modes of propulsion. As this appears to me to be the only way in which
this question can be fairly treated, I shall venture to state that,
if Robert Fulton of America and Henry Bell of Glasgow are entitled,
as I think they are, to be considered the first who put the paddle
steamer into practical and _continuous_ employment (I hold that James
Watt and Robert Symington were its true inventors), it may, with equal
justice, be said that to Captain Ericsson, Mr. Pettit Smith, and Mr.
Woodcroft, the credit is chiefly due of having put the screw into
working order so as to show how it could be profitably employed for
the purposes of commerce or of the arts of war, though, at the time
when Smith and Ericsson were practically illustrating the power of
the screw, in their respective forms, that of Mr. Woodcroft, though
well known, had not then been tried. In fact, his invention bears date
antecedent to that of either of the others,[144] and proved equal, if
not superior, when tested; indeed, it must have been considered so
by the Admiralty, as it was fitted in the royal yacht _Fairy_, which,
with the exception of the _Rattler_, and the _Bee_, of thirty tons, was
the first screw-propeller in Her Majesty’s Navy: it was also about the
same time applied to H.M.S. _Dwarf_. Mr. Woodcroft’s “varying-pitch
screw-propeller,” patented by him in February 1844, of which the
following is an illustration, was, certainly, in advance of any other
at that time, and is, I believe, still considered the best and most
useful type. In the account of it furnished by its able and ingenious
inventor, it is said to be the “only propelling instrument of any
description which has the peculiar and inherent property of acting with
an increased impulse against the water from the leading part, first
taking its action against the water to the end, however long or short
such propeller may be upon its axis.”
[Illustration]
However, be that as it may, when an impartial review is taken of all
the facts, it may be said of Messrs. Woodcroft, Ericsson and Smith
that, while each may be regarded as the individual author of their
respective plans, conceiving as they did their designs apart from
each other, we are indebted to them conjointly for this most valuable
invention.
While the relative merits of the paddle-wheel and screw were being
tested, the attention of scientific men was necessarily directed to
the different forms of ships or lines best adapted to the various
requirements of maritime commerce, which the introduction of steam had
either created or materially developed. Vessels of every conceivable
form, and of varied dimensions, have been in use from the earliest
ages: we have had, of one sort or another, canoes, coracles, barges
and yachts, coasters and Indiamen, with frigates and line-of-battle
ships such as they were, almost from the dawn of history, and no
doubt their owners and builders bestowed much thought and exercised
considerable skill in their construction, so as to suit the varied
purposes for which they were required; but it is only within our own
time that a thorough scientific knowledge has been invited to aid in
the construction of our merchant ships.
That knowledge has become much more necessary now than it ever was
before. To construct an useful and first-class steam-vessel, we must
first build a hull adapted to receive machinery, and then erect
suitable engines and boilers with an appropriate propelling apparatus,
combining the whole into a form such as will insure safety and speed,
the requisite space for the crew, machinery, fuel, and stores, with
accommodation for passengers and their numerous wants, and, also,
sufficient space for a remunerative cargo.
[Sidenote: In building fit vessels, the trade in which they are to be
employed must be considered.]
To embrace to the utmost advantage these various essential qualities
in a merchant-vessel, the trade in which she is to be employed requires
to be considered with her mercantile capabilities in relation to cost
and speed. These calculations must be carefully gone into so as to
obtain an approximate estimate of the commercial advantage with regard
to the cost of freight per ton, that attends the employment of ships
suitably constructed for the service in which they may be employed as
compared with vessels of inferior adaptation. By this investigation,
the comparative financial balance of outlay and expenditure and,
consequently, the income to be expected from one vessel as compared
with another, may be equitably apportioned. Such considerations
as these are essential to success, and cannot be neglected by any
shipowner who understands his business. They will not only conduce
to an effective direction and management of mercantile shipping, and
of financial economy, but, also, in case a vessel fails to fulfil an
assigned service, the degree in which such failure may be attributable
to faults of original construction (producing a low scale of locomotive
efficiency), or to defective management or to imperfect navigation,
may be determined. Moreover, steamship proprietors, especially, would
thus be enabled to ascertain the relative value of their stock, not,
indeed, as respects the intrinsic value of the respective ships, but
as respects their relative working properties and consequent value
for any special service. Each vessel might thus be assigned its most
appropriate duty, and ships, manifestly unsuitable for one line of
trade, might be otherwise employed or disposed of, instead of being put
on services which they are _constructively_ inadequate to perform.
For example, a vessel may be well suited for the economical conveyance
of cargo at eight miles an hour, but, being employed upon a service
demanding a higher rate of speed, and failing to attain this, is
held to be inefficient, while the value of the ship becomes unduly
depreciated, and incapacity of _direction_, the real cause of the
failure, escapes due observation.
FOOTNOTES:
[96] It would appear from Dr. Robinson’s interesting narrative
(Muirhead, “Life of Watt,” p. 65), that Watt’s first connection with
the steam-engine arose from his having been desired, by the Professors
of Natural Philosophy in the University of Glasgow, to repair a model
of one of Newcomen’s engines in the year 1764. (See Smiles’ “Lives,” p.
121.)
[97] See Tredgold “On the Steam-engine,” and Woodcroft, p. 82.
[98] The following is a copy, from “Memorials of James Watt” by
George Williamson, Esq., late perpetual Secretary of the Watt Club of
Greenock, printed for the Club, of Mr. Bell’s original advertisement
of his new steamer the _Comet_ to ply between Glasgow, Greenock, and
Helensburgh:—
STEAM PASSAGE BOAT, THE ‘COMET,’ between Glasgow, Greenock, and
Helensburgh, for passengers only.
The subscriber having, at much expense, fitted up a handsome vessel to
ply upon the River Clyde, between Glasgow and Greenock, to sail by the
power of Wind, Air, and Steam, he intends that the Vessel shall leave
the Broomielaw on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, about midday, or
at such hour thereafter as may answer from the state of the tide, and
to leave Greenock on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays in the morning to
suit the tide.
The elegance, comfort, safety, and speed of this Vessel require only to
be proved to meet the approbation of the public; and the Proprietor is
determined to do everything in his power to merit public encouragement.
The terms are, for the present, fixed at 4_s._ for the best cabin, and
3_s._ the second, but beyond these rates nothing is to be allowed to
servants, or any other person employed about the Vessel.
The subscriber continues his establishment at Helensburgh Baths, the
same as for years past, and a vessel will be in readiness to convey
Passengers that intend visiting Helensburgh.
Passengers by the ‘COMET’ will receive information of the hours of
sailing, by applying at Mr. Thomas Stewart’s, Bookseller Square; and at
Mr. Blackly’s, East Quay Head, Greenock; or at Mr. Houston’s office,
Broomielaw.
HENRY BELL.
_Helensburgh Baths, 5th August, 1812._
[99] Mr. James Deas, C.E., in his “Treatise on the Improvements and
Progress of Trade of the River Clyde,” (1873) says, “An old gentleman,
seventy-seven years of age, and who has been connected with the Clyde
for upwards of fifty years, informed me a short time ago that he made a
voyage in the _Comet_ in 1812. He left Greenock at 10 A.M. for Glasgow,
but, in consequence of a ripple of head wind, it was 2 P.M. before they
got to Bowling, 10½ miles above Greenock, where all the passengers were
landed and had to walk to Glasgow, owing to the want of water, the
tide having ebbed. It was no uncommon occurrence for the passengers,
when the little steamer was getting exhausted, to take to turning the
fly-wheel to assist her.”
[100] Henry Bell, like too many of the pioneers of vast and truly
important undertakings, failed to profit by the successful application
of steam to navigation; and in his declining years he was chiefly
supported by an annuity of 50_l._ granted him by the Clyde trustees. He
died at Helensburgh in 1830, aged 63. (“Treatise” by Mr. James Deas, p.
24.)
[101] “Encyclopædia Britannica” (eighth edition), vol. xx. p. 638.
In the Patent Office Museum there is now to be seen the engine of the
first _Comet_ which carried goods and passengers on the Clyde. It was
erected there in 1862 by the same engineer, Mr. John Robertson of
Glasgow, who fitted it in the _Comet_, exactly fifty years before that
time. To this engine I shall again refer.
[102] When Smeaton first officially surveyed the Clyde in 1755, with
a view to certain engineering improvements, he found the depth of the
river, between Glasgow and Renfrew, of not more on the average than
eighteen inches at low water—nor did he hope by the improvements then
contemplated to obtain more than “4½ feet of water at all times up
to the Quay at Glasgow;” but, in 1768, “the river,” according to the
report of another engineer, John Golborne, “was in a state of nature,
and for want of due attention has been suffered to expand too much.”
He, also, did not expect to secure more “than 4 or perhaps 5 feet of
water up to the Broomielaw” at a cost of “ten thousand pounds,” a very
considerable sum in those days to be raised by the citizens of Glasgow.
Nor does Mr. Telford even, in 1820, hold out much hope of improvement,
for in his report he remarks: “There does not appear to be any good
grounds to expect such increase of revenue as to justify incurring any
very considerable expense.” But the corporation of the city, who had
then the river under their charge, was happily not deterred by these
disheartening reports from attempting further improvements, and, in
1824, Mr. James Reddie, their town clerk, in an able letter, called
for further reports, which brought wiser engineering counsellors to
their aid. By the indomitable energy of the corporation and the river
trust, the Clyde was by degrees deepened; and at the Broomielaw,
which only fishing wherries and small barges could reach forty years
ago, the largest and most magnificent ships afloat, many of them more
than 3000 tons register, drawing upwards of 20 feet of water, are now
moored. See “Reports of the Improvement and Management of the River
Clyde and Harbour of Glasgow.” See also “Treatise” by Mr. James Deas,
C.E., chief engineer to the river Clyde trustees, edited by Mr. James
Forrest, C.E. (1873), pp. 31 and 32, where we learn that “during the
last twenty-eight years, 1844 to 1872, no less than 18,000,000 tons of
stuff have been dredged from the river by the Clyde trustees,” and that
the expenditure for dredging and depositing alone since the year 1770
has amounted to upwards of 500,000_l._ These dredging-machines are so
complete and so superior to anything else of the kind to be found in
any other part of the world, that I furnish, Appendix No. 2, p. 591, an
account of them, their cost, horse-power, and other details. In 1800
the total amount of the annual revenue of the Clyde trust was only
3319_l._ 16_s._ 1_d._ In 1874, the revenue for that year, ending 30th
June, amounted to 192,127_l._ 16_s._ 11_d._
[103] In 1868 the total number of vessels built and launched on the
Clyde was 232 of 174,978 tons, including 8 war vessels of 5384 tons;
in 1869, 240 vessels of 194,000 tons, including 3 war vessels of 9100
tons; in 1870, 234 vessels of 189,800 tons, including 1 war vessel
of 2640 tons; in 1871, 231 vessels of 196,200 tons, including 6 war
vessels of 3050 tons; in 1872, 227 vessels of 224,000 tons, and no war
vessel. (Treatise of Mr. James Deas, pp. 25 and 26.)
The vessels launched on the Clyde in the year 1873, are thus analyzed
by Mr. William West Watson, the chamberlain of the city of Glasgow, in
his report of the statistics of that city:
No. Tons.
Iron steamers under 100 tons 14 1,076
Iron steamers from 100 to 500 tons 26 8,382
Iron steamers from 500 to 1000 tons 13 9,786
Iron steamers from 1000 to 2000 tons 22 34,315
Iron steamers from 2000 to 3000 tons 24 60,026
Iron steamers from 3000 tons and upwards 30 104,188
--- -------
129 217,773
Tons.
Iron sailing ships under 500 tons each 2 328
Iron sailing ships from 500 to 1000 tons None
Iron sailing ships from 1000 to 2000 tons 7 12,148
-- ------
9 12,476
Hull or barge for shipment 1 198
Steamers shipped in pieces 3 2,459
1 screw steam yacht 1 20
--- -------
143 232,926
During the year 1873, the Iberia, gross tonnage 4670 tons, was
launched, being the largest merchant steamer ever built on the Clyde.
Similar particulars for 1873-74 will be found, Appendix No. 3, pp.
593-4.
[104] See Appendices Nos. 3 and 4, pp. 593-9, “Shipbuilding Yards on
the Clyde and Wear.”
[105]
[Sidenote: J. Elder and Co., their extensive premises.]
One firm alone, that of John Elder and Co., Fairfield, Glasgow, who
employ, on an average, 4000 men, launched in the year 1867 sixteen
vessels of a total burden of 10,323 tons; and, in 1868, there were
turned out from the Fairfield shipbuilding yard no fewer than fifteen
vessels, of which six were sailing-ships and nine screw-steamers, the
latter including a gunboat for the Royal Navy, and the _Magellan_, an
iron barque of 3000 tons and 600 horse-power for the Pacific Steam
Navigation Company. The total burden of the vessels launched from this
one private yard in 1869 was 16,050 tons. In the following year (1870)
fourteen steamers and three sailing-vessels were launched at Fairfield,
measuring 25,235 tons, their engines having a total of 4115 horse-power
nominal. There were likewise two steamers of 2600 tons transformed in
the year. In 1871 they launched sixteen vessels of which twelve were
steamers, amounting in the aggregate to 31,889 tons. In 1872 32,000
tons of steam shipping were built by this firm, and, in the course of
that year, they had as many as sixteen vessels on hand at one time or
contracted for, of an aggregate tonnage of upwards of 36,000 tons, six
of them being about or above 4000 tons each: one of these was delivered
to her owners complete and ready for sea, with steam up, within
thirteen months from the time she was contracted for! These works, as
may be supposed, are gigantic, covering upwards of 60 acres of land,
and embracing a wet dock where the ships are placed when launched to
have their boilers and machinery fitted on board; an engine shop, 300
feet square; a blacksmiths’ shop 296 feet in length and 102 feet in
width containing 44 fires, one large plate furnace and four forging
furnaces, six large steam hammers, and various hydraulic cranes. There
are also in the yard two bays spanned by travelling cranes, each
capable of lifting a dead weight of 40 tons; and among the numerous
tools and machines there is one capable of planing armour plates of 20
feet in length and 6 feet in width, and one boring machine which can
drill holes 4 inches in diameter, and penetrate a 9-inch plate in half
an hour.
Here we regret to add, for we can ill afford to lose such men, that the
head of this vast shipbuilding firm, and the man by whose remarkable
genius it was founded, John Elder, died in September 1869 at the early
age of forty-five. His father had been for many years the manager of
the well-known works of Robert Napier and Co. There Mr. Elder served
his apprenticeship and gained that practical knowledge which, combined
with great natural abilities and an enthusiastic taste for mechanics,
enabled him to create the very large business I have briefly attempted
to describe.
[106] Mr. Muirhead (in his “Life of Watt,” pp. 428-9) mentions a few
additional particulars which it seems worth while to record. Thus he
states that the largest steamer built up to the year 1813 was the
_Glasgow_ noticed above, of 74 tons and 16 horse-power; and that,
in 1815, the _Morning Star_ of 100 tons and 26 horse-power, and, in
1815, the _Caledonia_ of 102 tons and 32 horse-power, were severally
launched. He adds that, during his last visit to Greenock in 1816, Mr.
Watt made a voyage in a steam-boat to Rothesay and back, and showed the
engineer how to “back” the engine, it having been usual previously to
stop the engine for some time previously to mooring. He further states
that, in April 1817, Mr. James Watt, Jun., purchased the _Caledonia_
and, having refitted her, took her in October to Holland and up the
Rhine to Coblentz; having thus been the first to cross the English
Channel in a steam-boat. The average speed he obtained was seven
and a half knots an hour. On her return to the Thames in 1818, Mr.
Watt, Jun., made no fewer than thirty-one experiments with her on the
river, resulting in the adoption of many material improvements in the
construction and adaptation of marine engines.
[107] At this period, Mr. Rennie, who planned the breakwater at
Plymouth and new London Bridge, was “advising engineer” to the
Admiralty, and on every occasion urged the application of steam-power
to vessels of war. More than this, he hired at his own cost the Margate
steam-boat, the _Eclipse_, and successfully towed the _Hastings_,
74, against the tide from Woolwich to Gravesend, June 14th, 1819.
On this the Admiralty, supported by Lord Melville, gave up their
objections.—Smiles’ “Lives,” vol. ii. p. 267.
[108] William Denny, the builder of the _Rob Roy_, as also of the
_Marjory_ (noticed p. 75), was born in Dumbarton in 1789, where his
forefathers for some generations had been “wee lairds” (yeomen) farming
their own land. After serving his apprenticeship as a joiner and
ship-carpenter, and acting as manager of a small ship-building yard on
the River Leven, Dumbarton, he commenced business on his own account
at that place, and was the first to lay down in his yard Morton’s
patent slips, where he built various sailing-ships for the East and
West India trades. He died in December 1833. Three of his sons, also,
William, Alexander, and Peter, commenced business at that place as
iron ship builders in 1844, on a small piece of ground, removing in
1847 to a larger yard, where they continued the business of iron ship
builders under the firm of William Denny and Brothers, by which it is
still known. In 1851, two other brothers, James and Archibald, having
then joined them, they (there were seven brothers, all shipbuilders)
commenced the business of engine builders, subsequently adding to
this that of founding and forging, so that all the branches of work
connected with steam shipbuilding might be done on the spot. William
was a man of remarkable genius and talent, and attained so high a
reputation as a marine architect that he and his brother Alexander
planned most of the steamers built on the Clyde from 1839 to 1844.
He died in 1854, and the only brother now left is the youngest, Mr.
Peter Denny, who, with his son and Mr. Walter Brock, carries on this
well-known and extensive business, which, in the years 1873 and 1874,
built and fitted with engines 37,000 tons of iron screw-ships. Since
1844 the town of Dumbarton has risen, almost entirely through their
exertions, from a population of 4000 to 12,000 inhabitants. But, beyond
his fame as an iron ship builder, Mr. Peter Denny is known in public
life, having been appointed a member of the Royal Commission in 1872 of
which the Duke of Somerset was Chairman, to inquire into the cause of
the loss of life and property at sea.
[109] In this vessel Mr. Napier introduced, for the first time in
England, a plan for surface condensation; the condenser was composed
of a series of small copper tubes, through which the steam passed
towards the air-pump, and a constant current of cold water encircling
the pipes, the steam was cooled and returned into water, which was
again sent into the boiler for conversion into steam, without being
mixed with the cold salt water, which, in the usual plan, was injected
into the condenser. But, like Watt, Cartwright, and others who had
tried this system, both here and in America, Mr. Napier finding the
rapidity of condensation not sufficient, returned to the old system
of condensation by jet. Some years afterwards, however, he reverted
to the use of a surface condenser under peculiar circumstances,
which rendered it desirable to use flat plates instead of tubes, but
the advantages of the system have not been considered sufficient to
counterbalance the disadvantages. The first engine of Bell was to some
extent a vertical engine, inasmuch as the axis of the cylinder and of
the crank were placed in one vertical line; but there was no direct
connection between the cranks and the piston-rod, to the paddle-axle:
the communication of motion to it, being effected through the medium of
toothed wheels. In the common or lever engine, the piston-rod acts on a
cross-head, the cross-head on side rods, the side rods on side levers,
the lever on a cross-tail, the cross-tail on the connecting-rod, the
connecting-rod on the crank-pin, by which, through the axle, the
paddle-wheels revolve. In the engine of direct communication, the side
levers and some other parts of the train of communication are removed
by a device which enables the piston-rod to be almost immediately
attached by a connecting-rod to the crank of the paddle-shaft. This
plan was first adopted by Mr. Gutznur, of Leith, who built the _Athol_,
and another vessel called the _Tourist_, on this principle: but as his
method, though very simple, was not applicable in ordinary cases, Mr.
Napier made several modifications, so that his vertical engine, in the
judgment of the most competent engineers, includes almost all the best
improvements as yet introduced.
[110] In an able pamphlet, “The Fleet of the Future,” by Mr. Scott
Russell, published by Longman & Co. in 1861, the author remarks (p.
20), “A good many years ago I happened to converse with the chief naval
architect of one of our dockyards on the subject of building ships of
iron—the answer was characteristic, and the feeling it expressed so
strong and natural that I have never forgotten it; he said, with some
indignation, “Don’t talk to me about iron ships, _it’s contrary to
nature_.””
There was at one time almost as great a prejudice against Indian teak
as a material for ship-building, as this wood is heavier than water,
and in the form of a log will not float. (Arnott, “Elem. of Physics,”
p. 305.)
[111] See “Rolls’ Chapel Reports,” 7th Report, p. 204.
[112] See “Repository of Arts,” vol. xxviii. (second series), p. 138,
and Woodcroft’s “Specification of Marine Propulsion,” Part I. p. 63,
and “Steam Navigation,” p. 125.
[113] Fincham’s “Naval Architecture,” on the use of iron for
shipbuilding.
[114] William Laird, father of the late John Laird, M.P., established
the Birkenhead Iron Works in 1824, under the style of William Laird and
Sons, and, in 1829, they built for the Irish Inland Company the first
iron vessel constructed on the Mersey. She was a lighter of 60 tons
measurement, about 60 feet long and 13 feet beam. From that time until
1861, Mr. John Laird carried on this extensive business of shipbuilding
and engineering, and when, in that year, he was elected to represent
Birkenhead in Parliament, he transferred it to his sons, who now carry
it on under the style of Laird Brothers.
Mr. Laird died in October 1874, about the same time as Sir William
Fairbairn, another distinguished worker in the field of applied
science, and both men of great eminence in their profession.
[115] The _Elburkah_ was 70 feet long, 13 feet beam, and 6 feet
6 inches deep. Her plates were a quarter of an inch thick in the
bottom, and her sides one-eighth of an inch. She weighed only 15 tons,
including her decks, but without engines, boilers, spars, and outfit.
(See evidence, Mr. McGregor Laird before Select Committee on Steam
Navigation to India (1834), p. 59.)
[116] Lardner (“Steam Navigation,” p. 482) says that, in one of their
experimental trials, the _Elburkah_ got aground and heeled over on her
anchor, and that in a wooden vessel the anchor would probably have
gone through her; and, further that an iron vessel built for the Irish
Inland Navigation Company, on being towed across Lough Derg, was driven
on the rocks in a gale owing to the rope breaking; but, though she
bumped for a considerable time, she sustained no injury.
[117] The _Rainbow_ was, perhaps, the largest iron steam-vessel then
afloat. She was 185 feet long, 25 feet beam, 600 tons burden and 180
horse-power.
[118] See a learned and able report on the “Deviations of the Compass,”
by Mr. Frederick J. Evans, Master R.N., Superintendent of the Compass
Department of H.M. Navy, printed in the “Philosophical Transactions,”
Part II. 1860. In this interesting paper, Mr. Evans calls attention to
one or two important facts, certainly not known to the general public,
or perhaps not even to many shipbuilders. He says, p. 354:
“In an iron sailing-ship, built head to south, there will be an
attraction of the north point of the compass to the head, and if built
head to north, a like attraction to the ship’s stern; and so far there
would seem to be no advantage in one direction over the other. But, in
the first case, the topsides near the compass have weak magnetism; in
the second case, they are strongly magnetic: the first position seems
therefore preferable.
“In an iron steam-ship, built head to the south, the attraction due
to machinery is added to that of the hull, whereas in one built head
to the north, the attractive forces of hull and machinery are, in the
northern hemisphere, antagonistic, and a position of small, or no
‘semicircular’ deviation for the compass may generally be obtained.
To iron steam-vessels engaged on the home or foreign trades in the
northern hemisphere, this direction of build is therefore to be
preferred.”
And, again, at p. 355, he remarks:
“As every piece of iron not composing a part of, and hammered in the
fabrication of the hull,—such as the rudder, funnel, boilers, and
machinery, tanks, cooking galleys, fastenings of deck houses, &c.,—are
all of a magnetic character differing from the hull of a ship, their
proximity should be avoided, and, so far as possible, the compass
should be placed so that they may act as correctors of the general
magnetism of the hull.
“A compass placed out of the middle line of the deck is affected by the
nearest topside, and its deviations must necessarily be much increased
if that topside has the dominant polarity, as in ships built east or
west.”
[119] “The principal reason of an iron vessel being so much healthier
is on account of her coolness and her freedom from all manner of smell;
in an iron vessel there is no disagreeable smell of bilgewater, which
there is in a wooden vessel in a tropical climate; it is, in fact, the
difference between carrying water in a cask, and in a tank.” (Evidence
of Mr. McGregor Laird, p. 58, “Steam Navigation to India.”)
[120] Mr. Robert Stephenson thought it possible, that if you had a dock
filled with sulphate of copper, you might treat an iron vessel as you
do a small teapot, and electrotype it with a thin coating of copper.
(Evidence, 1851, 26th June, before Committee of the House of Commons.)
[121] The Liverpool underwriters, in their book of registry for iron
vessels (established 1862), in the edition of that work for 1863 and
1864, offer the following remarks:
“Experience has shown that iron ships are much more durable than was at
first supposed. By the use of cement inside, and by careful attention
to outside coating, a well constructed iron ship can be reckoned upon
to last, _in first-class condition_, for a period of at least twenty
years. Wear and tear of equipment, and of the wood used in their
construction, must in all cases be excepted.”
[122] Mr. McGregor Laird states in his evidence (Question 553, p. 59)
before the Select Committee on “Steam Navigation to India,” 1834, “A
strong iron vessel will not weigh one-half of that of a wooden one, and
therefore will draw considerably less water;” further (Q. 554), “Her
capacity for stowage will be much greater, her sides, including strong
iron frames, not exceeding 4 inches in thickness, while those of a
wooden vessel will be 12 inches thick.”
“The average weight of the iron steam vessels is about 6 cwt. per
register ton; a wooden one will weigh about 20 cwt. and upwards.”—(See
evidence of C. W. Williams, Appendix to Report of the above Committee,
p. 43.) See _note_, Appendix No. 5, p. 599.
[123] The greatest number of years originally allowed by “Lloyd’s
Register” for the classification of any vessel built of wood to remain
on the first class, was from four to sixteen years, but seldom more
than twelve from the date of construction; they might be renewed, but
the original term never exceeded the periods I have named.
[124] Captain (now Admiral Sir) W. H. Hall, R.N., in his evidence
before Lord Seymour’s (now the Duke of Somerset) Committee on Navy
Estimates which sat in 1848, stated (p. 648) that, when he commanded
the _Nemesis_, an iron vessel engaged in the Chinese war, she was in
one action struck fourteen times by the shot of the enemy; “one shot
went in at one side and came out at the other, it went right through
the vessel;” there were “no splinters;” “it went through just as if
you put your finger through a piece of paper.” “I had,” he added,
“a favourable opinion of it” (iron). “Several wooden steamers,”
he continues, “were employed upon the same service, and they were
invariably obliged to lie up for repairs, whilst I could repair the
_Nemesis_ in twenty-four hours and have her always ready for service;
indeed, many steamers were obliged to leave the coast of China and go
to Bombay for repairs. Repairs which would have taken in a wooden ship
several days, would take in ours as many hours only.”
Captain E. F. Charlwood, who had served in iron vessels “about four
or five years,” stated, in his evidence before the same Committee,
that the _Guadaloupe_, which he commanded, had been repeatedly struck
by shot, and that “the damage was considerably less than is usually
suffered by a wooden vessel,” and that “there was nothing like the
number of splinters which are generally forced out by shot sent through
a wooden vessel’s side.” He added that the shot went clean through (the
holes being plugged by the engineer at the time), and did not otherwise
injure the plates or leave a rent or displace any of the rivets.
[125] The author moved that the vote should be reduced by 300,000_l._
(see “Hansard’s Parliamentary Report” for May 23rd, 1861, page 30,
where his reasons are given), but, after a long debate, he was
defeated, only thirty members voting with him, and sixty-six against
any reduction. The reader will find what became of this timber (a
large portion lay rotting in the dock-yards) if he refers to the
Report of the Committee, appointed on the motion of Mr. Seely, some
years afterwards. But, beyond the reasons then given by the author,
the Admiralty or their practical advisers must have known, long
before 1861, that a screw-ship built of wood was vastly inferior to
one constructed of iron; that the action of the shaft of the screw
would prevent wooden vessels from lasting through a succession of long
voyages without very considerable repairs from the vibration in the
after body; and that the wood, by frequent concussion and constant
working, would gradually lose its power of resistance, the fibres
becoming bruised and compressed, which would not be the case with an
iron ship, at least to anything like the same extent. Indeed, the naval
constructors ought frankly to have told their Lordships that it would
be unsafe to send a wooden ship to sea fitted with a very powerful
propeller. No stern framework could be built to resist the vibration
of the largest class of engines now in use in the navy. An iron ship,
moreover, affords a much better and more solid foundation for the
engines.
[126] Dr. Lardner (“Steam-engine,” p. 479) observes that, “when
first introduced by Mr. Galloway, each board was divided into six or
seven parts; this was subsequently reduced, and in the more recent
wheels of this form constructed for the Government vessels, the
paddle-boards consist only of two parts coming as near the common wheel
as is possible, without altogether abandoning the principle of the
split-paddle.”
[127] April 14th, 1858.
[128] See Tredgold “On the Steam-engine;” Appendix D, 1842, p. 292;
Woodcroft’s MS. Collection, p. 22; Bourne “On the Screw-propeller,” p.
8, and other writers.
[129] Woodcroft’s “Specifications,” p. 1, n., pp. 25 and 28. Ibid., pp.
31 and 34.
[130] It would appear that his experiment was successful if reliance
can be placed, as I have no reason to doubt, on the accuracy of a
letter from Mr. Fulton, in the memoir by E. Cartwright, London, 1843,
p. 142.
[131] Woodcroft “On Steam Navigation,” p. 54; with drawing; Bourne “On
the Screw-Propeller,” p. 12; and accounts of trials which appeared in
the newspapers, 1802.
[132] Woodcroft “On Steam Navigation.”
[133] As one more conspicuous than any other, it must be stated
that, in March 1832, Mr. Bennet Woodcroft patented an “increasing
screw-propeller,” which he thus describes: “A spiral worm blade or
screw coiled round a shaft (this resembles the invention of Watt) or
cylinder of any convenient length and diameter, in such form that the
angle of inclination which the worm makes with the axis of the cylinder
continually increases, and the pitch or distance between the coils or
revolutions of the spiral, continually increases throughout the whole
length of the shaft or cylinder upon which the spiral is formed.”
(Specifications of “Marine Propulsion,” Part II. p. 112.)
[134] The number of claimants to every important invention is
remarkable. An impartial student will, however, probably come to the
conclusion that the invention of the screw and its application was,
like that of the steam-engine itself, the sole property of no one man,
as he finds by research that experiments to discover the means of
applying the screw as a motive power to ships were at different periods
spontaneously and independently made in various places by inquiring
minds, who frequently were perfect strangers to each other and to each
other’s discoveries or appliances; yet, as time passes on, and the
labours of others are forgotten, a nation or a town claims for some
one of its countrymen or townsmen who may have experimentalised on an
invention which has become of great use to mankind, the sole or the
largest share of the credit of the invention, and erects in their midst
an enduring monument of his fame. Such would appear to be the case of
Frédéric Sauvage, who has just (October, 1874) had a statue erected
to his memory in the town of Boulogne-sur-Mer, where he was born on
the 20th of September, 1786. On either side of the monument (which is
14 feet high surmounted by a large bronze bust of M. Sauvage) is an
inscription setting forth the date of his birth and of the translation
of his remains, together with a list of his inventions. On the front
are the two words “Frédéric Sauvage,” and a bronze bas-relief showing a
vessel with a screw-propeller. Frédéric Sauvage’s life was similar to
those of many other inventors, in that he spent his days and fortune in
perfecting inventions which brought him no profit. Having lost his own
money, he borrowed from others, and, being unable to repay, was thrown
into a debtors’ prison, which he afterwards exchanged for a madhouse,
where he died on the 19th of July, 1857.
[135] “The Screw-Propeller: who Invented it?” by Robert Wilson,
published by Thomas Murray and Son, Glasgow, 1860.
[136] See “Specifications relating to Marine Propulsion,” Part II. pp.
127 and 128; _London Journal_ (Newton’s), p. 14, conjoined series, p.
34; _Mechanics’ Magazine_, vol. xxvii. p. 130, vol. xxviii. p. 215,
vol. xxix. pp. 143 and 283, and vol. xlii. p. 225; _Artizan_, vol.
viii. pp. 187 and 209; also Bourne “On the Screw-Propeller,” pp. 30 and
34.
[137] See Weale’s Papers on “Engineering,” vol. iii. Part V. pp. 1-7,
“Steam Navigation.”
[138] With regard to the question of the progress of steam-ships in
the Royal Navy since then, Mr. T. H. Farrer, of the Board of Trade,
remarks, with great force, in a letter I recently received from him:
“We hardly know how fast we move. One of my first colleagues at the
Board of Trade, in 1850, was Admiral Beechey, an officer of very
superior attainments and intelligence, and one who, having been much
employed on surveys, was well acquainted with steam-vessels. And yet
I well remember his telling me that he did not believe that the Navy
of the future—the Royal Navy—ever could consist of steamers! Nor
could he endure iron ships. It was a very few years after this that, in
company with him, I witnessed one of the most beautiful sights of my
life—the Naval Review at Spithead, in the first summer of the Russian
war, when the last four or more sailing-vessels of the Royal Navy
formed the attacking squadron. I shall never forget the beauty of the
scene, when late in the afternoon these magnificent ships came on with
a gentle breeze from the east, and the descending sun shed a ‘dying
glory’ on their towers of canvas. It was a fit obsequy for the Hearts
of Oak of Rodney, Howe, and Nelson.”
[139] “Specifications relating to Marine Propulsion,” Part II. p. 127.
[140] _Mechanics’ Magazine_, vol. xxxi. p. 225.
[141] The first experimental trip of the _Archimedes_ was made on
Monday, October 14th, 1839, the second on the following Wednesday,
in the presence of Sir Edward Parry, Sir William Symonds, Captains
Basil Hall, Austin, and Smith, R.N., and several civil engineers.
Subsequently to the Admiralty trials between Dover and Calais, Captain
Chappell, R.N., sailed round England and Scotland in her, calling at
numerous ports; details of this voyage will be found in Appendix D to
Tredgold “On the Steam Engine.”
[142] The _Rattler_ was launched from Sheerness Dockyard in April
1843. She was considered a remarkably fine model, and of very unusual
length in proportion to her beam, her dimensions being 195 feet extreme
length, close upon 33 feet extreme breadth, and 18½ mean depth of hold.
Her burden was 888 tons. The log of this vessel from 28th of March
to 13th April, 1851, will be found in the Appendix to a Report of a
Committee of the House of Commons, 1851, p. 565, where the merits of
the screw are examined.
[143] The “screw” which Mr. Stevens used in his boat cannot have been
of a practical character, or the Americans would not have allowed so
valuable an invention to lie dormant for 35 years.
[144] Mr. Woodcroft patented, on the 18th of November, 1826, a
mode “for propelling boats and vessels,” but no specification was
enrolled; and on the 22nd of March, 1832, he “prolonged” his patent
“increasing-pitch screw-propeller,” which he then fully described. (See
“Specifications of Marine Propulsion,” Part XI. p. 112.)
CHAPTER III.
Steam-ships of the United States—Improvements in form of
hull—Natural facilities for Steam Navigation in America—Her
lakes—Canals—Harbours—Rivers—Seaboard—Bays and
roadsteads—Rapid increase of steam-vessels—First vessels
built for the western rivers and lakes—Dangers of River
Navigation—Number of steamers lost by “snags,” ice, fire,
and collision, 1831-1833—Peculiar description of wharves
and levees—Description of steamers employed—Boats of the
Mississippi—Boatmen—Engines of the steamers—Different
construction of the steamers on the Atlantic rivers—Great
speed of American lake and river steamers—Peculiarity
of construction—Steamer _New World_—Details of her
construction—The _Daniel Drew_—Her enormous speed—Pacific
Steam-ship Company started, 1847—Cost of establishing it—Speed
of its vessels—Difficulties to encounter—Number of its
steamers—Services performed—China and Japan line—“Law” line
of steamers—South American Steam-ship Company—Mr. Randall’s
projected large American steamer—Details of proposed ship—Two
sets of paddle-wheels—Principle of construction—Advantages to
be derived from vessels thus built—Mr. Randall’s experience of
steamers employed on the lakes and the Pacific.
[Sidenote: Steam-ships of the United States.]
While Great Britain is entitled to the credit of the invention of the
marine steam-engine with its auxiliaries, the paddle-wheel and screw,
and of having first put both into practical, if not in the earliest
stages remunerative, operation, America may, on her part, justly claim
the making of many improvements on them, and the turning the new motive
power to profitable account with greater rapidity than England.
[Sidenote: Improvements in the form of hull.]
To the Americans we owe the modification of Watt’s engine still in use
in their vessels: to them we are also indebted for engines of long
stroke with the necessarily long crank, and the further peculiarity of
upright guides for the piston-rod instead of the old parallel motion.
They likewise first introduced the paddle-wheel with divided floats by
which the resistance of the water was rendered more uniform, and the
concussion of the common paddle-wheel avoided. But, above all, they
were the first to improve the form of steam-vessels by substituting a
fine entrance and a clean, clear run for the round or bluff bows and
full sterns previously prevailing. By these important alterations, and
by making the length of their vessels eight and, occasionally, ten
times their beam, they succeeded, even during the infancy of marine
steam propulsion, in raising the rate of progress from 9 to 13 miles
an hour, and in giving to the world lines for the modelling of ships
vastly superior to any hitherto adopted.
[Sidenote: Natural facilities for steam navigation in America.]
[Sidenote: Her lakes.]
But nature has afforded our great Transatlantic rivals marvellous
facilities for the development and rapid increase of vessels propelled
by steam, not possessed by ourselves. The lakes[145] of America are,
in fact, extensive inland seas, affording in themselves an almost
unlimited source of profitable employment to vessels propelled by
steam. Their shores are lined with sheltered bays and natural harbours,
with waters unusually free from rocks and shoals, while, in their
immediate vicinity, are vast tracts of rich lands requiring only the
industry of man to render them subservient to his wants, while the
surrounding forests at the same time produce some of the finest pine
timber in the world.
[Sidenote: Canals.]
[Sidenote: Harbours.]
Great cities, such as Chicago,[146] Buffalo, Detroit, Michigan,
Milwaukie, Toronto, and Kingston, besides numerous towns and villages,
now line their banks, while those lakes which have no natural navigable
communication with each other are now connected by means of canals,
so that vessels from the Atlantic can penetrate for upwards of 2000
miles into the interior, in fact, to the most remote habitable regions
of North America.[147] Short canals, also, overcome the natural
obstacles presented to navigation by the rapids of the St. Lawrence
and the Falls of Niagara; and, while, on the one hand, the Erie canal
of 363 miles in length connects that lake with the River Hudson, and
consequently with the Atlantic Ocean, the Ohio Canal, 334 miles in
length, on the other hand, brings it into connection with the Gulf of
Mexico by way of the great rivers Ohio and Mississippi: thus, with
the Welland Canal,[148] the connecting link between the other lakes
and Ontario, there is navigable communication throughout the whole of
the vast continent of North America, extending from the Gulf of St.
Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico, a distance of upwards of 3000 miles.
All these lakes are now well supplied with lighthouses, buoys, and
beacons to insure the safety of the large fleets of shipping employed
on them. There are, also, numerous spacious harbours, many of them
built of stone, as also breakwaters, the waves on these lakes during
gales of wind being hardly less formidable to navigation than those of
the ocean.
[Sidenote: Rivers.]
But if the lakes of North America are vast in extent, the navigable
rivers are even more gigantic, and afford still wider fields of
remunerative employment for steamers.[149] Indeed, until steam-ships
were launched on their surface, many of these rivers were altogether
unnavigable, and some of them unexplored. Those of my readers who have
not visited America, can form only a very imperfect idea of her mighty
streams. Some of them, as may be seen by reference to a map of the
United States, have their source in the northern parts of the Rocky
Mountains, and discharge themselves by the Gulf of St. Lawrence into
the Atlantic, while others rising in the west of these mountain ranges
flow into the Pacific. Those which have their sources to the east of
the Alleghany Mountains find their way by various routes, and through
luxuriant valleys, some of them of enormous extent, to numerous outlets
on the shores of the Atlantic and on the north-eastern portion of the
Gulf of Mexico, while the rivers comprehended under the head of the
Mississippi and its tributaries, which spring from that great valley
between the Alleghany and the Rocky Mountains, likewise pour their huge
volumes of water into the Mexican Gulf, with New Orleans as the chief
entrepôt of their now gigantic commerce. The former rivers, upwards
of one hundred in number, afford an aggregate amount of more than
3000 miles of ship and boat navigation. But the latter, embracing the
parent Mississippi, the Missouri, the Ohio, Arkansas, Red River, and
various other tributaries pouring their waters into the giant stream,
constitute an aggregate length of no less than 44,000 miles![150]
Large steamers now ascend to Pittsburg, a distance of 2000 miles from
the Gulf of Mexico. The Missouri, which joins the Mississippi 18
miles above the city of St. Louis and about 1200 miles from the gulf,
has an uninterrupted navigation of 2532 miles from its mouth; its
tributaries being the Gasconade, navigable for 150 miles; the Osage
for 500 miles; the Chariton for 300 miles; the Tansas for 200 miles;
and the Yellowstone for 800 miles; while the Moine, which flows into
the Mississippi 130 miles above the Missouri, is supposed, with its
tributaries, to be navigable for a distance of 1500 miles.
Such are a few, but a few only, of the many navigable rivers which
pour their waters into the Mississippi; there are many others whose
names our space precludes the possibility of our even mentioning. To
the north and the west, we have the St. Lawrence, a river second only
to the Mississippi, with a course of upwards of 2000 miles, receiving
the waters of about thirty others of considerable size; and, though
navigable itself for large sea-going vessels only as far as Montreal,
a distance of 880 miles from the Atlantic, it is extensively used in
its upper portion under the name of the St. Mary’s River, where, among
the islands with which it is studded and the numerous rapids with which
it is impeded, it is navigated by vast rafts of timber and by fleets
of strong flat-bottomed boats expressly built for the purpose, and
well-known as the Canadian _batteaux_.
Then we have the River Hudson (on which the first vessel in America
propelled by steam was employed), small in itself compared to those I
have named, but important from its connection with New York, and the
extent and value of its trade; and most interesting to the traveller,
from its beautiful scenery. This river is navigable for ships of large
burden up to the town from which it derives its name, about 120 miles
above New York, and for vessels of smaller draught of water to Albany
and Troy respectively 30 and 34 miles further. To the north we have the
Penobscot with a course of 300 miles from the bay of that name in the
State of Maine, navigable for large vessels to Bangor, a distance of 50
miles, and the Kennebach River with a course of 230 miles, navigable
for 40 miles from the sea, as also the Merrimac of 200 miles in length,
and the Connecticut, which, after a course of 450 miles through a
highly cultivated and fertile country, discharges itself into Long
Island Sound.
To the south there is the important River Delaware, of 310 miles in
length, navigable for vessels of the largest class to Philadelphia, a
distance of 40 miles, and the Susquehanna flowing into the Chesapeake,
which, though the largest river in the important and productive State
of Pennsylvania, is more celebrated for the beauty of its scenery
than for the facilities it affords for navigation. There is also the
Patapsco, navigable to Baltimore for vessels drawing 18 to 20 feet of
water; the Patuscent, navigable for 60 miles from its mouth; and the
Potomac, navigated by vessels of the largest class to Washington, a
distance of 103 miles from Chesapeake Bay; as also the Rappahannoc,
navigable for 110 miles to the town of Fredericksburg, besides the
James River and various others of greater or less importance extending
along the line of coast from Chesapeake Bay to the western shores of
the Gulf of Mexico.
[Sidenote: Seaboard.]
[Sidenote: Bays and roadsteads.]
But, beyond the vast facilities these immense lakes and rivers afford
to a maritime commerce capable of development to an extent far beyond
the conception of the most sanguine enthusiast, there is the extensive
seaboard of that great continent, studded with harbours, and containing
some of the most magnificent bays and the largest and safest roadsteads
to be found in any part of the world. Take, for instance, the line
of coast extending northwards from Chesapeake Bay to the Gulf of St.
Lawrence: that bay, itself, has safe anchorage for an untold number
of vessels; and, to the northward, there are numerous other bays and
sheltered sounds, affording natural facilities for the formation of
harbours more commodious than any which works of art alone, however
costly, could possibly supply. From among these the Americans have been
able to select many admirable sites for their trade emporiums,—in
themselves also natural harbours of refuge of the finest description,
completely sheltered from the surge of the ocean, and, therefore, not
requiring for their protection the expensive breakwaters of Plymouth,
Portland, or Cherbourg; where, along the margin of projecting tongues
of land or within out-lying islands, vessels of the largest description
can anchor in safety, or be moored alongside jetties erected at a
trifling expense, where, too, they can discharge their cargoes into
warehouses with almost as much ease as they could do in the London or
Liverpool docks. These natural advantages, amply illustrated as they
are in the case of New York, a city evidently destined to rival, if
not to surpass, any city of either ancient or modern times, London not
excepted, struck the writer with surprise and wonder. Situated on the
southern portion of the island of Manhattan, New York is washed on
the east by the sound separating it from Long Island,[151] and on the
west by the estuary of the River Hudson, while the bay itself, which
is nine miles in length and five miles in breadth, has a communication
with the Atlantic through a strait two miles in width, between Staten
Island and Long Island, completely sheltered from the ocean and forming
a magnificent deep-water basin, with abundant quays and jetties on its
eastern, western, and southern margins: here vessels of any size can
deliver their cargoes into the heart of the city at all times and in
perfect safety.
Proceeding further north we reach Boston Bay, more celebrated than any
other place in the history of the War of Independence, a thoroughly
sheltered inlet of about 75 square miles in extent, inclosed by two
necks of land so nearly approaching each other as to leave only a
narrow entrance communicating directly with the Atlantic, with deep
water close in shore where numerous wharves are erected as in the
case of New York. Further north, we reach Narraganset Bay, and, within
it, the town of Newport and its finely sheltered roadstead forming one
of the most superb natural harbours in America; also Penobscot Bay
into which the river of that name flows, and Passamaquoddy with its
excellent roadstead receiving the waters of the River St. Croix, the
boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada.
With such magnificent bays, harbours, roadsteads, lakes, and rivers
all ready formed by the hand of Nature to receive an almost unlimited
extent of shipping, and, at the same time, peculiarly adapted for
the employment of steamers, it is not a matter for surprise that
the Americans should have directed their genius and energy to this
new branch of industry and their skill to the rapid development of
the power of steam, affording them as it did extraordinary means of
opening out hitherto unknown branches of commerce and new sources of
almost unbounded wealth. More conversant at this period than any other
nation with the most approved style of shipbuilding, and possessing
an abundant supply of materials at a comparatively low price, they
were able, when steam-vessels were first introduced, to construct them
at a lower cost than any other people; and if they had not the same
facilities for obtaining steam-engines, these could easily be obtained
from England.
[Sidenote: Rapid increase of steam-vessels.]
From the time therefore that Fulton[152] launched the _Clermont_
at New York, and proved, by her performance in 1808 on the Hudson,
that vessels propelled by steam could be made a source of profitable
employment, they were increased with a rapidity and employed to an
extent, especially during the first quarter of this century, far in
excess of Great Britain. Besides the _Clermont_, launched in 1807,
Mr. Charles Brown, an enterprising shipbuilder of New York, built in
that year, also for the navigation of the Hudson, the _Car of Neptune_
of 295 tons, and the _Rareton_, of 120 tons, named after the river
on which she was employed. In 1811, he launched the _Paragon_, of
331 tons, which was likewise employed on the Hudson, and, in 1812,
the _Firefly_, to trade between New York and Newburg, as well as the
_Jersey_, ferry-boat of 118 tons, employed in the same year by the
Ferry Company for the conveyance of passengers between New Jersey and
the city of New York.
[Sidenote: First vessels built for the western rivers and lakes.]
In 1814 the Americans launched their first steam-ship on the great
waters of the Mississippi, at once showing the practicability of
ascending that mighty river by accomplishing on her trial trip,
immediately after she was built, a distance of 700 miles against the
current. In 1818, they started a steam-boat to ply between New York
and New Orleans, and, from that time, vessels of this description,
steadily, and we may say rapidly, increased on their coasts and rivers.
Their first steamer on the lakes was the _Orleans_, a two-masted
vessel built at Pittsburg in 1811, but some time elapsed before
any other steamer appeared on the Lakes, their then limited trade
offering little inducement for profitable employment; hence, when the
_Walk-in-the-Water_—a most characteristic name—commenced to trade on
Lake Erie in 1819, there was no one to furnish her with a cargo except
the American Fur Company. In 1827, the waters of Lake Michigan were
first ploughed by steam, a boat having made an excursion to Green Bay,
and in 1832, another steam-boat reached Chicago with troops, that site
being then in course of clearance and settlement: in the following
year, there were eleven boats on the lakes at a cost of 360,000
dollars, carrying in that year (1833) 61,480 passengers, and earning
in freight 229,211 dollars. In 1834, seven new boats were launched,
making eighteen in this service during that year; and in 1840, the
number of boats trading between Buffalo, Chicago and other ports west
of Detroit, their trip between these two places occupying fifteen days,
had increased to forty-eight. Such was the beginning of the steam-boat
traffic on the great North American lakes.[153] In the following
woodcut may be seen a fair illustration of one of these early vessels.
[Illustration]
But it was on the rivers and along the sheltered bays on the coast that
the new mode of propulsion made at first the most rapid progress. From
the time when the pioneer boat ascended the Mississippi, steam-ships
rapidly increased in number and in size, as well as in the power of
their engines, so that, so early as 1832, there were no less than 900
arrivals of steamers at New Orleans from the upper country, and in
1834, there were 234 steam-vessels running on the Mississippi and Ohio,
the large majority of which were built at Pittsburg and Cincinnati.
[Sidenote: Dangers of river navigation.]
[Sidenote: Number of steamers lost by “snags,” ice, fire, and
collision, 1831-1833.]
The navigation, however, of these great rivers was for many years
attended with almost endless difficulties and dangers. In the Ohio and
other western waters of the United States, though the current does not
average more than three miles an hour, there were rapids where, in some
instances, it attains a velocity of from seven to eight miles. There
were also numerous sandbanks, most of which have now been removed,
whereon the boats frequently took the ground and were detained until
the next rise of water, sometimes for even three and four months. In
the upper waters, too, the floating ice during the spring of the year
occasioned many disasters, and is still a danger not to be prevented.
But the greatest danger arose from what was known as “snags,” stumps
of trees which, from the falling in of the banks, are carried down the
river until they lodge, with one end resting in the mud or sand, and
the other rising to the surface sometimes so concealed as to baffle the
utmost precaution in avoiding it. Among the sixty-six boats lost in the
navigation of these western rivers during the years 1831-2-3, while
seven were wrecked by ice, fifteen stranded and abandoned, fifteen
destroyed by fire, and five wrecked by collision with other boats, no
less than twenty-four were “_snagged_.”
But, besides the “snags,” there are dangers, though of somewhat less
importance, arising from other falling trees, known by the name of
“sawyers,” trees which have sunk with an inclination down the stream,
the action of the current upon them causing a continual vertical
vibration, whence their name. Generally, when a boat going down stream
strikes a sawyer, she will pass over it with little or no injury as its
inclination is in the direction of the boat’s movement. But the danger,
here, differs from that of the “snags.” Their inclination is up the
river, their ends sometimes projecting above the surface at low water,
or when the river is at a higher stage, remaining just sufficiently
beneath the surface to be still more dangerous. Boats going down
stream, therefore, encounter very great peril, and it has frequently
occurred that, when the “snag” lies at a great inclination, the end
rises when struck and not only pierces the hull but passes up through
all the decks.
These dangers are increased by the remarkable fluctuation in the depth
of the water in the rivers, which is sometimes so great, as to admit
the navigation of the largest vessel, and again so small, as to render
it impossible to construct vessels with draught of sufficient lightness
to float upon them.
On the Ohio, the rapids are chiefly caused by bars, or as they are
termed “chains of rock,” extending across the river, which, when the
water is low, impede navigation and sometimes stop it altogether.
Artificial means have, however, in some instances been adopted whereby
a greatly increased volume of water is thrown into a single channel,
but hitherto these schemes have not been of much practical utility,
though the money expended in the removal of “snags” and other temporary
obstructions has tended to render the navigation of the Ohio, as well
as of the Mississippi, Missouri, and Red River, comparatively safe and
easy to what it was when steam-boats were for the first time despatched
upon these mighty streams.
[Sidenote: Peculiar description of wharves and levees.]
In consequence of the great fluctuations in the depth of the western
rivers, no regular wharves or jetties can be formed alongside of
which the boats engaged in the traffic can land their passengers and
goods. In lieu of these, therefore, the banks of the river opposite
to the towns, or where landing-places are necessary, are sloped off
at a considerable inclination and paved with ordinary paving-stones.
At intervals along the shore, and, also, at different distances up
the bank, piles are driven with large ringbolts attached to their
heads for the purpose of mooring the boats. Owing, also, to the same
cause, and the ever varying strength of the currents of the rivers,
it is necessary that the boats employed on them should be as light as
possible combined with the requisite strength, of small draught of
water, and of great power, so as to be able to pass over the sandbanks
and make headway against the currents.
[Sidenote: Description of steamers employed.]
In order that the boats may land passengers without difficulty at these
sloping banks or “levees,” as they are termed, and also discharge and
take in freight and passengers, their bows have a very long rake, so
that when they strike the bank the bow gradually rises out of the water
till it has sufficient hold upon the bank to maintain its position
while landing the cargo, without any material assistance from the warps
attached to the mooring post. To facilitate the operation of landing,
the forecastle deck carries its width in most cases right to the stem,
so as to furnish the necessary platform for discharging and loading
cargo. In order, also, to meet the frequent occurrence of very shallow
water during the summer months, a class of boats has been constructed
termed light-water steamers. They differ from the ordinary description
of boats, in that they are built in the lightest possible manner and
with a comparatively small engine power, so that their speed seldom
exceeds from 6 to 7 miles per hour; they have, however, the advantage
of being able to navigate rivers the ordinary boat could not traverse,
their draught of water ranging from 12 to not more than 18 inches when
laden with cargo and passengers.
The vessels employed on the Mississippi vary in size from 150 to 1500
tons burden, and in some cases more. It is necessary, too, that these
should be built so to draw as little water as possible, the largest not
exceeding when loaded from 7 to 8 feet, as this great river is also
impeded by bars or “chains” extending across it, though not to the
same extent as the Ohio and other smaller rivers. At New Orleans, the
_levee_ or quay is from four to five miles in extent, with an average
breadth of 100 feet. It is 15 feet above low-water mark, or that
condition of the river when its waters retire within their natural bed,
and is 6 feet above the level of the city, to which it is graduated by
an easy descent. It is constructed of the alluvial soil brought down
from the north, and deposited in the vicinity by the waters of the
Mississippi.
[Sidenote: Boats of the Mississippi.]
Prior to the general introduction of steam navigation, the trade
carried on by flat boats occupied a great space in this now important
emporium of commerce. Hundreds of long, narrow, black, dirty-looking,
crocodile-like craft lay sluggishly without moorings, upon the soft
_batture_,[154]—a heterogeneous compound produced from the territories
of the Upper Mississippi and its numerous tributaries, while they
poured out their contents upon the quay. These rafts, or flat boats
as they are technically called, which frequently had on board cargo
to the value of from 3000_l._ to 5000_l._, are covered with a raised
work or scantling, giving them the appearance of long, narrow cabins,
built for the purpose of habitation, but really designed to protect
their contents from the weather. They are guided by an oar at the
stern, aided with an occasional dip of two huge pieces of timber, which
move on each side like fins (rude imitations of the leeboards to be
found in Dutch galiots or Thames barges), and float with the stream
at the rate of 3 miles the hour. Such were the means of carriage of
the up-country’s products on the Mississippi about half a century ago,
and steam-boat navigation has not diminished the number of these flat
boats. They are so natural, simple, and cheap a mode of transporting
produce down the stream, that as long as the Mississippi passes with
such rapidity from its source to its embouchure in the gulf, the
traveller will be sure to meet with these unsightly masses floating
on its bosom; swayed to and fro by its currents, countercurrents, and
eddies, often shifting end for end like some species of shell-fish, and
not unfrequently resembling the crab, preferring the oblique to the
forward movement.
[Sidenote: Boatmen.]
Like the boatmen of the Nile, the men who make these wooden habitations
their usual dwellings are a distinct class. Launching their boats
upon the Ohio, the Illinois, the Upper Mississippi, the Missouri, the
Arkansas, and the Cumberland with all their respective tributaries, and
guiding them to their final resting-place at New Orleans, these men are
all known by the general designation of “Boatmen of the Mississippi.”
They are a strong, hardy, rough, uncouth people, with a touch of the
savage about them.
[Sidenote: Engines.]
Although the condensing engine is met with in some of the Mississippi
steamers, high pressure engines are much more frequent, the pressure in
the former being never less than 10 and frequently as high as 30 pounds
to the square inch; when, however, this pressure is so worked, the
object is to shut off the steam and take advantage of the expansion.
In high pressure engines the pressure is used _ad libitum_ from 50 to
150 pounds, and, in former times, to such an extent, that no mortal
was left to measure its height, the boiler as well as the boat and
its contents, animate and inanimate, having too frequently been blown
into the air. In condensing engines, when moving at full speed, the
steam is never “wire-drawn,” as the engineers term it, the passages
being made large enough, and the valves fully opened: the same, in high
pressure engines: but, when not moving at full speed, the steam can be
“wire-drawn” as the engineer thinks necessary.
The term “high pressure” in America is applied to that description of
engine which is worked against the atmosphere or without condensation;
all condensing engines are called low pressure. In both these engines
ashwood and pine, where coal could not be easily obtained, were the
descriptions of wood most commonly used for fuel,[155] and, in the
dangerous competition, happily less frequent now than it was some
years ago, barrels of pitch, rosin, and even tallow were sometimes
thrown into the furnaces, the recklessness of the captains and
engineers on the Mississippi in working their boilers at a greater
pressure than they could with safety carry, and, thereby, causing the
frightful explosions to which I have just referred.[156]
[Sidenote: Different construction of the steamers on the Atlantic
rivers.]
The steam-boats on the Atlantic rivers are differently constructed from
those of the west, as the same necessity for light draught of water
does not exist, while they are more especially intended for passengers;
their cabins are, frequently, under deck, while those on the western
rivers, constructed for carrying heavy cargoes as well as passengers,
have their cabins, generally, in two tiers above the deck, hence the
preference given to high pressure engines from their being lighter
and occupying less space. The condensing or low pressure engine is
much more prevalent in the Eastern boats, and is more economical in
fuel than the high pressure: their boilers are usually circular; there
is great variety in the form and construction of the furnaces and
flues, and the boilers designed for burning wood are, of necessity,
of greater external dimensions than those designed for burning coal,
although the proportions of steam space may be smaller in the former
than in the latter. These boilers are frequently worked at 18 to 20
pounds on the square inch, but 12 pounds is considered the medium.
The expansive action of the superheated steam in these engines, the
greater space allowed for the engines to work in, and the generally
admirable form of the boats, will, of course, tend to reduce the
quantity of fuel required. The stroke of the piston, in some of the
fastest American boats, is as much as 10 or 11 feet, and the connecting
rods 13 to 19 feet long: the engine is worked at a much quicker rate
than in England, the piston passing through the space of 500 feet in
a minute, at which speed the whole machinery is found to work more
smoothly than at a slower rate. It has been remarked by competent
judges that, though the English engine is more perfect and more highly
finished than the American, the advantage of superior workmanship is
more than compensated in the American by greater length of stroke and
the connection. American engineers consider the English engine, as
applied to marine purposes, too confined, and until steam of a higher
pressure is used, the boat must be of inferior speed to those of the
United States. A Boulton and Watt engine[157] of 30-inch cylinder and
4-foot stroke, making twenty-five revolutions in a minute with 3½
pounds of steam, is estimated as a 30-horse engine; but the force of
this engine, it is argued by Americans, will be increased one-third if
steam of 7 pounds be used; “lengthen the cylinder,” they remark, to 8
feet and drive the piston through that space in the same time, that is,
400 feet instead of 200, use the same quantity of steam by shutting it
off at half the stroke, and the American engine as compared with the
English will be nearly an 80-horse instead of a 30-horse power.
[Sidenote: Great speed of American lake and river steamers.]
In their early career the Americans were likewise much in advance, as
we have seen, of Great Britain in the model and speed of their river
steamers, a superiority they still maintain. Indeed, the competition on
their rivers, especially on the Hudson, was then much greater than it
is even now. This strong rivalry made speed of the utmost importance,
as the boat which performed the trip between New York and Albany in the
shortest time, if only by half an hour (the Americans not concerning
themselves about the chance of an explosion), would be sure to take
all the passengers. Hence every expedient ingenuity could devise was
resorted to for this object, and to the skill and perseverance of Mr.
Robert L. Stevens the Americans are greatly indebted for the perfection
to which the models of their river boats have advanced. These boats
were built on the finest models; their entrance and runs sharper than
had ever been before attempted; besides this, he had several of the
earlier ones sawn in two and their length increased 25 or 30 feet, at
the same time carrying a false bow from 18 to 20 feet beyond the stem,
and forming true lines with the planking of the boat. This experiment
fully answered his expectations; their speed was surprisingly
increased, and, when running at the rate of 18 miles an hour, “they
hardly raised a feather in front.” But, in 1834, another American
shipbuilder constructed a steamer 185 feet long and 20 feet beam, with
solid ends sharper than any of the false bows, having a flat floor
and a single-cylinder engine of 52-inch diameter and 10-feet stroke,
which was pronounced to be “_the fastest thing afloat_:” indeed, to
such perfection have these steamers been brought that they now traverse
rivers once thought to be altogether unnavigable. The first attempt
to reach the falls of the Ohio from New Orleans was considered so
visionary that the projector was looked upon as little better than a
madman, but steamers are now engaged in regular traffic wherever the
bars are covered with 12 or 15 inches of water, American genius, skill,
and perseverance having triumphed over almost every impediment.
[Sidenote: Peculiarity of construction.]
Each successive year new vessels have been built, surpassing their
predecessors in their size and power and in the splendour of their
decorations, while they possess every improvement the skill, taste, and
experience of their constructor can devise. There exists, nevertheless,
in the general external appearance of the boats employed on the river
navigation a great similarity which may be seen also in the details of
their construction and in that of their machinery, as well as to some
extent in their models, their usual features being great proportion of
length to beam, a shallow hold, and a long flat floor, extending almost
to the extremities of the boat. Great buoyancy, and consequently, a
very light draught of water are by these means secured, and as the
shallowness of the rivers in some places requires this, experience has
demonstrated the advantage of attempting to go over rather than through
the water when it is desirable to attain very high speed.
Although the absolutely best form of model and that which, under all
circumstances, is subject to the least average resistance remains a
matter of speculation, every builder having an opinion and theory of
his own differing more or less from those entertained by his brethren
of the craft, the competition and rivalry between the different
builders and owners have been productive of extraordinary results. On
the American rivers a sustained average speed of 20 miles per hour
is now not an uncommon performance, due, doubtless, in part, to the
improved form and fineness of the water lines, and, in part, also, to
the great size and power of recent engines: add to this, that, from the
superior tenacity and strength of American iron, the constructor is
able to give his engines proportions considerably lighter than would
be deemed safe elsewhere. The immense diameter of their paddle-wheels
is also worthy of note as an element of no mean importance in the
economical expenditure of the power developed in the engine and,
consequently, in its effect on the speed of the boat. Taken as a whole,
therefore, it would be impossible to find anywhere else finer specimens
of naval architecture or more suitable engines for the special traffic
on which they are engaged, than the boats now traversing the coasts,
rivers, and lakes of the United States.
[Illustration: HUDSON RIVER STEAMER “NEW WORLD.”]
The steamers at present engaged in passenger traffic between New York
and Boston, are magnificent vessels; they are indeed “floating
palaces;” and it is a fine sight to witness their departure every
evening from New York. They run in connection with the railway at
Allen Point, their course being about 140 miles by the East River and
Long Island Sound, a distance generally accomplished in about seven
hours and a half, including the delay in calling at New London.[158]
Yet these magnificent vessels were (if they are not now) surpassed in
speed by the steamers on the River Hudson, while they were equalled in
the beauty of their lines and the splendour of their accommodation. An
illustration of one of these, the _New World_, will be found on the
preceding page.
[Sidenote: Steamer _New World_.]
This graceful and magnificent vessel is 380 feet in length. Her breadth
of beam is 50 feet, or 85 feet over all, including the sponsons and
paddle-boxes, while the diameter of her paddle-wheel is no less than
45 feet, and that of her cylinder 76 inches, the length of stroke
being 15 feet. The _New World_ has 347 state rooms or cabins, and 600
sleeping-berths. In her construction and equipment may be traced,
to the most minute details, the natural mechanical ingenuity so
characteristic of the Americans; every corner that would otherwise be
vacant is adapted either to the necessities of the trade or to the
comfort of the passengers. From the colossal beam engine with which she
is propelled, down to the minutest fittings of her saloons, cabins,
restaurant, bar, lavatories, smoking-room, and barber’s shop, there
is, combined with the system and order generally prevalent, almost
everything to admire and nothing the most fastidious could honestly
condemn.
No doubt much of this perfection arises from the complete subdivision
of labour to be found throughout most of the great American
establishments, so apparent in many of their manufactories and
workshops and in their large hotels as well as in their ships, but,
more especially, in their river and coasting steamers. For instance,
the construction, fitting, and equipment of the latter is carried on
throughout by a class of people who devote themselves entirely to such
work, and make it a study to attain perfection in it. Whatever may
be the case in the “Far West,” where labour is scarce, and, whatever
may be the facility with which the Americans can adapt themselves to
circumstances (developed as this was remarkably during the late civil
war), a “Jack of all Trades” receives no encouragement in the equipment
or in the manning of their steamers. Their ship-owners require, in both
cases, if they can be obtained, regardless of cost, men who thoroughly
understand their respective duties, and in this, as well as in various
other matters, England has much to learn from the Americans.
In the _New World_, we have an excellent specimen of the first-class
American coast or river steamer, combining the multifarious and,
apparently, conflicting requisites for vessels thus employed. With a
light draught of water, such vessels require to have stability to carry
in safety the lofty hotels erected on their decks, and to afford the
spacious and sumptuous accommodation which competition has led every
American traveller to expect. High speed must also be combined with
safety and comfort, and lightness blended with strength. To attain the
former, the boilers of these vessels are placed outside the ordinary
line of the hull of the vessel on guards or framework, an extraordinary
position for heavy weights, but tending, materially, to safety in
the event of explosion, and, to comfort, in causing less vibration
and greater coolness, the furnaces being thus away from the cabins.
To secure the latter, the rigidity of the hull is maintained by a
perfect system of trussing with wooden beams, braces, iron tie-rods,
and stays, together with innumerable other remarkable contrivances
wherein great skill and scientific knowledge is displayed. By these and
other contrivances, the requisite strength, combined with the greatest
lightness consistent with safety, is ensured, so that the whole vast
and commodious structure, with its towering cabins, lofty saloons,
handsome galleries, balconies, and extensive promenades, fragile as
they doubtless appear, is a marvel of mechanical skill, and, really,
possesses much greater stability and power of resistance than is to be
found in numerous vessels of other countries of twice the weight of
materials used in the construction of the _New World_.
[Sidenote: Details of her construction.]
The mode of constructing these vessels is entirely different to that
adopted in any other country: thus, the hull of the _New World_ is of
wood, the external planking being about 3½ inches in thickness, and
the ribs sheathed internally for a considerable distance amidships
by double-crossed diagonal woodwork. Further forward and aft, it
is single, and, towards the end, there is no sheathing; but the
floor-timbers are strengthened by several longitudinal timbers or
keelsons of considerable size.
To compensate for the want of depth in the sides of the boat, a
“hog-back” or “bow” frame, consisting of timbers joined together in the
shape of a bow, springing from the side at some little distance from
the end of the boat, and rising to a height of 20 or 25 feet at the
centre, is applied to strengthen it. This “hog-back” is braced to the
side in several places by vertical and diagonal timbers and bolts, the
whole forming a powerful trussed framework, placed directly over the
side of the boat so as to be regarded as virtually an addition to the
depth of the side. The floor of the boat is strengthened by a system of
bracing consisting of masts 40 or 50 feet in length, which are stepped
into the keelson and furnished at their top with caps to which are
fastened iron rods; these rods radiate to the sides of the boat, like
the shrouds of a ship, and thus transfer the upward pressure on the
centre of the floor directly to the side. The deck beams project over
the sides of the boat to the extreme width of the paddlebox-houses,
constituting what are called the “guards.” These guards are supported
by diagonal struts underneath them, and they overhang to the extent of
18 or 20 feet at the centre, meeting in a point at the bow, but at the
stern projecting about 2 feet 6 inches, so as to form a gangway round
the ladies’ saloon. But the success now almost invariably attending
the construction of all the lake, coasting, and river steamers of the
United States is attributable less to any theoretical inquiries and
deductions than to a long course of practical experience, or, as it
has been characteristically termed, to “a course of trial and error.”
To show that this experience has been successful it is enough to
observe that the steamers built for these waters carry a greater amount
of freight, and accommodate a larger number of passengers on a given
draught of water than those constructed in any other part of the world.
[Sidenote: The _Daniel Drew_.]
[Sidenote: Her enormous speed.]
Although the _New World_ was one of the largest and most magnificent
vessels employed on the Hudson, she was surpassed in speed by the
_Daniel Drew_, which has attained the extraordinary rate of 25 statute
miles an hour without assistance from either wind or tide. From my own
knowledge, I can confirm the accuracy of this statement, having made a
passage in her from New York to Albany. To persons who, like myself,
familiar with nautical affairs, have made their study the business as
well as the pleasure of life, no more enjoyable sensation could have
been afforded than the rapid movement of this vessel. Like some “thing
of life” she noiselessly cut through the water with no curling wave
or struggling foam at her bows, throwing aside only a silvery jet of
the fluid over which she appeared to skim. Nor was the action of her
machinery less worthy of admiration. After the first half-dozen strokes
of the paddle-wheels when started, their pace was so smooth and rapid
that sound and vibration alike were hardly perceptible.
But, though the Americans have surpassed all other nations in the
steamers hitherto produced for their lake and river navigation, they
have not as yet sent forth any steam-ships so well adapted for ocean
navigation as those of Great Britain; indeed, almost every attempt
made by them to compete successfully with British vessels so engaged
has been a commercial failure. In their distant coasting lines (what
a misnomer to describe the voyage between New York and San Francisco
as “coasting trade”!) they have, however, for many years employed
some of the finest steam-ships afloat. In fact, when the district of
California was almost a wilderness, the merchants of New York started a
line of steamers to trade with it, and were thus, in a great measure,
the means, though at a heavy loss to themselves, of developing its
marvellous natural resources.
[Sidenote: Pacific Steamship Company started, 1847.]
The Pacific Mail Steam-ship Company, formed in 1847, is much the
largest maritime undertaking yet organised, as distinctly American
and under the flag of the United States, and their first steamer, the
_California_, which left New York on the 6th of October, 1848, was
the first to bear the American flag to the Pacific Ocean. To form a
steam-ship establishment 4000 to 5000 or, as it was at that time,
13,000 miles from home, where the necessary supplies could only be
obtained with the greatest difficulty in a country wholly new, was
an undertaking of no ordinary hazard and difficulty. Nevertheless,
there appeared to be ingredients for success sufficient to encourage
the projectors to increase their fleet with extraordinary rapidity
soon after they commenced operations; and there were at that period
no steam-ships afloat finer than the _Panama_, _Oregon_, _Tennessee_,
_Golden Gate_, and _Columbia_, which followed the _California_ in rapid
succession.
[Sidenote: Cost of establishing it.]
From a small beginning, the Pacific Company has now one of the best
fleets belonging to the United States, though the difficulties in
forming it were probably far greater than in the case of any of the
other American companies. Among these, may be mentioned the necessity
of constructing large workshops and foundries for repairs, together
with the creation at Bernicia of an establishment, where marine engines
could be constructed; they had, also, to build their own dry dock, for
that of the Government at Mare Island was not ready until 1854, the
company’s dock being for some years the only accommodation of this
kind in the Pacific. The company had also to form establishments at
Panama, San Francisco, and Astoria, with coal depôts, at a time when
labour and materials were excessively high, and when the coal itself,
whether brought from the Eastern States of the American continent or
from England, was invariably, and necessarily, carried round Cape Horn,
seldom or never costing less than from 20 to 30 dollars, and, in one
instance, 50 dollars per ton.[159]
[Sidenote: Speed of its vessels.]
[Sidenote: Difficulties to encounter.]
But, from first to last and amid all its difficulties, the Pacific
Steam-ship Company has carried on these distant services with
remarkable regularity. Even in the earlier portion of its career,
the steamers performed the service between Panama and San Francisco,
a distance of 3300 miles, at an average speed of 254 miles per day,
touching at various ports on the way; the company has also by its
semi-monthly line from San Francisco to Oregon materially assisted in
populating that rich and beautiful agricultural district. Nevertheless,
had it not been for the discovery of the gold fields of California,
the undertaking must have been a great commercial failure; indeed,
even within the last few years, its history has been one of disaster,
while its management has been characterized by a succession of mistakes
each one graver than the last. Its most formidable rival is now the
Central Pacific Railroad Company with other allied lines, which carry
off a large portion of the more valuable goods previously conveyed
in steamers, viâ Panama, between the northern and eastern states and
California.
[Sidenote: Number of its steamers.]
The Pacific Steam-ship Company is, however, still by far the greatest
of the American maritime undertakings, having at present in commission
thirty-three very fine steamers of an aggregate capacity of 74,000
tons of cargo, exclusive of the large space assigned to passengers. It
has thirty-five chief agencies on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of
the United States and in the West Indies, Mexico, Central and South
America, Canada, England, China, and Japan. There are altogether fifty
ports where its steamers call, three of which are on the Atlantic and
forty-seven on the Pacific: these figures may in some measure afford my
readers an idea of the extent of its commercial operations.
[Sidenote: Services performed.]
The steamers engaged on the China line leave San Francisco for Yokohama
and Hong Kong every alternate Saturday, connecting at Yokohama
with their branch steamers for Shanghai and at Hong Kong with the
English and French steamers for Singapore and the principal ports in
India, and, viâ the Suez Canal, with the Mediterranean and Atlantic
ports of Europe. The New York and Panama line connects at Aspinwall
with the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company to Southampton; with the
West India and Pacific Steam Packet Company to Liverpool; with the
Hamburg-American Steam Packet Company to Hamburg, and with the Companie
Générale Trans-Atlantique to France. At Panama, they connect with the
Pacific Steam Navigation Company to all South American ports. The
Mexican and Central American line leaves San Francisco every alternate
Thursday for Panama, stopping at all Mexican and Central American
ports. The New York and Panama line leaves New York every alternate
Saturday and San Francisco every alternate Wednesday.
[Sidenote: China and Japan line.]
The China and Japan line, which the company is now promoting with great
vigour, was not started until the 1st of January, 1867, when the first
of its fleet passed out of the “Golden Gate” of California bound across
the Pacific to those ancient nations. The _Great Republic_, _China_,
_Japan_, and _America_, all of them wooden vessels with paddle-wheels
and “walking beam” engines, soon followed. These vessels, of somewhere
about 4000 tons each, make the voyage from San Francisco to Yokohama in
twenty-two days, thence to Hong-Kong in seven more, the whole distance
occupying, with the stoppage at Yokohama, thirty days.
Until recently, the service was monthly each way, but the rapid
increase of trade has now induced the company to despatch a steamer
from each end, once a fortnight. Between Yokohama and Shanghai, this
company runs, in connection with the large steamers, many smaller
vessels which, passing through the inland seas of Japan and calling at
Hiogo and Nagasaki, have secured a large share of the local traffic,
at the same time feeding the trunk line, the vessels of which have
very extensive accommodation for the numerous Chinese passengers,
between Hong-Kong and San Francisco. Though this company now finds
a large and increasing amount of employment for its ships in goods,
as well as passengers, consisting chiefly of wheat, flour, treasure,
and general merchandise for China, and tea, sugar, cleaned rice, oil,
and miscellaneous articles in return, it is largely subsidised by the
American Government, which, as well as its subjects, shows considerable
jealousy of the steamers of other countries competing for the same
trade.
In 1874, two pioneer steamers of an English company attempted to
compete with those of the Pacific Steam-ship Company, but the promoters
appear to have been unable to obtain sufficient capital to enlarge
their service and maintain the opposition, as they consented, after a
few months’ trial, to charter their vessels to the American company,
which has also added to its fleet now engaged in this trade two new and
large vessels, the _City of Pekin_ and the _City of Canton_.[160]
As the Central Pacific Railroad was opened soon after the inauguration
of the line of steamers to China, passengers as well as a large
proportion of the teas and other Chinese produce and merchandise are
now transported by it, instead of being conveyed as hitherto from
China, by way of the Cape of Good Hope, or across the Pacific Ocean to
San Francisco, and thence, viâ Panama, to New York, Boston and other
ports on the north-eastern seaboard.
[Sidenote: “Law line” of steamers.]
That San Francisco was, in the opinion of the Americans, destined to
become a great central depôt of commerce, and ought, therefore, to be
encouraged by every means in their power, may be inferred from the
circumstance that, in 1847, when the Pacific Mail Steam-ship Company
commenced operations, another company, known as the “Law Line,”
established by Messrs. Law, Roberts, and Company, of New York, received
also a subsidy for carrying the United States’ mails between New York,
California, and Oregon monthly, although there was not then sufficient
trade for even one monthly line of steamers.
[Sidenote: South American Steam-ship Company.]
Running in connection with the steamers from New York to Aspinwall, the
Americans have another line, consisting of twelve very fine steamers
ranging from 500 to 2000 tons each, plying between Panama, Valparaiso,
and the intermediate ports, rivalling the vessels of the English
Pacific Steam Navigation Company, and largely sharing in the commerce
between San Francisco and the South American Republic, a trade destined
to become one of vast magnitude and of great public importance. Nor
do they seem disposed to limit their operations to the shores of the
Pacific, for besides the great line now traversing that ocean to China
and Japan, they evidently contemplate at no distant date to run lines
of their own steamers from San Francisco and Panama to our Australian
Colonies. “One of the most pressing needs of the day,” remarks a writer
in the leading San Francisco journal of January 1875, “is for the
establishment of a permanent steam communication with Australia, and
it is a disgrace to the public spirit of our community that it has not
been satisfactorily effected.”
[Sidenote: Mr. Randall’s projected large American steamer.]
Nor are the Americans inclined to rest satisfied with the present
size of their steamers, but, with a prudence not displayed by the
projectors of our _Great Eastern_, they have hitherto regulated their
dimensions by the requirements of the trade in which they intended
to employ them. When I visited Philadelphia, in the autumn of 1860,
several merchants of that city brought under my notice the designs
and model of a steam-ship they then contemplated building, and which,
though not one-half the dimensions of our own vast _Leviathan_, was
double the size of any other vessel then afloat; they had, indeed,
formed a company which they styled the Philadelphia and Crescent Steam
Navigation Company, expressly for the purpose of constructing a line of
such vessels to trade with Great Britain. The plans of this ship are
now before me.
[Sidenote: Details of proposed ship.]
Into the estimates of profit and loss I need not enter, as their
accuracy, or otherwise, has not been tested, but the plans of the
projector, Mr. Randall, were considered of sufficient importance to
justify the State legislature in granting to the company an Act of
Incorporation. This vessel was to be 500 feet long, with a beam of 58
feet moulded, and to measure about 8000 tons. She was to have “ample
accommodation for 3000 passengers and 3000 tons of cargo,” and to be “a
regular 20-mile ship.” She was to “have ample fuel room, sufficient to
run 8000 miles without stopping for coal,” and to have a “main saloon
of 350 feet of uninterrupted length,” and “175 family state rooms, with
double beds in each of extra size, and a dining-room and drawing-room,
each 150 feet long.” For the comfort and convenience of excursionists,
who, it was said, “will be induced, in consequence of the increased
safety offered by these vessels to visit Europe in preference to
Saratoga, Newport, Niagara, &c., there will be found on board a social
hall, reading-rooms, and library 50 feet long, and a smoking-room
45 feet in extent, and numerous baths, comparing favourably with
first-class hotels.”
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Two sets of paddle-wheels.]
[Sidenote: Principle of construction.]
Her motive power was to consist of two sets of wheels, “constructed in
such a manner and so placed as to obtain a vast increase of speed;” she
was to be divided into seven water-tight compartments, and the engines
were to be entirely distinct, 130 feet apart. She was to be constructed
on the diagonal principle and trussed with bars of iron as shown in
the following midship section. There was to be “a solid arch on each
side of the ship, together with the vertical arch and iron diagonal
bracing, extending over the whole frame, affording a construction of
strength and security never equalled.”[161]
But her midship transverse section was the most striking feature of
this great ship; it is in many respects novel, and so different from
the midship section of any vessel constructed in other countries,
that the following representation of it may prove interesting and
instructive.
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Advantages to be derived from vessels thus built.]
The proposed arrangements present an amount of accommodation for
passengers greatly superior to any obtainable in vessels of similar
size constructed on the principles generally followed by the
shipbuilders of Great Britain. The almost dead flat floor, adopted with
the American idea of, as far as practicable, skimming over the surface
of the water, rather than forcing a passage through it, is at variance
with the form hitherto considered by us most desirable where great
speed is required. But we are daily expanding the breadth of the round
and rising floors of our ships, and approaching the American form, and,
so long as there is sufficient depth to secure stability,[162] some
persons consider that vessels with flat floors and fine ends are the
best models for speed as well as for capacity.
Although the ocean-going steamers of Great Britain, as in the case of
the great competition between the steamers of the Collins and Cunard
lines, to which reference will presently be made, have, hitherto, in
a commercial point of view, surpassed those of the United States, it
is much to be regretted that Mr. Randall’s ship was never built. As
she was the nearest approach in size to the _Great Eastern_ of any
vessel hitherto contemplated, her trial would have been interesting,
especially as it was thought that her form and mode of construction
presented greater elements of success as regards speed and capacity in
proportion to her register tonnage; and, if we apply the formula for
determining the strength of a truss, we shall find that, in proportion
to the weight of materials used, with the system of bracing proposed,
she would have more effectually resisted the twisting or writhing so
fatal to long and heavily-laden ships when they encounter the violently
agitated cross seas of the Atlantic Ocean.
[Sidenote: Mr. Randall’s experience of steamers employed on the Lakes
and Pacific.]
Such were the views of Mr. Randall, and, when it is considered that he
was no mere theorist, but a man of large practical experience in such
matters, there were even greater reasons to anticipate valuable results
from the experiment. For twenty-two years before he propounded his
scheme to the merchants of Philadelphia, Mr. Randall had been employed
in building, fitting, and navigating steam-ships on the American lakes
and on the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans:[163] and the only difference
between these ships and the one he projected for the European trade
consisted in the increased size, and in the application of two distinct
sets of paddle-wheels instead of one.
FOOTNOTES:
[145] Lake Ontario, which lies nearest to the Atlantic, is 172
miles in length, about 60 miles in extreme breadth, and 483 miles
in circumference. Lake Erie is about 265 miles in length, from 30
to 60 miles in breadth, and 529 miles in circumference; while Lake
Huron is 240 miles long, from 186 to 220 miles wide, and 1000 miles
in circumference. Michigan, which is connected with Lake Huron by a
navigable strait, is 300 miles in length, 75 miles in width, and 920
miles in circumference, having a superficies of 16,200 square miles.
But Lake Superior is the largest of all the lakes, being no less than
360 miles in length, and 140 miles in breadth, with a circumference
of 1116 miles; the line of coast formed by the margins of these lakes
extends to upwards of 4000 miles, while they are all, nearly throughout
their entire length and breadth, navigable for vessels of the largest
description, their depth varying, except within a short distance of the
shores, from 12 to 200 fathoms.
[146] Chicago, situated on the south-west shore of Lake Michigan, at
the mouth of a river of the same name, was in 1830 a mere station in
the midst of a forest where a few Americans traded with the Indians
in furs. Ten years afterwards it had 4470 inhabitants; but in 1850
these had increased to 27,620, and in 1853 to 60,552. In 1860, when I
visited that place, it had become a great city, with somewhere about
150,000 inhabitants, numerous handsome stone buildings, and magnificent
stores; those for grain capable of containing, according to the annual
report of the Chicago Board of Trade, 5,475,000 bushels of corn, with a
capacity for shipping no less than 1,835,000 bushels each day. Indeed,
I witnessed the loading of a brigantine with 9000 bushels of wheat from
one of these stores in two hours!
[147] The first vessel ever built on western waters was the brig
_Dean_, launched at Alleghany City, Pa., in 1806.
[148] In a letter I received, January 5th, 1855, from Mr. E. P. Dorr,
the President of the Buffalo Board of Trade, he says: “The Welland
Canal, as it now stands, is used almost wholly by American vessels. It
is the key of the other canals; its length is 28 miles, and there are
28 locks, as Lake Erie is 256 feet above Lake Ontario: but a new and
enlarged canal is in process of construction, which, when finished,
will admit vessels of large tonnage.”
[149] In 1860 there were 265 steam-vessels of 104,543 tons register,
belonging to the United States, and 104 similar vessels, registering
33,269 tons, owned in Canada, all of which were engaged in the commerce
of the lakes. On January 1st, 1875, the number of steamers belonging to
both countries, thus employed, had increased to 689, measuring 258,980
tons. They range in size from 250 to 1500 tons. But, besides these,
there were 1770 sailing-vessels of 386,554 tons similarly engaged, or
an aggregate of 645,534 tons, one in every five of which vessels can
go through the Welland Canal, three-fourths of them being American and
one-fourth Canadian. Some of the lake sailing-vessels occasionally
trade to England, the first, the _Dean of Richmond_, having taken a
cargo from Chicago direct to Liverpool in 1856.
[150] “Civil Engineering of North America,” pp. 60, 61.
[151] Long Island Sound lies between that island and the mainland, and
extends in a north-easterly direction from New York Harbour, affording
a sheltered line of navigation of about 120 miles in extent.
[152] If any further proofs were necessary to show that almost
everything done in this new business had its origin in England, these
will be found in the fact, that a boat launched by Fulton on July 4th,
1815, was a counterpart of the one belonging to Mr. Miller, which he
had seen on Dalwinston Lock some years previously. She was a structure
resting upon two boats, separated from end to end by a channel 15 feet
wide and 60 feet long. One boat contained the copper cauldrons, for
preparing the steam; the other, the iron cylinder, piston, levers and
wheels. The water-wheel revolved in a space between them just as in one
of Mr. Miller’s boats. Had Fulton, in this matter, claimed originality,
it would, certainly, be another and striking instance of two persons
resident far apart from each other, carrying out the same idea, even in
its most minute details.
[153] See _Western States and Buffalo Advertiser_, quoted by Mr. John
MacGregor in his “Statistics of the American Lake Trade,” London, 1847.
[154] _Batture_ is the original French word, still retained, applied to
the new formation of alluvial soil formed by the capricious action of
the Mississippi. The Levee extends from 43 miles below the city to 120
miles above it.
[155] In an address by Mr. Lothian Bell (May 1875), late President of
the Iron and Steel Institute of Great Britain, the area of pit coal
in the United States is computed at 192,000 square miles, as compared
with 8000 square miles in the United Kingdom. Hitherto the expense
of working any portion of these vast coal fields was too great to
make it remunerative, but, now, the use of coals is being so rapidly
substituted for wood in the American steamers that the facilities for
working the mines and transporting the coals has marvellously increased
within the last twenty years. Mr. Bell remarks, in the same address,
that 20,000 tons of coal are sometimes embarked at Pittsburg on a
flotilla of flat bottomed boats towed by one steamer and conveyed 1600
miles down the Ohio at something under a shilling a ton, including the
cost of bringing back the empty barges.
[156] Between 1816 and 1848 no less than 233 steam-boats employed on
American waters exploded, some of them involving terrible disasters,
the lowest number during that period being one annually, but sometimes
there were as many as ten, twelve, and thirteen in the course of a
year. The loss of life in each accident averaged eleven persons, being
a total of 2563 human beings killed, besides 2097 persons wounded. In
one terrible explosion, that of the _Louisiana_, on the New Orleans
_levee_, nearly 200 persons lost their lives. See _St. Louis Republican
and Insurance Reporter_ (U.S.A.).
[157] In the rule for nominal horse-power, Watt assumed 7 lbs. of steam
as a mean pressure.
[158] I am enabled through the courtesy of Mr. Webb, the well-known
ship-builder of New York, to furnish in the Appendix No. 6, p. 600, a
description of the engines of the _Bristol_ and _Providence_, the two
finest steamers at present (1875) employed on the line between New York
and Boston.
[159] Coals are now worked from mines on the coast, and, from this
and other causes, the price of coals on the Pacific coast has been
materially reduced.
[160] These “magnificent” vessels are each 5560 tons burden, and are
423 feet in length, 48 feet wide, and 38 feet deep. They are the
largest steam-ships that have ever carried the American flag. It is
confidently believed in America, that the running time from Hong Kong
to San Francisco, viâ Yokohama, by these vessels will be reduced to
within twenty days; and they are guaranteed by the builder, under a
heavy penalty, to make fourteen and a half knots per hour. The _City of
Pekin_, on her trial trip, made fifteen knots an hour, with fifty-three
revolutions per minute and 57 lbs. of steam. This company has now in
course of construction another three steamers similar in size; all
are being built of _iron_ at Chester, Pa., U.S. Each vessel will have
capacity for 800 passengers, and 3000 measurement tons of freight.
[161] The advantages of this system of trussing are described by
a practical authority, as follows: “Running fore and aft, and
constituting the frame of the sides of the ship, are two arched trusses
of wood and iron, of the most ingenious construction. The vertical
depth, from the crown of the truss down to the level of the keel, is
about 53 feet. In the truss is also interwoven a counter arch, the
trusses, therefore, not only prevent the sinking of the two extremities
and rising of the middle, but they likewise prevent any rising of
the extremities, and sinking of the middle of the ship, and thus
effectually prevent any tendency to bend or break in the direction
up or down in a fore and aft vertical plane; and, by a most perfect
system of lateral trussing interwoven with the tiers of beams, she is
prevented from bending or breaking in the direction of a horizontal
plane, running fore and aft through the ship. Where strain by tension
or pulling is exerted, wrought iron is to be used, and where thrusts
or compression is exerted, wood is used, and where both compression
and extension are felt, wood and iron together are used.”—Address by
Captain T. J. Cram, delivered at the Board of Trade Room, Philadelphia,
July 11th, 1860.
[162] So far as regards the stability of the proposed vessel, Captain
Cram, who was a member of the United States’ Corps of Topographical
Engineers, remarks, in the lecture on her, delivered in 1860 at
Philadelphia, as follows: “She is to be a four-storey ship. Commencing
at the bottom and going upwards we have the first storey, a hold, 16
feet high in the clear, with ample room for the machinery, boilers,
and coals, and for a large quantity of freight besides. All this great
weight of engines, boilers, coals, and dead weight freight, which is to
be stowed in the very bottom of the ship, will act as ballast placed
in the right position to insure stability and to relieve the ship
from that dangerous topheaviness usually observed in many sea-going
steamers.”
[163] In 1833, Mr. Randall designed and built the _Wisconsin_, 218
feet in length and 38 feet in width, at Detroit, Michigan, and ran
her successfully, under his own command, through three of the lakes
between Buffalo and Chicago, carrying freight and passengers, in spite
of strong head winds, on round trips of 2000 miles, averaging a speed
quite as great as the _maximum_ contemplated many years afterwards
by the projectors of the _Great Eastern_. In 1845 he designed and
navigated in the same trade the _Empire_ of 251 feet in length, with
a beam of 38 feet, at an average speed of 16 statute miles per hour.
Soon afterwards the _City of Buffalo_ and the _Western Metropolis_,
constructed according to his design, were sent afloat. They were
sister ships, each 340 feet in length with a beam of 42 feet, and far
in advance of any ship England had then afloat, while their draught
of water, when laden, was only 9½ feet. By a report which appeared
in the _Cleveland Herald_ (U.S.) [and there is no reason to doubt
its accuracy], the trip between Buffalo and Cleveland was made at an
average speed of 21 miles an hour by the _Metropolis_, while the _City
of Buffalo_ made a similar voyage, averaging still greater speed in the
ordinary course of trade. Nor were Mr. Randall’s practical experiments
in vessels of similar model and design confined to the lakes, for he
commanded the _Yankee Blade_, a vessel of still larger dimensions, with
a draft of 11 feet of water, on her voyage from New York to California
round Cape Horn, encountering, successfully, a gale in which many
vessels foundered; afterwards, he continued to ply with her for some
years on the station between San Francisco and Panama.
CHAPTER IV.
Struggle between Great Britain and United States for the
Atlantic carrying trade—English shipowners cleave to
Protection—“Baltimore clippers” and “American liners”—The
_Savannah_, the first American Atlantic steamer, 1819—The
_Curaçoa_, 1829—The _Royal William_, 1833, from Quebec—The
_Sirius_ and _Great Western_, 1838—Successful voyages of these
vessels—Details of _Great Western_—The _Royal William_, second
of that name, the first steam-ship from Liverpool, 1838, followed
by the _Liverpool_—Origin of the Cunard Company—Contract for
conveyance of mails—Conditions—Names and particulars of the
first steamers in this service—The _Britannia_—Comparative
results of different vessels—Building (1839) and loss (1841)
of the _President_—Building of the _Great Britain_ in
1843—Advantages of iron ships—American auxiliary screw steamer
_Massachusetts_, 1845—American line of steamers to Europe,
1847—First ocean race won by the English—Not satisfied with
Cunard line, the Americans determine to start one of their
own—Reasons for so doing—American shipowners complain justly
of the “Protective” policy of their own Government—Nevertheless
adopted—Collins line established—Original terms of
subsidy—Dimensions of their steamers—Mr. Faron’s visit to
England—Details of the build of these vessels—Engines—Frame
sustaining engines and dead weight—Cost of steamers greatly
increased by demand for increased speed—Further details of
competing lines—Speed obtained and cost—Great competition,
1850-1852—Results of it.
[Sidenote: Struggle between England and the United States for the
Atlantic carrying trade.]
Having furnished a general outline of the rise and progress of
propulsion by steam on the rivers, coasts, and lakes of the United
States of America, and traced its advance in Great Britain to the
period when the superiority of the screw over the paddle-wheel, and
of iron over wood, had come to be generally acknowledged, I shall
now ask my readers to accompany me while I endeavour to describe the
great contest between these two countries for the carrying trade of
the Atlantic. It is a grand story to tell, one far more worthy of
record than the wars for maritime supremacy between Rome and Carthage,
or than, perhaps, some wars of more recent times which, without any
apparently useful object, have stained land and sea with the blood
alike of the victor and the vanquished, rendering desolate many a once
happy home.
The war I have now to relate was a far nobler conflict, consisting
as it did in the struggle between the genius, scientific skill, and
industry of the people of two great nations, commenced, too, and,
continued throughout without bloodshed and with a fair field, neither
country having, in the direct trade, any special legislative advantages.
[Sidenote: English shipowners cleave to Protection.]
Though the Americans still retain the whole of their river, lake, and
coasting trade, including even the distant voyage between New York
and California, for the immediate benefit of their own shipping, the
vessels of both nations conduct on equal terms the intercourse between
the mother-countries, and have done so for more than half a century.
But when, towards the close of the War of Independence, the struggle
for supremacy commenced, the shipping of both England and America were,
in all branches of their maritime commerce, under the leading-strings
of their respective legislators. England would not then allow American
vessels to trade with most of her vast possessions and, while thus
nursing her shipowners, prevented the mass of her people from deriving
the advantages invariably flowing from a natural and wholesome
competition. Nor did she, indeed, confer any real benefit on this
favoured class: on the contrary, she taught them to lean on Protection,
instead of depending on their own skill and industry. The consequences
were apparent in even the earlier results of this struggle. Having
ample fields for employment exclusively their own, English shipowners
did not enter with their wonted energy, into the direct carrying trade
between their own country and America, which was so rapidly developed
after the Americans had become independent; they remained satisfied
with those branches of commerce expressly secured to them by law, just
as the boy too frequently does who, receiving a small patrimony by his
parents, cares not to exert himself to increase it and, consequently,
leaves others not so highly favoured, to surpass him in the race of
competition for wealth and independence. Thus the shipowners of Great
Britain did not care to continue their vessels in the trade with
America in a competition, on equal terms, with those of that country,
especially when they found they would have to produce a superior class
of vessel and to use extra exertions, to make this trade pay as well as
did their protected branches of oversea commerce without the additional
trouble of “improvements.” It was otherwise with the shipowners of the
United States, for there was then no other branch of oversea trade
where the laws of nations allowed them to compete on equal terms with
foreign vessels.
[Sidenote: “Baltimore clippers,” and “American liners.”]
Although possessing the advantage of vast forests of timber for the
construction of their ships, the American shipbuilders were obliged
to import their iron[164] from Great Britain, their hemp from Russia,
and many other articles necessary for the equipment of their vessels
from other and distant countries; they did not, therefore, especially
as skilled labour was higher at home than in Europe, engage in the
vigorous though peaceful struggle, I am about to describe, with any
special advantages, but, being equal in energy and industry, they had
the incalculable advantage of being obliged to depend on themselves.
They, consequently, set to work to construct that description of
merchant-vessel likely to yield the most remunerative returns, adopting
the best mechanical contrivances within their reach, so as to reduce
navigation to the smallest cost consistent with safety and efficiency;
and the world soon saw the results of their labours in their celebrated
“Baltimore clippers” and the still more celebrated “American liners,”
which for a considerable period almost monopolised the carrying trade
between Great Britain and the States.
Yet, strange to say, though the superiority of the merchant-vessels
of the United States soon became only too apparent, scarcely any
improvements were adopted by Great Britain, or indeed, by any other
nation, until wiser statesmen than had hitherto guided the councils of
this country swept away the whole paraphernalia of her Navigation Laws,
and left her shipowners to rely entirely on their own resources.
I have already shown that this superiority consisted mainly in the
fact that American ships could sail faster and carry more cargo,
in proportion to their registered tonnage, than those of their
competitors; but their improvements did not rest here. In considering
the current expenses of a merchantman, manual labour is one of the most
important items, and, herein, our competitors, by means of improved
blocks and various other mechanical appliances, so materially reduced
the number of hands that twenty seamen in an American sailing-ship
could do as much work, and probably with more ease to themselves, than
thirty in a British vessel of similar size. With such ships we failed
successfully to compete; and although we have since far surpassed them
in ocean steam navigation, the Americans were the first to despatch a
steamer, for trading purposes, across the Atlantic.
[Sidenote: The _Savannah_, the first American Atlantic steamer, 1819.]
In 1791, when the steam-boat was in its infancy—indeed, when it was
hardly known—Mr. Fitch[165] of Windsor, Connecticut, boldly predicted
that sailing-vessels would soon be superseded in the carrying trade
between Great Britain and America by steamers, though it was not till
1819, that the American steam-ship _Savannah_, of 300 tons, arrived
at Liverpool from Savannah, Georgia, in thirty-one days, partly
steaming and partly sailing;[166] but as her horse-power was too
small, while she was otherwise unsuited for ocean navigation, she did
not prove commercially remunerative. The questionable success of the
_Savannah_, combined with the fact that about this time, and for some
years afterwards, men of science[167] were demonstrating, at least to
their own satisfaction, that the navigation of the Atlantic by steam
power alone, was the dream of a visionary, prevented, for ten years,
the renewal of this bold experiment, the American sailing-vessels
continuing to retain the bulk of this carrying trade.
[Sidenote: The _Curaçoa_, 1829; the _Royal William_, 1833, from Quebec.]
[Sidenote: The _Sirius_ and _Great Western_, 1838.]
The next step in Transatlantic steam navigation was the dispatch, in
1829, of an English-built vessel, the _Curaçoa_, of 350 tons and 100
horse-power, which made several successful voyages between Holland
and the Dutch West Indies. On the 18th of August 1833, a steam-ship
named the _Royal William_[168] sailed from Quebec and arrived at
Gravesend on the 11th of September, having been detained three days at
Nova Scotia on her way to England. But it was not until 1838 that the
practicability of profitably employing vessels propelled by steam on
an Atlantic voyage was fully tested. In that year, an advertisement
appeared announcing that the “steam-ship Sirius, Lieutenant Roberts,
R.N., Commander, would leave London for New York on Wednesday, the
28th of March, calling at Cork Harbour, and would start from thence
on the 2nd of April, returning from New York on the 1st of May.”
Thus a company of merchants was found sanguine enough to test the
practicability of regular steam navigation with the United States, by
advertising, not merely the days of sailing from England, but, also,
those of arrival and departure from America. Circumstances, however,
delayed the departure of the _Sirius_ until the morning of the 4th of
April, when she started, at ten o’clock, with ninety-four passengers.
Although not built for Transatlantic navigation, having been previously
employed by the St. George Steam Navigation Company in their trade
between London and Cork, the _Sirius_ was much superior in size to
either of the three vessels which had previously made the voyage, being
about 700 tons register with engines of 320 horse-power, constructed by
Thomas Wingate, of Glasgow.[169]
But the _Sirius_ was soon surpassed by the _Great Western_, which
three days afterwards (the 7th of April, 1838) followed her with goods
and passengers for New York. As the _Great Western_, the marvel of
the period, was the first steam-ship specially constructed for the now
vast trade between Great Britain and the United States, it may interest
my readers to know that she was built of wood by Mr. Patterson, of
Bristol, according to his own design, and that her dimensions were 212
feet in length between the perpendiculars, 35 feet 4 inches breadth
of beam, and 23 feet 2 inches depth of hold; registering 1340 tons,
builders’ measurement.[170] Her engines (on the side lever principle)
were 440 horse-power, constructed by Messrs. Maudslay, Sons, and Field,
of London, having cylinders 73½ inches in diameter and 7 feet stroke,
making twelve to fifteen revolutions per minute.[171] She was commanded
by Captain Hosken.
In the interval between the sailing of the _Sirius_ and the _Great
Western_ and their arrival at New York, much doubt prevailed as to
the probability of their accomplishing the voyage in safety, and this
uncertainty was increased by the arrival at ports in Great Britain, of
vessels from America, without having encountered either of them; it was
forgotten for the moment, that, in the immensity of the ocean, vessels
may easily miss each other although traversing the same zones. They
were however at length spoken with by the _Westminster_, an American
sailing packet, the _Sirius_ on the 21st April, within six hours’ sail
of her destination, and the _Great Western_ on the 22nd. The former
reached New York on that day after a passage of seventeen days; the
latter completed the passage in two days’ less time, having arrived
(without any accident in either case), on the 23rd of that month.
[Sidenote: Successful voyages of these vessels.]
The safe arrival of these ships at New York was hailed with immense
acclamation, thousands of persons having gathered early in the morning
to bid them welcome, and, as this, too, is a matter of historical
interest, I shall trouble my readers with the substance of the
accounts of their arrival as they appeared, at the time, in the public
journals.[172]
[Sidenote: Details of the _Great Western_.]
The _Sirius_ sailed on her homeward voyage on the afternoon of the
1st of May, her advertised time, and the _Great Western_ on the 7th
of that month. The former reached England on the 18th of May, the
latter on the 22nd, being respectively, sixteen and fourteen days
on the passage. The whole distance run from Bristol to New York, by
the _Great Western_, was 3125 knots,[173] her average speed being
208 miles each day, or 8·2 per hour, consuming 655 tons of coal. Her
return passage was accomplished at an average of 213 knots each day,
or close upon 9 knots an hour, with a consumption of 392 tons of coal
(the difference of consumption arising no doubt in a great measure from
the prevalence on her homeward passage of westerly winds); her average
daily consumption on this occasion varied from 27 tons, with expansive
gear in action, to 32 tons without it.[174]
As the _Sirius_ was not intended for the American trade she made only
the one voyage across the Atlantic and, on her return to Liverpool, was
dispatched to London to open up steam communication between that city
and St. Petersburg, where she was for some years successfully employed.
[Sidenote: _Royal William_, the second of that name, the first
steamship from Liverpool, 1838.]
But another steam-vessel was soon engaged to take the place of
the _Sirius_. On the 6th of July, 1838, a paragraph in the public
journals[175] announced the interesting fact that the enterprising
merchants of Liverpool, who now hold the great bulk of the
Anglo-American trade in their hands, had dispatched their first
steam-ship, the _Royal William_, though the second of that name, to New
York.[176]
Although the practicability of steam navigation across the troubled
waters of the Atlantic had now been triumphantly established, other
steam-ships having followed the _Royal William_ in rapid succession,
many years elapsed before the magnificent sailing-vessels which
American energy and skill had created, were driven from the trade.
[Sidenote: followed by the _Liverpool_.]
In October 1838, Sir John Tobin, a well-known merchant of Liverpool,
seeing the importance of the intercourse now rapidly increasing between
the old and new worlds, dispatched on his own account, a steamer to
New York. She was built at Liverpool, after which place she was named,
and made the passage outwards in sixteen and a half days. It was now
clearly shown that the service could be performed, not merely with
profit to those who engaged in it, but with a regularity and speed
which the finest description of sailing-vessels could not be expected
to accomplish. If any doubts still existed on these important points
the second voyage of the _Great Western_ set them at rest, she having
on this occasion accomplished the outward passage in fourteen days
sixteen hours, and the homeward passage in twelve days fourteen hours,
bringing with her the advices of the fastest American sailing-ships
which had sailed from New York long before her; and thus proving the
necessity of having the mails in future conveyed by steamers.
But this idea so far from being new was coexistent with the
introduction of steam itself for the purposes of navigation; nor indeed
was it the idea of any one person interested in the trade between Great
Britain and the United States of America, though one man set himself
more zealously to carry it into practical and continuous operation than
any one else.
[Sidenote: Origin of the Cunard Company, 1838.]
So far back as 1830, Mr. Samuel Cunard of Halifax, N.S., contemplated
the establishment of a mail service between the two continents, his
original plan, which he followed up, being to run steamers from
Liverpool to Halifax (that harbour presenting unusual facilities for
the reception of steam-vessels) and thence to Boston in the United
States.
About that time the Government of Bombay which had just launched
the _Hugh Lindsay_, and the East India Company were considering the
introduction of larger steam-vessels for their naval service, and,
as Mr. Cunard was personally known to Mr. Melvill, then secretary to
that Company, he placed himself in communication with that gentleman,
making known to him his views, and requesting to be favoured with
an introduction to any shipbuilder in this country or other persons
likely to join him in carrying out his project. Mr. Melvill furnished
him with a letter to Mr. Robert Napier, the well-known engineer and
shipbuilder of Glasgow, and through him Mr. Cunard was led to discuss
this important undertaking with Mr. George Burns of that city, and
his friend and correspondent Mr. David MacIver of Liverpool.[177]
Both those gentlemen entertained with favour the proposals of Mr.
Cunard, and, subsequently, agreed to co-operate with him in finding
the requisite capital and ships, should he be enabled to secure the
contract for the conveyance of the Transatlantic mails.
[Sidenote: Contract for the conveyance of the mails.]
The regularity of the passages of the _Great Western_ satisfied the
British Government as to the superiority of steam over sailing-packets,
and, in October 1838, the Admiralty issued advertisements for tenders
for the conveyance of the North American mails by steamers. Much to
the annoyance of the _Great Western_ Company, who did not contemplate
any serious opposition to their offer, the tender from Mr. Cunard,
as the lowest and, in many other respects the most favourable in its
conditions for the public, was accepted, the contract being entered
into in the name of Samuel Cunard, George Burns, and David MacIver; and
from this sprung the vast private maritime undertaking now popularly
known as the Cunard Company.
[Sidenote: Conditions.]
The original conditions of the contract were that, for the sum of
55,000_l._ per annum, Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and MacIver should supply
three suitable steam-ships and perform two voyages a month from
Liverpool to the United States, leaving England at certain periods;
but, afterwards, it was thought desirable to have fixed days in America
as well as in England for departure. By a subsequent arrangement, four
boats were required by the Admiralty to be provided by Mr. Cunard
instead of three, subject to certain other conditions, for which the
subsidy was increased to somewhere about 81,000_l._[178] per annum.
[Illustration: THE “BRITANNIA.”]
[Sidenote: Names and particulars of first steamers in this mail
service.]
[Sidenote: The _Britannia_.]
For the performance of this contract Mr. Cunard and his co-partners
placed on the line four steam-ships[179] in every way adapted for
the service so far as the knowledge of the period extended, and from
the commencement of the company until the present day the Cunard
Company have without exception supplied vessels greatly exceeding the
stipulated power required by their postal contracts. The whole of the
first four vessels were constructed of wood on the Clyde by its leading
shipbuilders, and the engines were supplied by Mr. Robert Napier, long
celebrated in his profession. They were nearly alike in size and power,
and, that my readers may compare them with the steam-vessels of to-day
a drawing of the _Britannia_ (which commenced the service by sailing
from Liverpool on 4th July, 1840) is furnished (page 182); the
particulars of her construction, in all essential details, are likewise
herewith supplied.[180]
These vessels commenced the mail service in 1840 between Liverpool,
Halifax, and Boston, performing it with great regularity out and home
at an average speed of about 8½ knots an hour, and giving complete
satisfaction to the public on both sides of the Atlantic; indeed, when
the _Britannia_, on her first voyage, was frozen up in the harbour of
Boston, the inhabitants of that city, at their own expense, cut her
through the ice into clear water for a distance of seven miles. (See
illustration, page 182.)
In 1844, Mr. Cunard brought into the service (partly in pursuance of
his contract) the _Cambria_ and _Hibernia_, each of 500 horse-power,
and of 1422 tons, with an average speed of 9¼ knots.
In 1848, the _America_, _Niagara_, _Europe_, and _Canada_ followed, so
as to meet the increasing wants of the trade and the ever increasing
demands of the public for greater speed and improved accommodation.
Each of these vessels was about 1820 tons and of 680 horse-power, with
an average speed of 10¼ knots an hour.
The success of the Cunard Company, created, as might have been
anticipated, much jealousy among the shareholders of the _Great
Western_ Steam-ship Company, who complained of a monopoly having been
granted to their injury and to that of other owners of steam-ships
engaged in the trade, or who were desirous of entering it. Although
no unfairness was alleged against Mr. Cunard and his partners, and no
valid charges could be raised against the manner in which the mail
services were performed, the _Great Western_ Company had sufficient
influence to obtain a parliamentary inquiry. They asked it, first, on
the broad grounds (which have since been frequently raised, and now
with much more show of reason than then), that the public was taxed for
a service from which one company alone derived the advantage, and which
could be equally well done and, at less expense, if mails were sent by
all steamers engaged in the trade, each receiving a certain amount of
percentage on the letters they carried; and, secondly, because their
company had been the first in the trade and had incurred great expense
and risk in developing steam communication between Great Britain and
the United States of America. But, after full inquiry, the committee
reported that the arrangements concluded with Messrs. Cunard, Burns,
and MacIver, were on terms more advantageous than any others which
could then be made, and that the service had been most efficiently
performed.[181]
[Sidenote: Comparative results of different vessels.]
Indeed, it was clearly shown that even the first boats the Cunard
Company ran between England and America were superior in power and
speed to any others similarly employed,[182] and this superiority they
long maintained. In the calculations made of the relative power of the
steam-vessels thus employed, an average westerly passage across the
Atlantic was taken, and an endeavour made to place these vessels in
the order of speed. The _Oriental_ and _Great Western_ were pronounced
about equal, as also the _President_, and the _Great Liverpool_ before
the alterations were made in her. It should however be remarked
that, though the proportion of power and tonnage was the same in the
case of the _Oriental_ and _British Queen_, it was not questioned
that, on every point, especially when the vessels were deeply laden,
the _Oriental_ had the advantage. It may also be mentioned that the
_Liverpool_ was, after her alterations, 393 tons larger than formerly;
and, though her proportion of power was consequently diminished, her
speed and weatherly qualities were materially increased,[183] showing
that more depended _on the form and construction of the vessel_ than on
having a large engine power.
[Sidenote: Building (1839) and loss (1841) of the _President_.]
The _President_, built by Messrs. Curling and Young for the British and
American Steam Navigation Company, was launched on the 7th December,
1839, with great _éclat_, but her career at sea was very brief, and
her end most melancholy. It may be summed up in the few words that,
when due from New York, in April 1841, she did not make her appearance;
tremendous weather having been experienced in the Atlantic, with
unusual quantities of ice in very low latitudes, the most intense
anxiety arose both in the mercantile world and among the relatives
of the passengers as to the cause of her detention. The arrival of
other ships from the same port increased the public anxiety. For a
considerable period the appearance of every large vessel was hailed as
the missing steamer, and a thousand rumours prevailed as to her wreck
in various parts of the world. The hopes long entertained that her
engines had broken down and that she had sailed for the West Indies or
elsewhere to refit, proved fallacious, while the agony of the parties
interested in her was kept alive by the most conflicting speculations
as to the cause and certainty of a catastrophe. The _President_ was
never again heard of, nor was any trace of her wreck ever discovered.
This calamitous event, however it affected the interests of the company
of Bristol merchants to whom she belonged, did not check the ardour of
the people of England for steam navigation across the Atlantic.
The _Great Western_ Steamship Company having, so far back as 1838,
resolved to build a second ship much larger than their first, aimed
at realizing in her the greatest improvements the art of naval
construction could then command. Nor were they disappointed in their
expectations, the _Great Britain_ when launched being not merely much
the largest, but also the finest vessel up to that period built for
ocean steam navigation.[184]
[Sidenote: Building of the _Great Britain_ iron-ship, 1843.]
In proportion to all other vessels hitherto constructed of iron, the
dimensions of the _Great Britain_ were altogether colossal and, at the
time, she excited quite as much public interest as that vast leviathan,
the _Great Eastern_, did at a later period. She was built at Bristol,
and her lines were furnished by Mr. Patterson of that place, who
had planned and constructed the _Great Western_. Nor was the public
interest in her at all lessened when it became known that, though
originally intended for a paddle-wheel steamer, her builder had boldly
resolved to adopt the screw, then comparatively little known as a means
of propulsion.
[Sidenote: Advantages of iron ships.]
As there were still many unbelievers in the suitability of iron, for
the construction of sea-going vessels, and still more who had no faith
whatever in the value of the screw, this second step in advance on the
part of the directors of the _Great Western_ Steamship Company led to
much discussion among scientific men, and created many evil forebodings
as to the ultimate fate of the _Great Britain_, all of which she,
however, falsified. On her passage from Bristol to the Thames, though
she encountered very severe weather, she braved the storm in a manner
(see following illustration,) which ought to have silenced for ever
the opponents of iron as a suitable material for the construction of
vessels of every description, as well as those men of science who
still, and for many years afterwards, maintained that the screw,
under all circumstances, was an inferior motive power to that of the
paddle-wheel.
[Illustration: STEAMER “GREAT BRITAIN” OFF LUNDY ISLAND.]
So great, indeed, was the interest felt in this vessel that, on her
arrival in the Thames, Her Majesty and Prince Albert with great numbers
of the nobility, and thousands of other persons, paid her a visit. Nor
was her fame confined to England, forming as she did the subject of
discussion among the learned and scientific societies of Europe, which
was taken up with unusual fervour in the United States of America when
it became known that she was to be employed as one of the Transatlantic
steamers destined to eclipse the still celebrated American sailing
clippers.[185]
[Sidenote: American auxiliary screw-steamer _Massachusetts_, 1845.]
Though the Americans continued with undaunted courage their lines of
sailing packets, every year, increasing their dimension, and improving
by every possible means their speed and seagoing qualities, they saw
the most valuable portions of their trade (first-class passengers and
fine goods) passing into the hands of British steamers. Resolving
if possible to maintain their position, they, with that genius, and
ready adaptation of means to an end peculiarly their own, fitted a
steam-engine into one of their sailing-vessels, and were therefore the
first to apply the auxiliary screw to ocean navigation, as they had
been the first to cross the Atlantic with steam. They knew that when
the wind was strong and favourable, their celebrated ships could, with
their sails alone, surpass in speed any ocean steamers then afloat,
and they thought that if they could introduce, at a moderate cost and
with comparatively small current expenses, a steam-engine to propel
their sailing-packets when the wind failed, or when entering port
or passing through narrow channels, they would be enabled to hold
their ground against their now formidable rivals. Consequently, they
sent forth, in the autumn of 1845, their auxiliary steam-packet ship
_Massachusetts_,[186] of which the following is an illustration.
[Illustration: AUXILIARY SCREW-STEAMER “MASSACHUSETTS.”]
From a description given of her in the _Mechanics’ Magazine_ of January
1846, she appears to have been 161 feet in length on deck, 31 feet 9
inches in breadth of beam, and 20 feet depth of hold from maindeck. She
was 751 tons, O.M., and had a full poop extending to the mainmast, in
which there was accommodation for thirty-five first-class passengers.
Her enterprising owners (Mr. Forbes and others),[187] did not
contemplate competition so far as regards speed with the steamers
then employed on the Atlantic service, but by using the screw as an
auxiliary they hoped to accomplish the voyage with so much greater
rapidity than an ordinary sailing-ship as to recompense them for
the cost of the machinery and the cargo space which it occupied. By
insuring greater regularity they also hoped to command a moderate share
of the passenger traffic, and of that description of goods which from
their nature would not allow so high a rate of freight to be paid as
the owners of steam-ships required to cover the greatly enhanced cost
of navigation. The passages of the _Massachusetts_, as compared[188]
with those of sailing-ships which left Liverpool before and after her,
showed a considerable saving in time.
Her motive power consisted of a condensing engine, constructed by
Messrs. Hogg and Delamater of New York, designed by Captain Ericsson
and fitted with his screw, the blades of which turned up out of
the water when the vessel was under sail alone. The engine had two
cylinders working nearly at right angles, each 3 feet stroke and 26
inches diameter. There were two boilers, named “waggon-boilers,”
each 14 feet long, 7 feet wide, and 9 feet high, with a furnace to
each boiler. For the purpose of raising steam quickly there was a
blowing-engine and blower, the power of her engine being equal to 170
horses, sufficient to drive the ship about 9 statute miles an hour
in smooth water and during calms, with a consumption of 9 tons of
anthracite coal per day. The whole of the machinery, with the boilers,
coal bunkers, &c., which were fitted in the after portion of the lower
hold, occupied a space of one-tenth the cubic contents of the ship. Her
propeller was made of composition metal, and could be raised out of the
water when the steam-power was not required. Its shaft passed through
the ship, close to the stern post on the port side and rested in a
socket which was bolted to the stern post, and further supported by a
massive brace above. Her entire cost was 16,000_l._ complete in all
respects with machinery.
[Sidenote: American line of steamers to Europe, 1847.]
[Sidenote: First ocean race won by the English.]
But even the _Massachusetts_[189] did not meet the wishes of the
American people. They saw their most valuable maritime commerce
slowly but surely passing away from them, and though not yet prepared
to run steamers to compete on the direct Atlantic line with British
enterprise, they determined to secure at least a portion of the
first-class passenger and fine goods trade with Europe. Consequently,
they established a line of steam-ships of their own to run between New
York and Bremen, calling at Southampton, and in June 1847 started
their first ship, the _Washington_, for Southampton on the same day
that the _Britannia_, belonging to the Cunard Company, sailed from
New York for Liverpool. This was the first race between American and
British steamers, and though the _Britannia_ did not require “to run by
the deep mines, and put in more coal” to beat the _Washington_ as the
_New York Herald_ anticipated, the other prophecy of the editor of that
enterprising journal has been now remarkably fulfilled.[190]
The _Britannia_ won the race by two full days. The _Washington_,[191]
of which the following is an illustration (though the Spithead
correspondent of the London _Times_ does not give a very glowing
account of her appearance as she passed before him on the waters of
the Solent[192]), was welcomed on her arrival at the port of Bremen
with great rejoicings; the burgomaster proceeding on board in state to
invite the captain to a banquet in the Town Hall, specially prepared
for him by the Senate.
[Illustration: STEAMER “WASHINGTON.”]
Hitherto the American Government had been opposed in principle to
all subsidies, but the vast results which accrued to the material
interests of the United States from the extensive employment of steam
navigation, effected concurrently a great change in the policy of the
Federal Legislature and soon rendered it necessary to subsidize vessels
of their own for the conveyance of their mails to Great Britain. If,
before the period of the introduction of steam, Congress had exhibited
an undue parsimony in providing funds in any form for their national
navy, it is certain that a more liberal policy now prevailed.
[Sidenote: Not satisfied with the Cunard line, the Americans determine
to start one of their own.]
Ocean steam navigation was now adopted by the Americans for the joint
purpose of extending and advancing the commercial and other interests
of the country, and more especially to provide a marine force which
might be easily made available for the protection “of American rights;”
and the attainment of this two-fold object was the motive which, in
the opinion of Congress, justified the application of public funds
in aid of private enterprise. Nor was the argument, once so popular
in England, overlooked that the money so advanced would ultimately be
reimbursed by saving the expense of a standing fleet to the extent of
the number of the vessels subsidized in the conveyance of the mails,
while encouraging commerce and the arts during the time of peace.
[Sidenote: Reasons for so doing.]
The Americans also now complained (they had not thought of it before)
that the ocean mails along their southern coasts had been placed in
the hands of foreign carriers,[194] sustained and protected by the
British Government, under the forms of contracts to carry the British
mails; while the Cunard line, between Liverpool and Boston viâ Halifax,
constituted the only medium of regular steam navigation between
the United States and Europe. In this way it was alleged that the
commercial interests of the United States were on one side entirely
at the mercy of British steamers which plied along the southern
coast of the United States, entering their ports at pleasure, and
thereby acquiring an intimate knowledge of the soundings and other
peculiarities of the American harbours, a process which might prove
highly injurious to America in the event of a war with Great Britain:
while, on the other, danger was incurred by a foreign line of steamers
carrying the ocean mails, under the liberal encouragement of the
British Government, and thus threatening to monopolize by steam the
mail postage and freight between the two countries.
Under these somewhat hazardous circumstances to the commercial and
political interests of the United States, it became necessary to decide
whether American commerce should continue to be “thus tributary to
British maritime supremacy,” or an American medium of communication
should be established through the intervention of the Federal
Government in the form of loans in aid of individual enterprise. The
Americans now felt that unless they departed from their previous
policy, they could not contend successfully against the Cunard line of
packets, which received a large subsidy from the English Government.
It was humiliating, they also argued, to their pride as a great
maritime people, that foreigners and commercial rivals should wrest
from them the virtual monopoly of ocean steam conveyance, especially
between the United States and Europe, as well as between the West
Indies and South America. But, in reviewing this question, their
statesmen and politicians might have perceived without prejudice, that
England has acted upon the same liberal policy in furnishing means
to establish ocean lines to other parts of the world where American
rivalry has no place; therefore, the paragraph about the “Queen of the
Ocean levying her imposts upon the industry and intelligence of all
the nations that frequent the highway of the world,”[195] is merely a
rhetorical flight, with no foundation in fact, apparently introduced
into their official reports in order to reconcile the ignorant people
of the Western States to the payment of a tax for services performed,
by which they would be but indirectly and remotely benefited.
[Sidenote: American ship-owners complain justly of the “Protective”
policy of their own Government.]
Moreover, it was urged, in favour of the principle of subsidies, that
the American sailing packets, though undoubtedly vessels of unrivalled
beauty and swiftness, were fast losing the most valuable portion of
their trade through the competition of steamers under a foreign flag;
but, so far from this being an argument in favour of subsidizing
vessels of their own of a similar description, the shipowners of New
York and Boston and in all the leading American ports, who held the
sailing-ships as a property, naturally complained that the United
States’ Government should improperly interfere by a protective system,
which would inflict a double injury upon them, and insisted that such
matters should be left entirely to individual enterprise, which, in
their opinion, becomes paralyzed under the effects of Government
patronage bestowed upon some to the exclusion of others. To all these,
and similar complaints from other quarters, the Government answered
that the system was deemed to be not only calculated to awaken and
reward the enterprise of American citizens, but avoid the expense of
keeping on hand, in time of peace, a large and useless military marine,
which could only be preserved in a condition of efficiency by a vast
annual outlay of public money. The Government therefore came, perhaps
reluctantly, to the opinion that these ocean facilities should exist
through their intervention, more especially as they were beyond the
capabilities of private means.
But apart altogether from any of the reasons assigned in favour of
subsidizing a line of mail steamers of their own, the national pride of
the Americans had been touched by the success of the Cunard and other
lines of steam-ships frequenting their ports, or trading, if not along
their coasts, at least on seas they considered their own, and they
attributed this success (not altogether without reason) to the annual
grants for mail services from the British Crown.
Nor is it surprising that their national pride should have been
touched. American genius and skill had sent forth steamers to trade
on their coasts, lakes, and rivers which were marvels of naval
architecture, unsurpassed in speed and in the splendour of their
equipment—their sailing packets, as we have seen, were the finest
the world had then produced, while their perfection in the art of
shipbuilding had even reached so high a point that they constructed
steamers to ascend rivers where there was hardly depth of water for
an Indian canoe; indeed it was proverbially said, in honour of their
skill in the art, that their vessels would traverse valleys if only
moistened by the morning dews. No wonder they should have felt annoyed
at the progress of British shipping in those branches of maritime
commerce they had long considered peculiarly their own.
[Sidenote: Collins line established.]
It was under such circumstances as these that Congress resolved to make
their postal arrangements altogether independent of foreign and rival
agencies. They had subsidized to advantage a line of steamers between
New York and Chagres, _viâ_ New Orleans and its auxiliaries; and had
repossessed themselves of the power of transport of their mails for
Mexico, South America, and their possessions in the Pacific, which, in
consequence of the discoveries of gold in California, had become of no
ordinary importance. As the steamers for this line were of the highest
class, possessing great speed and superior passenger accommodation,
and capable, besides, of being converted at a small expense into
war-steamers, they estimated that similar successful results would
attend the establishment of another line of steam-ships of their own
between New York and Liverpool.
There was no difficulty in finding men, whose experience and practical
knowledge rendered them eminently qualified to prepare and conduct a
mail service across the Atlantic to compete with the Cunard Company,
and Mr. E. K. Collins, of New York, who undertook the responsible
task of establishing the line which bore his name, was perhaps more
competent than any other man for the work; relying as he could on the
experience gained in his previously successful establishment of the
Collins line of sailing packets between Liverpool and New York. To
ensure the most perfect description of vessels, he nevertheless sought
the assistance of the most competent shipbuilders and engineers, who
had not only the proper knowledge of marine engines and boilers, but
who, having also seen their operation at sea, would be able to avoid
previous errors, and to construct vessels and machinery well fitted to
vie with the best that England could produce.
[Sidenote: Original terms of subsidy.]
When, therefore, Mr. Collins and other American citizens, who had
associated themselves with him, offered to enter into a contract with
their Government for the conveyance of its mails between New York and
Liverpool, their proposals were favourably entertained and, in the
sequel, an agreement was entered into with them to perform twenty
voyages in each year, with five first-class steam-vessels; for which
important services Mr. Collins and his colleagues were to receive
$19,250 per voyage.
Immediately the contract was completed, arrangements were entered into
for the construction of four such vessels, to be named the _Arctic_,
_Baltic_, _Atlantic_, and _Pacific_, each to be about 3000 tons
register and of 800 horse-power.
[Sidenote: Dimensions of their steamers.]
These vessels, built chiefly of live oak, were planked with pitch pine
and were in strength equal, if not superior, to any vessels constructed
of wood then afloat. The timbers, which were solid and bolted to each
other, were further strengthened by a lattice work of iron bands,
wood and iron being so united as to derive the greatest advantage
from each: wood for its elasticity, and iron for its greater power of
resistance. They were beautiful models, and could at a small expense
have been easily converted into ships of war. The Arctic, which was
considered the finest of the fleet, familiarly known as the “clipper
of the seas,” was built by Mr. William H. Brown of New York, under the
superintendence of Mr. George Steers, who modelled the famous yacht
_America_. She was 2856 tons register.[196] Her equipment was complete
and of the highest order, as I can testify from inspection, while her
cabin accommodation in comfort and elegance surpassed that of any
merchant-vessel Great Britain then possessed.
“To enter,” exclaims Mr. Bayard, a member of the Senate, “the contest
with England for the supremacy of ocean steam navigation required
talent, energy, and _faith_ of the highest order known to our
countrymen, for to _fail_ would involve a loss not only of the vast
sums necessary to make the effort, but, what is of far more value to
every lover of his country’s reputation, it would insure national
disappointment, more deeply felt from the fact that England had already
been vanquished by our sailing-ships, and gracefully yielded to us
the palm of victory, since more brilliantly illuminated by the yacht
_America_, and the clipper ship _Witch of the Wave_.”
Such were the expectations and warnings of those who guided public
opinion in the United States, when it was resolved to undertake this
great ocean race.
Before giving out the contracts for the machinery, Mr. Collins obtained
from Messrs. Sewell and Faron, chief engineers of the United States’
Navy, full specifications of the engines and boilers the latter had
designed, and subsequently made use of, for the steamers _Arctic_ and
_Baltic_.[197]
[Illustration: STEAMER “ATLANTIC.”]
[Sidenote: Mr. Faron’s visit to England.]
[Sidenote: Details of the build of these vessels.]
At that time it was believed, from the best information that could be
obtained, that the Cunard steamers carried an average boiler pressure
not exceeding 10lbs. to the square inch, and that, to equal them, it
would only be necessary to have for the Collins vessels, cylinders of
90 inches diameter and 9 feet stroke with the same boiler pressure,
although Mr. Sewell (it is understood) originally advocated 95-inch
cylinders. After the contracts were given out to the Novelty and
Allaire Works of New York, Mr. Collins procured permission of the
government to allow Mr. Faron to visit Great Britain and examine
the marine engines and boilers in use there. On his return in the
_Niagara_, he discovered that the safety-valves of that steamer were
weighted with 13lbs. per square inch, and that with every plunge of
the vessel, the valve would open slightly, at once indicating the
pressure was equal to the load on the valve. The moment this was
communicated to Mr. Collins, he conveyed the intelligence to his
engineers, giving a cross section of the _Niagara_ and the dimensions
of her cylinder, with 13lbs. of boiler pressure, together with the
cross sections of the _Atlantic_, and the _Pacific_ then building. The
engineers accordingly recommended that, to _equal_ the Cunard vessel,
the dimensions of the cylinder should be 95 inches diameter and 9 feet
stroke, the size originally suggested by Mr. Sewell, to which Mr.
Collins at once agreed. The engines of the _Arctic_, like those of her
sister vessels, were of the “side-lever” kind, with solid cast iron
beams, and wrought iron columns and braces. The cylinder, air pump,
feed-pumps, shaft-bearing columns, &c., rested upon the bed-plate; the
ordinary parallel motion was used to guide the piston-rod, as in the
British engines, and the motion was communicated to the cranks by the
ordinary arrangement of cross-head, cross-tail, side-rods, and single
connecting-rod.
The most essential difference from the British method was in the steam
and exhaust valves, which were of the “balance poppet” variety, the
steam valve being also used for expansion, and working in the several
vessels, under the following patents:—on Allen’s cut-off in the
_Arctic_ and _Atlantic_; Stevens’s in the _Pacific_; and Sickles’s in
the _Baltic_. These engines were greatly admired at the time.
The _boilers_ of the _Arctic_ were peculiar to the Collins line, and
their merit was principally due to Mr. Faron, who acted as chief
engineer of the company. They were arranged with double furnaces, and
lower water-spaces connected by a row of vertical tubes, around which
the heated gases circulated, with a hanging bridge or plate, which
checked their otherwise rapid flow to the chimney and rendered the
combustion more perfect. The heating surface was principally confined
to the tubes and consequently vertical, the height of the smoke-pipe
above the grates, 75 feet, insured a strong natural draft, and the
proportion of heating to grate surface, was unusually large, being 33¼
to 1. The ratio of evaporation of sea water, during the quick trip of
the _Baltic_ in February 1852, was 8·55 pounds of water per pound of
anthracite.[198]
Mr. Collins, under the advice of his engineer, originally intended to
use fresh water entirely in these boilers, previously condensed from
sea water, and an arrangement was made with J. P. Pierson, the inventor
of the “double vacuum condenser,” to furnish condensers. But the tubes,
which had been manufactured in England, were lost at sea, and the
vessels were equipped without them.
Bituminous coals alone were used until the superior qualities of
anthracite were in several particulars shown to be of great importance
in ocean steamers, when it was determined to use the former only _on
the return trips_; and such became the established practice, resulting
from an extended and careful series of experiments.[199]
The _Pacific_ was a three-decked ship, very high on the water, and
consequently much more comfortable for passengers than the other
vessels; while the straight line of her bows, and freedom from
encumbrances on her upper deck, offered less resistance to the wind.
Her model under the water-line resembled somewhat the river boats;
she had a flat bottom, her immersed section being not far from a
parallelogram. Her bows and stern were formed by nearly plain surfaces,
which, joined together, constituted an angle much more acute than was
considered safe for adoption in ocean navigation some years ago.
[Sidenote: Engines.]
The _Pacific_ was provided with two engines, each supported upon a
large and solid bed-plate 32 feet long, and 9 feet broad, which was
fastened to the keelson and ship’s bottom by bolts of large dimensions
previously fixed in the wood; it was a single casting having a channel
below in which there was a foot valve, and above it the cylinder
bottom, the air-pump seat, and also a great part of the condenser,
through which the side-lever shaft passed: it also had upon it sockets
for the different pieces of the frames. On the cylinder bottom, at the
extremity of the bed-plate, the cylinder itself was bolted, the largest
at that time ever cast: its diameter being 96 inches, calculated for a
stroke of 9 feet, and length, flange to flange, 10 feet 6 inches. The
lower steam-opening being cast with the bed-plate, the upper one alone
belonged to the cylinder. The steam exhaust valves were on the plan
generally adopted in the United States and arranged with Stevens’s “cut
off,” so as to let the steam expand one-half its volume.
The steam passed from the boiler to the upper steam-opening by a large
pipe 2 feet in diameter and about twenty feet long, and after doing its
duty in the cylinder, escaped by the middle of the exhaust side pipe,
and reached the condenser, which was not more than 1 foot distant,
through a pipe of the same section.
The condenser and the reservoir were formed by a single casting inside
which was a partition between them of the same casting. This piece
was ornamented in the same style as the steam-chest, and supported a
beautiful turret used as an air reservoir, which rather resembled an
old castle of the Middle Ages than a steam engine of the nineteenth
century, and gave an imposing appearance to the whole structure. The
steam, arriving in the condenser between two horizontal iron plates,
which were pierced over the whole surface, causing the condensing water
to fall in small streams through them, so as to be soon condensed; then
passing through the foot valve under the condenser, it reached the
air-pump, which was situated on the other side of the condenser.
The condenser was so much elevated that the steam required to make a
vertical descent of 11 feet, mixed with cold water, before reaching
the channel way, thereby furnishing the means of quick condensation
with a condenser of comparatively small size. All the pieces of the
engine, cylinders, levers, connecting rods, &c., were calculated upon
the best rules then known,[200] and the straps, keys, gibs, ribs,
mouldings, &c., were so disposed as to produce the maximum of strength
and security against accidents: but the pre-eminent success was in the
design of the frame.
[Sidenote: Frame sustaining engines and dead weight.]
Any scientific engineer can calculate the thickness of a cylinder or
diameter of a connecting rod necessary to resist the force they have
to resist, but the disposition of the frame becomes difficult when
the action of dead weight, and the various pressures produced by the
working of the engines are complicated through the motion of the ship
herself, which alters their modes of action. The usual practice had
been to sustain the engines by a frame so massive as to present ten
times the strength necessary, and accordingly a useless and costly
weight took permanently the place of cargo: but in the engines of the
_Pacific_, the difficulty was completely overcome: two large hollow
pillow-blocks which sustain the paddle-wheel shafts on each side of
the cranks were supported in each engine by four wrought iron columns
on the forward extremity of the bed plate, the centre of the shaft
being 23 feet above the keelson. The pillow-blocks thus supported were
connected by two strong inclined braces to the cylinder, by means of
solid facings cast with it, on each side of the steam opening. To
maintain this skeleton, a number of braces, small in appearance, were
so disposed as to effect the purpose.
No expense having been spared to render the ships of the Collins
Company complete in all respects, the cost so far exceeded the
estimates that the government found it necessary not only to make
an advance to the company, while the vessels were in course of
construction, but also to relieve them from their obligation of
building a fifth vessel as originally contemplated, and to increase the
subsidy from $19,250 to $33,000 per voyage, or to the sum of $858,000
(about 178,750_l._) per annum. _But increased rates of speed were
required in return._
[Sidenote: Cost of steamers greatly increased by demand for increased
speed.]
There seems an almost insane desire for increased speed in locomotion
by land and by sea, especially by persons who are not aware, or who do
not consider that high speed involves increased danger, and greatly
increased cost in ocean navigation. The attainment and maintenance
of high speed depend upon the exertion of a high power. High speed
and power require stronger parts in everything: in the materials for
the ship’s build, the boilers, the machinery, and in all the working
arrangements. High speed and power demand a larger outlay in prime
cost for the adequate resistance required by such power, and lead
to more frequent and costly repairs. High speed and power need more
watchfulness, more prompt action, and consequently more persons,
whether engineers, firemen, or coal-stokers; moreover, they cause the
consumption of more fuel.
These propositions have been evident to all practical men in America,
as they must be to those on this side of the Atlantic. In the
construction of the hull, greatly increased strength is obviously
requisite. The resistance to a vessel, or its concussion against the
water at a low rate of speed, will not be sensibly felt, but if that
speed be considerably increased, and the concussion made quicker
without a corresponding increase in the strength of the frame and
hull of the ship generally, the ship will creak, strain, and yield to
the pressure until she finally works herself to pieces, at the same
time disarranging the engines, whose stability, bracing, and keeping
proper place and order depend first and essentially on the stability
of the hull. If the resistance to a vessel in passing through the
water increases as the square of the velocity, and if, in addition to
this outward thrust against the vessel, she has to support the greater
engine power within the hull, which has increased as the cube of the
velocity, then her strength must be made adequate to resist without
injury these two combined forces against which she has to contend.
The same increased strength is also necessary in the engines and
boilers. It is evident that if the boilers have to generate and the
engines to employ twice the power and exert twice the force, they must
also have twice the strength, and there is no working arrangement in
any way connected with the propulsion of the ship that does not partake
of this increase: every pump, every valve, every bolt is connected,
directly or indirectly, with the engine economy of the ship. All this
is equally applicable to the ship’s hull, though in a less degree in
the case of iron vessels than in those of wood. It is unnecessary to
dwell upon the cost of repairs: indeed, the rapid motion of heavy parts
of machinery and the necessarily severe concussions and jarrings cannot
fail to destroy the costly working parts of the engine, entailing heavy
and expensive repairs and substitutions.
But first cost and current expenses do not for the moment appear to
have been considered by any person interested in the Collins line. One
thought, and one only, prevailed, and that thought was embodied in
the resolution to run the Cunarders off the Atlantic, or at least to
“neutralize,” as was expressed in the discussions of the period, “an
existing foreign monopoly.” The enterprise they proposed “was one of a
national character, and the semblance or reality of monopoly on their
side was lost,” they alleged, in the stipulation of the contractors
themselves to transfer their ships at cost price with their contracts,
and all the additional facilities that might be extended to them by
Congress “to any person who might be acceptable to the United States’
Government, and capable of carrying out an enterprise of such vital
importance to the nation.”
By this plausible but transparent mode of reasoning Congress attempted
to disguise the real features of an undertaking which eventually became
a great failure. From the spirit, however, which then prevailed, cost
was not considered either by the projectors or by the majority of the
members of Congress in their determination to surpass in speed and in
splendour of equipment, any steamers which Great Britain could send
afloat. “We must have speed,” exclaimed Mr. Bayard, “extraordinary
speed, a speed with which they (Collins steamers) can overtake any
vessel which they pursue, and escape from any vessel they wish to
avoid; they must be fit for the purpose of a cruiser with armaments to
attack your enemy (if that enemy were Great Britain) in her most vital
part, her commerce.”
Happily, the Collins steamers were never required for any such
purposes, and, in 1850, just ten years after the Cunard vessels
commenced to run, they started against them in their great contest for
the commercial maritime supremacy of the Atlantic Ocean, a much more
sensible struggle than that which Mr. Bayard so glowingly pictured when
he spoke about their “sweeping the seas.”
[Sidenote: Further details of competing lines.]
Before the Collins line was established, the Cunard steamers were
receiving 7_l._ 10_s._ sterling per ton, freight, which was so much
of a monopoly rate, that in two years after the Collins line had
commenced, the rate of freight fell to 4_l._ sterling per ton. Arguing
from this fact the Americans held that the excessive freights charged
for transport by the Cunard Company were paid by the United States’
consumer, in most instances, on articles of British manufacture carried
to America by British vessels. But now the American consumer paid only
4_l._ per ton, and this sum for the most part was paid to their own
people, thus increasing their national wealth. Their acute political
economists discovered “that formerly the American consumer paid _very
nearly twice as much for the service_, and enriched the British
capitalists: whereas, subsequently to 1850, he not only saved one-half
of the former cost of freight to himself, but in paying the remaining
half, benefited his fellow-citizens who, in return, aided in consuming
perhaps the very merchandise which he had imported.”[201]
[Sidenote: Speed obtained and cost.]
Arguments such as these, too frequently honoured with the title of
political economy, are often employed to hide direct taxation; so,
instead of attempting to refute them, I prefer inviting my readers to
inquire with me into the practical results.
Now, there can be no doubt that the Collins line of steamers did honour
to the naval architecture of the time, and in their performances
equalled the expectations of their most sanguine friends. Mr. C. B.
Stuart, with feelings of national pride, places upon record that,
in May 1851, the _Pacific_ accomplished the passage from New York
to Liverpool in nine days, twenty hours, and sixteen minutes, and
that, in July 1852, the _Arctic_ made the same passage in nine days,
seventeen hours, and twelve minutes, which considerably exceeded in
swiftness any voyages hitherto made across the ocean by the vessels
of any nation. But while this determination to surpass every other
vessel afloat is one which commends itself to our admiration, if not
to our better judgment (as speed unless it is combined with safety
should always be condemned), it was attended with enormous extra
outlay, for, by a statement afterwards laid before Congress, it
appeared “that to effect a saving of a day or a day and a half in
the run between New York and Liverpool costs the company nearly a
million of dollars annually.”[202] So eager, however, are the public
to make rapid passages (and this applies to railways as well as ships)
that the Collins line for the time had a decided preference with
passengers.[203] Nor was there any lack of valuable goods; the gross
earnings of the company by freights and passage money alone amounting
in the two first years to $1,979,760. But while the Government during
these two years paid the Collins line for mail service $770,000, they
only recovered $513,546, showing a pecuniary loss of $256,453, so
that, so far as the public was concerned, the establishment of the
Collins line of steamers can only be regarded as a costly and doubtful
experiment; and, as will hereafter be shown, the establishment and
maintenance of a costly Transatlantic line was not merely an equivocal
success on the whole, but to the shareholders resulted in a vast loss
of capital.
[Sidenote: Great competition, 1850-1852.]
The owners of the Cunard steamers were, however, not listless
spectators of the great preparations which the Americans were making
to run them off their ocean lines, and, in 1850, they added two new
vessels to their fleet, the _Asia_ and _Africa_; they were sister
ships[204] but, though magnificent vessels, they were not equal in
speed to those which the Collins Company had sent forth.
The competition between these two great lines of steam-ships excited
extraordinary public interest at the time on both sides of the
Atlantic, and indeed in all parts of the world; numerous records were
kept for twelve months of the length of the respective voyages of
the ships of the contending companies, and large sums of money were
expended in bets on the result of each passage. Dividing the year into
two parts it appears that the average length of passage from Liverpool
to New York of the Collins steamers during the last half of 1851 was
eleven days eighteen hours, while the average time of the Cunard boats
was eleven days, twenty-three hours, thirty minutes; but, in the last
quarter of that year, they were respectively, on the return passages
from New York to Liverpool, ten days, twenty-three hours, and ten days,
thirteen hours, seventeen minutes.
[Sidenote: Results of it.]
During the first half of 1852, the Collins line made the passage
from Liverpool to New York, on an average of eleven days, twenty-two
hours, and the Cunard Company on an average of twelve days, thirteen
hours, and fifty-two minutes, while the return passages to Liverpool
were respectively eleven days, one hour, and ten days, twenty-one
hours, forty-four minutes, showing, on the whole, an average gain
each passage of fourteen hours, twenty-three minutes, in favour of the
Collins line.[205]
It must, however, be mentioned that the Cunard line had only two of
their new, or best boats engaged in the race, and that had their old
boats, the _Canada_, _Niagara_, and _Europa_, been equal in speed to
the _Asia_[206] and _Africa_, the gain of the Collins line would have
been reduced to nine hours and ten minutes each passage. Still, in that
great ocean race, the Americans were triumphant, and the rejoicings
which spread throughout the United States, were, to our credit,
re-echoed on the shores of Great Britain, for the struggle was one
which, up to that time, had involved no loss of life, and the triumph
honestly gladdened the hearts of every lover of progress on both sides
of the Atlantic, encouraging as it did two great nations to extend the
benign influence of art and science to their legitimate object—the
advancement of the human race.
But though the Cunard Company were thus far behind in the contest, they
were far from vanquished, and, with renewed exertions and indomitable
energy, at the same time ever bearing in mind the value of human life
and the stupendous responsibility they incurred in the continuation
of this struggle, they, as will hereafter appear, produced steamers
which surpassed their competitors in speed, and were unrivalled in the
regularity and safety with which their passages were performed. It was
far otherwise with the Collins Company, and the closing years of their
brief career is a sad, sad story to tell.
FOOTNOTES:
[164] The Americans are now rapidly developing their large natural
resources of iron. “The iron ores of the United States” (London
_Times_, 28th of May, 1875), “are plentiful and various, though some
kinds are wanting; thus the ‘spathose’ or spar-like iron ore, scarce
even in Europe, is very rare; and the ironstone of the liassic and
oolite seams, which furnishes about one-third of our British pig-iron,
appears to be wholly absent. On the other hand, the specular iron ore,
the brown and red hematites, the clay and blackband ironstones, are
good and abundant; and some of the deposits of magnetic iron ore—as at
Lake Champlain, and at Cornwall, in Pennsylvania—are very remarkable.
At Cornwall the deposit consists of a solid hill of ore, measuring
roughly 500 feet in diameter, rising from the ground level to a height
of 350 feet, and proved by borings to a depth of 180 feet below ground
level. The iron mine at Port Henry—at the south-west corner of Lake
Champlain, in the State of New York—is worked in a huge prism of ore,
about 200 feet square, and descending at an angle of 26 to 40 degrees,
to an unknown depth, the superincumbent rock being supported by pillars
of solid ore, 40 feet square at the base and about 20 feet at the top,
with a height of considerably more than 100 feet.”
[165] _Ante_, p. 42.
[166] “Encyclopædia Britannica” (eighth edition), vol. xx. p. 639,
“Steam Navigation.” The _Savannah_ was full rigged as a sailing-vessel
with auxiliary steam power, and her paddles were removable.
[167] Dr. Lardner, in his “Encyclopædia” and elsewhere, had more than
once expressed the opinion that no steam-ship would ever be able to
make so distant a voyage as that of crossing the Atlantic, without
recoaling. Having entered on details with regard to this important
question in a lecture he delivered at Liverpool in December 1835,
I consider it desirable to give the following extract from it, as
reported in the _Liverpool Albion_ of the 14th of that month, the
matter being one of considerable historical interest:
“STEAM COMMUNICATION WITH AMERICA.—Dr. Lardner then proceeded to
observe that one of the grandest projects which had ever occupied the
human mind was at present in the progress of actual accomplishment.
He meant that of constructing a great highway for steam intercourse
between New York and London. Part of the highway was in process of
formation. It consisted of several stages—that of the railroad from
London to Birmingham; that from Birmingham to Liverpool, and the
steam intercourse with Dublin; but there was another stage—that from
Dublin to Valentia—which had as yet hardly been thought of. Ireland
was a country which, with all her political disadvantages, was blest
by nature with a vast number of physical advantages, and among the
rest he might reckon a vast number of excellent harbours. No country
in the world could boast of so many fine and spacious ports, bays,
and roadsteads. She had many harbours on her west coast, which would
serve admirably as stations for steam conveyance across the Atlantic;
but Valentia had been selected as the extreme westerly point suitable
for that purpose. It was a fine anchoring ground by an island of that
name on the coast of Munster. The distance from Dublin to this point
was under 200 miles, which might be traversed in about eight hours.
The nearest point of the Continent of North America to this point of
Ireland was St. John’s in Newfoundland. The distance between the two
was about 1900 miles, thence to Halifax in Nova Scotia there would be
another run of 550 miles, and from that to New York would not exceed
the admissible range; but touching at Halifax would be desirable for
the sake of passengers. The only difficulty would be as to the run from
Valentia to St. John’s; and the voyage from Dublin to Bordeaux and
back, a distance of between 1600 and 1700 miles, with the same stock of
coals, came very near this distance. It must be observed that westerly
winds blew almost all the year round across the Atlantic. They were
produced by the trade winds being the compensating cause that restored
the balance which these served to destroy, according to that beautiful
principle in nature which always provides a remedy for any derangement
in the deranging cause itself. As a last resource, however, should
the distance between Valentia and St. John’s prove too great, they
might make the Azores a stage between, so that there remained no doubt
of the practicability of establishing a steam intercourse with the
United States. _As to the project, however, which was announced in the
newspapers of making the voyage directly from New York to Liverpool,
it was, he had no hesitation in saying, perfectly chimerical, and they
might as well talk of making a voyage from New York or Liverpool to the
moon._ The vessels which would ultimately be found the best adapted
for the voyage between this country and the United States would be
those of 800 tons, which would carry machines of 200 horse-power, and
would be able to stow 400 tons of coal. To supply a 10 horse-power,
daily required an expenditure of a ton of coals, and, consequently,
200 horse-power would require 20 tons of coal daily; but if the vessel
carried 400 tons of coal only, it would not be practicable to undertake
a voyage which would require the whole of that quantity. They must
make an allowance of 100 tons for contingencies. Thus, in reckoning
the average length of the voyage which might be undertaken by such a
vessel, we might safely calculate upon 300 tons of coal, which would
be sufficient for fifteen days, and it might fairly be concluded that
any project which calculated upon making longer voyages than fifteen
days without taking in a fresh supply of coals, in the present state
of the steamboat, must be considered chimerical. Now, the average rate
of speed of the Mediterranean packets was 170 miles per day, and the
utmost limit of a steam voyage might be taken at 2550 miles; but even
that could not be reckoned upon.”
It is, however, fair to the scientific memory of Dr. Lardner to state
that, in the eighth and last edition of his “Steam-engine, Railways,”
&c., 1851, pp. 294-309, he declares that he never stated that a “steam
voyage across the Atlantic was _a physical impossibility_:” the more
so, that he was of course well aware of the previous voyages of the
_Savannah_ and _Curaçoa_; what he did say (especially at the meeting
of the British Association at _Bristol in 1836_) was “that the long
sea voyages which were contemplated could not be maintained with that
regularity and certainty which are indispensable to commercial success
by _any revenue which could be expected from traffic alone_, and _that,
without a government subsidy of a considerable amount_, such lines of
steamers, although they might be started, could not be permanently
maintained.”
[168] The _Royal William_ was between 400 and 500 tons, built at Three
Rivers, Canada, and her engines, constructed in England, were fitted
into her at St. Mary’s Foundry, Montreal. She only made this one
Atlantic passage and was subsequently sold to the Portuguese Government.
[169] It is only due to the memory of the late Mr. MacGregor Laird,
who, with his brother, the late Mr. John Laird, M.P. for Birkenhead,
did so much to encourage Ocean steam navigation in its infancy, to
state that the _Sirius_ was placed on the Transatlantic service on his
recommendation, and that, so early as 1836, he was chiefly instrumental
in founding the British and American Steam Navigation Company which
chartered this vessel from the St. George Company. See letter from Mr.
A. Hamilton of St. Helen’s Place, London, “the friend and executor of
the late Mr. MacGregor Laird,” which appeared in the _Shipping and
Mercantile Gazette_ of the 15th May, 1873: in this paper, also, appears
a copy of a letter which Mr. Laird, under the signature of “Chimera,”
addressed to the _Liverpool Albion_ on the 28th December, 1835, in
reply to Dr. Lardner’s fallacious prognostications that a steam voyage
across the Atlantic was “perfectly chimerical,” from which I take the
following extract:
“By what process of reasoning Dr. Lardner has fixed the ultimate size
of steam-vessels for the Atlantic at 800 tons and 200 horse-power does
not appear, which is the more to be regretted, as it must be a peculiar
one, from the size of the vessels very little exceeding that of several
in the coasting trade, and the power being much less; but I am not
bound to take this for granted, particularly as all my experience
has proved that we as yet have never had to complain of the size of
the vessel if the power has been proportionately increased; on the
contrary, the Dublin boats have crept up from 250 to 500 and 600, and
the Clyde from 200 to 400 tons, and other lines in the same proportion.
In reasoning, therefore, upon a line of steam communication between
Great Britain and New York, I must reason from analogy, and fortunately
Dr. Lardner gives me the data. The _Leeds_, it appears, makes the
voyage to and from Bordeaux, a distance of 1600 miles, with one supply
of coals. The _Leeds_ is, I believe, 420 tons and 140 horse power, and
her displacement between her light and load marks will be about 80 tons
to one foot, or perhaps only 70. Now, the distance from Liverpool or
Portsmouth to New York is 3000 nautical miles or 3500 statute miles, a
little less to Liverpool. Suppose the _Leeds_ be trebled in capacity,
so that her displacement should exceed 200 tons per foot draught, it is
not necessary to treble her power, as double power propels more than
double bulk: but allow her 300 horse-power, her light draught of water
would be about 11 feet with her machinery on board, and with 800 tons
of dead weight on board, about 15. I take the consumption of coals
at 30 tons per day, and a mean speed of 10 miles per hour, and at an
expenditure of 525 tons of common coal, or 420 of Langennich, I land
my passengers in New York, Portsmouth, or Liverpool in something less
than fifteen days. I have not allowed anything in this calculation for
the saving of fuel that would accrue in these large engines by working
them expansively, but have taken the consumption at 9½ lbs. per horse
per hour, and with common coal I would have a surplus of 275 tons dead
weight for passengers and goods. One objection will, I am aware, be
made, viz., that my average speed is too great, and if I admitted that
the _beau idéal_ of a steam-vessel was embodied in one of His Majesty’s
Mediterranean steam-packets the objection would be fatal; but what is
the fact? (no less wonderful than true), the average speed of private
vessels far exceeds them; and, to prove that the average speed of 10
miles per hour is not ‘chimerical,’ I may state that the average speed
of the _Dundee_ and _Perth_, in all weathers, winter and summer, fair
or foul, exceeds 11 miles per hour; that the average speed of the
_Monarch_ is 10½ miles per hour; and that the _Medea_ steam-frigate
averaged more than 10 miles per hour on her voyage to Malta. Now,
I am of opinion that the _Dundee_, _Perth_, _Monarch_, and _Medea_
are to be, and will be, beat, but not by vessels of 800 tons and 200
horse-power. I hope, Mr. Editor, I have proved that it is easier to go
from Portsmouth or Liverpool to New York than to the moon; that it is
more convenient to go direct than through the first ‘gem of the sea;’
and the last, though not the least consideration, that if we wish to go
at all by steam, we had better not wait for the Valentia Railway.”
[170] Builders’ measurement, or O.M., is the measurement of a vessel
according to the old law of 1773 (13 George III., Chap. LXXIV.) which
prescribed as follows: “The length shall be taken on a straight line
along the rabbet of the keel of the ship, from the back of the main
stern-post to a perpendicular line from the fore part of the main-stem
under the bowsprit, from which substracting three-fifths of the
breadth, the remainder shall be esteemed the just length of the keel
to find the tonnage; and the breadth shall be taken from the outside
of the outside plank in the broadest place in the ship, be it either
above or below the main wales, exclusive of all manner of doubling
planks that may be wrought on the sides of the ship; then multiplying
the _length_ of the keel by the _breadth_ so taken, and the product by
_half the breadth_ and dividing the whole by ninety-four, the quotient
shall be deemed the true contents of the tonnage.”
Though another Act was passed in 1834 (Act 5th & 6th William IV.
Chap. LVI.) which was again amended by the 6th & 7th Victoria, Chap.
LXXXIV., and consolidated by 8th & 9th Victoria, Chap. LXXXIX., known
as the “new measurement, or N.M.” the old law remained in use with all
shipbuilders in their contracts until 1854, when the law (proposed and
carried out by Moorsom) now in force, was passed. By this law, the
internal cubic contents of a ship are ascertained, and the register
tonnage (on which all fiscal dues are levied) ascertained by certain
calculations which produce as nearly as possible the same results in
the old measurement of all ships built since 1854 (see _ante_, vol.
iii. note, p. 310), and thus the necessity is avoided of altering the
rates charged upon shipping, for light, dock and other dues; under the
present law, which is generally approved, an allowance is made for the
space occupied by the engines in steam-vessels, so that the register
tonnage on which all dues are levied is the gross admeasurement, less
the space occupied by the propelling power. The mode of arriving at
this, adopted by different nations, has of late been a question of
much discussion with reference to the dues charged on vessels passing
through the Suez Canal.
[171] The “Principle of Construction” of this vessel is clearly stated
in the following note given in Mr. Brunel’s life at p. 234: “To enable
the ship to resist the action of the heavy Atlantic waves, especial
pains were taken to give her great longitudinal strength. The ribs
were of oak, of scantling equal to that of line-of-battle ships. They
were placed close together and caulked within and without before the
planking was put on. They were dowelled and bolted in pairs; and there
were also four rows of 1½ inch iron bolts, 24 feet long, and scarfing
about 4 feet, which ran longitudinally through the whole length of the
bottom frames of the ship. She was closely trussed with iron and wooden
diagonals and shelf-pieces which, with the whole of her upper works,
were fastened with bolts and nuts to a much greater extent than had
hitherto been the practice.”
[172] “ARRIVAL OF THE ‘GREAT WESTERN’ AND ‘SIRIUS’ STEAMERS AT NEW
YORK.—At three o’clock P.M., on Sunday, the 22nd of April, the
_Sirius_ first descried the land, and, early on Monday morning,
the 23rd, anchored in the North River immediately off the battery.
The moment the intelligence was made known, hundreds and thousands
rushed early in the morning to the battery. Nothing could exceed the
excitement. The river was covered during the whole day with row-boats,
skiffs, and yawls, carrying the wondering people out to get a close
view of this extraordinary vessel. While people were yet wondering how
the _Sirius_ so successfully made out to cross the rude Atlantic, it
was announced about eleven A.M. on Monday, from the telegraph, that a
huge steamship was in the offing. ‘The _Great Western!_—the _Great
Western!_’ was on everybody’s tongue. About two o’clock P.M. the first
curl of her ascending smoke fell on the eyes of the thousands of
anxious spectators. A shout of enthusiasm rose on the air.... During
the first part of the passage of the _Sirius_ she made slow progress,
her speed varying from 4 knots 4 fathoms per hour to 7; the latter
portion was at the rate of 8 to 11 knots. Thus the grand experiment has
been fairly and fully tested, and has been completely successful. The
only question now in the case is that of expense. Can steam-packets be
made to pay?”
[173] Sixty knots are equal to sixty-nine geographical or statute miles.
[174] The _Great Western_ ran regularly between Bristol and New York
till the end of 1846. In 1847 she was sold to the West India Royal
Mail Steam Packet Company, and was long one of their best vessels. In
1857 she was broken up at Vauxhall, being no longer able to compete
profitably with the new class of steamers which, by that time, had been
placed on the different Transatlantic lines.
[175] “DEPARTURE OF THE FIRST STEAM-SHIP FROM LIVERPOOL TO NEW
YORK.—On Thursday evening the _Royal William_, the property of the
City of Dublin Steam Packet Company, set sail on her first voyage for
New York. The _Royal William_ was announced to sail for New York at
half-past six o’clock. At that time Prince’s Pier was lined towards the
river with a dense crowd from top to bottom, and the rigging of the
shipping in the Prince’s Dock was densely manned with sailors. Every
conceivable standing place on George’s Pier was crowded to excess. The
deck of the vessel was crowded with passengers and their friends, and
those whom curiosity had taken there. Exactly at half-past six o’clock
the anchor was weighed, and, immediately, as the noble vessel began
to move she was greeted with the enthusiastic cheering of thousands
of spectators, which were responded to by those on board, whilst from
Woodside, Birkenhead, Rock Ferry, the Pier, and the steamboats in the
river on all sides, scores of cannon thundered forth the rejoicings of
their possessors.... She is built by Messrs. Wilson and her engines
are from the manufactory of Messrs. Fawcett and Preston. The vessel
is 817 tons burthen, and her engines are 276 horse-power, and work
expansively at a 5 feet 6 inch stroke. The consumption of coal is 14
cwt. 2 lbs. per hour. She has furnaces which completely ignite the
smoke, and are a saving of 33 per cent. in the consumption. The smoke
from the chimney top is scarcely perceptible. She has fuel on board for
4500 miles; almost sufficient to take her out and bring her back again.
Her length is 175 feet; breadth of beam 27 feet; and depth of hold 17
feet 6 inches. She is also fitted with four water-tight wrought-iron
bulk-heads for safety from foundering and fire. She is fitted up with
floats, which neutralize the vibration. Her paddle-wheels are 24 feet
in diameter, and, owing to the great depth of the vessel in the water
from the large quantity of coal on board, the paddles are 6 feet in the
water. In smooth water the vessel sails 11½ knots an hour. Her cabins,
which are exceedingly neatly fitted up, contain accommodation for
eighty passengers. There are two principal cabins and several private
cabins. Thirty-two passengers went out in her.”
[176] The _Royal William_ made her first passage from Liverpool to New
York in nineteen days and the passage home in fourteen and a half days.
[177] Mr. George Burns, whose family had for many years held a highly
respectable position in the city of Glasgow (his father having been
for the very long period of seventy-two years the minister of the
Barony parish of that city), entered into partnership with his elder
brother, James, in 1818, and in that year founded the great business
firm still carried on in Glasgow. In 1824 they became owners, along
with the late Hugh Matthie of Liverpool, of six sailing-vessels trading
between that port and Glasgow, and in the same year they engaged in
steam navigation between Glasgow and Belfast. They next substituted
steam for sailing-vessels in the Glasgow and Liverpool trade and, in
1830, amalgamated this business with that of the Messrs. MacIver of
Liverpool, with whom they afterwards made arrangements to establish
the line of steamers with the United States of America from Liverpool,
suggested by Mr. Cunard. The business thus created was, in its various
branches, carried on by Messrs. G. and J. Burns in Glasgow, by Messrs.
D. and C. MacIver in Liverpool, and by Messrs. S. Cunard and Co., in
Halifax, N.S., under the superintendence of Mr. Cunard at Boston,
and, subsequently, when New York was embraced in the line, under the
management of his son Mr., afterwards Sir Edward, Cunard, Bart. Mr.
David MacIver died a few years after the formation of the Cunard line.
Mr., afterwards Sir Samuel, Cunard, Bart., and his son, Sir Edward,
who died more recently, have been succeeded by Mr. William Cunard,
now managing the affairs of the company in London and Mr. George
Burns, alone, survives of the Glasgow firm, the business of which is
now carried on by his two sons, Mr. John Burns (whose abilities and
philanthropy are alike conspicuous), and his brother, Mr. James Cleland
Burns, and that in Liverpool by Mr. Charles MacIver (a gentleman of
remarkable energy and ability) and his sons.
[178] Mr. Cunard in his evidence before the Select Committee “On
Halifax and Boston Mails” (Parl. Paper, 1846, No. 563), stated that
3,295_l._ per voyage was paid for the service. And, in 1874, Mr. John
Burns, in his examination before the Royal Commission “On Unseaworthy
Ships,” said, in reply to question 16,982: “The original contract
of the Cunard Company which was made by my late partner, Sir Samuel
Cunard, was made with the Admiralty, and under the Admiralty all the
ships were inspected by Admiralty officers, and there were certain
restrictions in the contract as to allowing them to be used in time
of war. These ships were all wooden ships and they had to carry naval
officers on board, and to do other things which caused a good deal of
trouble and expense to us. In the last contract which we negotiated we
said that we would take less money, if certain of these restrictions
were taken away from us. Therefore, we are now under a contract of
70,000_l._ a year, and carry no naval officers on board.”
[179]
-----------+---------------+---------+----------+------------+---------
Name. |Length between | Extreme | Depth of | Nominal | Burden
|Perpendiculars.| Breadth.| Hold. |Horse-Power.| in Tons.
-----------+---------------+---------+----------+------------+---------
| Feet. | Ft. In. | Ft. In. | |
_Britannia_| 207 | 34 4 | 22 6 | 423 | 1,156
_Acadia_ | 206 | 34 6 | 22 6 | 425 | 1,136
_Caledonia_| 206 | 34 6 | 22 6 | 425 | 1,139
_Columbia_ | 207 | 34 2 | 22 4 | 425 | 1,138
-----------+---------------+---------+----------+------------+---------
[180] Built on the Clyde by Mr. R. Duncan, in 1840. Left Liverpool on
her first voyage, July 4th, 1840.
Material of vessel Wood
Length, keel and forerake 207 feet
Breadth of beam 34 feet 4 inches
Breadth over paddle boxes 54 feet 8 inches
Depth of hold 22 feet 6 inches
Depth over planking 24 feet 8 inches
Tonnage, builders’ measurement 1,156-45/94
Tonnage, new measurement 1,155-13/100
Tonnage, of engine-room 535-70/100
Tonnage, register 619-43/100
Length on deck 203 feet 7 inches
Breadth of deck 31 feet 9 inches
Depth of hold 22 feet 2 inches
Length allowed for engine space 70 feet 7 inches
Draught, mean, one-half of coals consumed 16 feet 10 inches
Area of midship section at mean draught 520
Displacement at mean draught 2,050 tons
Kind of engines Side-lever
Collective H.P., nominal, per Admiralty 403
Cylinders, diameter 72½ inches
Stroke of piston 6 feet 10 inches
Diameter of paddle-wheel over floats 27 feet 9 inches
Number of floats on one wheel 21
Dimensions of floats 8 ft. ⨉ 2ft. 10 in.
Kind of boilers Flue (4)
Number of furnaces 12
Grate, 6 ft. 2 in. ⨉ 3 ft. 222 square feet
Total heating surface in boilers 2,698 square feet
Coals consumed outwards to Boston viâ Halifax 440 tons
Coals consumed homeward from Boston viâ Halifax 450 tons
Mean draught of water, ship leaving Liverpool 17 feet 2 inches
[181] Report of Committee of House of Commons, August 1846.
[182]
---------------------+--------+------------+----------------------+--------------------
Vessel’s Name. |Tonnage.|Horse-Power.| Proportion of Tonnage| Remarks.
| | | to Power. |
---------------------+--------+------------+----------------------+--------------------
_Acadia_ (Cunard }| 1,136 | 400 | 1 h.p. = 2¾ tons | Exceedingly fast.
Company) }| | | |
| | | |{ 10¼ knots when
_Oriental_ | 1,670 | 440 | 1 h.p. = 4 tons |{ deep on trial
| | | |{ trip.
| | | |
_Great Western_ | 1,340 | 450 | 1 h.p. = 3 tons |
| | | |
_Great Liverpool_ | 1,543 | 464 | 1 h.p. = 3⅓ tons |
| | | |
| | | |{ Fast when light,
_British Queen_ | 2,016 | 500 | 1 h.p. = 4 tons |{ and light stern
| | | |{ breeze.
| | | |
_President_ | 2,366 | 540 | 1 h.p. = 4½ tons |{ Slow under any
| | | |{ circumstances.
| | | |
_Liverpool_ (before }| 1,150 | 404 | 1 h.p. = 2½ tons | Slow and crank.
alterations) }| | | |
See Fincham’s “Naval Architecture.”
[183] Letter from E—— in the _Civil Engineer and Architects’
Journal_, January 1841.
[184] She was constructed of iron, and expressly for the Transatlantic
trade. Her dimensions were, length of keel, 289 feet; 296 feet between
the perpendiculars; and 322 feet over all. Her extreme breadth, 51
feet, with 32 feet 6 inches depth of hold, her main load draught of
water being 16 feet; and her measurement 2984 tons, with engines of
1000 horse-power.
[185] The _Great Britain_ was launched on the 19th of July 1843. The
machinery was constructed in the works of the company, as no engineers
could be found willing to undertake the task by contract. But, by
putting the engines into the vessel at the works, it was found that she
was so deeply immersed as to be unable to pass out of the dock, and
she was, consequently, detained for some months until the requisite
alterations could be made for her release. Soon after her experimental
trip, made on the 12th December, 1844, she was placed on the American
station. Her career, however, was prematurely brought to a close by an
accident (stranded on the coast of Ireland) which, though occasioning a
serious loss to her enterprising owners, proved at this early stage the
great strength and value of iron ships. During the whole winter that
she lay on the beach at Dundrum Bay, coast of Ireland, she sustained
very little injury, and though frequently altered and under repair
since then, the _Great Britain_ is still successfully employed in the
trade between Liverpool and Australia, and to all appearance is as
sound a vessel as she was when launched thirty-one years ago.
[186] Mr. R. B. Forbes, of Milton, Massachusetts, in forwarding to the
author the lithograph of his ship, remarks: “The lower yards and the
topgallant yard are in the same position as in the ordinary rig; but
the topsail and topgallant sail are so divided as to make three sails
instead of two. The topsail being exactly of the size of an ordinary
double reefed topsail, the yard being parrelled to the heel of the
topmast, where the topmasts are fidded forward of the lower mast-head;
and to the head of the lower mast where the topmasts are (as they ought
to be) fidded abaft the mast-head; this renders it necessary to have
the lower mast-heads longer, by several feet, than in the old rig. The
next sail above the topsail, representing the upper half of the topsail
of the old rig and a fraction of the old topgallant sail, is called
the topgallant sail, and the old rig topgallant sail is in the new rig
called the royal, while the royal of the old rig becomes the skysail of
the new rig. As I consider it important to have the sail as much in the
body of the ship as possible, and at the same time to dispose of the
canvas and spars that the sails can be used in different places, I make
the foreyard of the same length (excepting a slight difference in the
yardarms) as the main topsail yard; the fore topsail yard the same as
the main topgallant yard, the fore topgallant yard the same as the main
royal yard, and so on with the mizen, so that the yards and sails on
the fore fit on the main one stage higher up, those on the mizen fit on
the fore one stage higher and on the main two higher.”
[187] In a letter which I had the pleasure of receiving from Mr.
Forbes (November 1874) that gentleman further remarks: “On the 15th
September, 1845, I sailed for Liverpool in the steam-propeller ship
_Massachusetts_: she made one other voyage to that port and, in June
1846, she was chartered to carry troops to the Gulf of Mexico. She
was afterwards bought by our government and bore the flag of General
Scott to the siege of Vera Cruz. She long continued in the navy
department, and was known as the _Farralones_. Three or four years ago
our government sold her when her machinery was removed, and she is now
running and is called the _Alaska_.”
[188]
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
Name. | Date of | Date of | At | Advantages to
| Sailing. | Arrival. | | credit of
| | | |_Massachusetts_.
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
_Massachusetts_ | Oct. 22 | Nov. 18 |Holmes Hole| *
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
_Shenandoah_ | Oct. 22 | Dec. 3 a 4 |Sandy Hook | 13 days
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
_Adirondack_ | Oct. 22 | Dec. 3 |Sandy Hook | 13 days
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
_Henry Clay_ | Oct. 23 | Nov. 26 |Sandy Hook | 5 days
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
_Columbiana_ | Oct. 23 | Nov. 30 | Boston | 11 days
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
_St. Patrick_ | Oct. 23 | Dec. 1 | New York | 11 days
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
_St. Petersburg_| Oct. 13 | Nov. 27 | Boston | 18 days
----------------+----------+------------+-----------+----------------
[189] Mr. Forbes, one of the owners of this ship, is a remarkable
man, and has, during the long period of sixty years, taken so useful
and active a part in the development of the maritime resources of his
country, that a brief note of his career, for which he has furnished
the materials, cannot fail to interest my readers. In 1811, when a boy
of only seven years of age, he and his mother were captured at sea on
their passage to France, and, again, in 1813, on his return passage.
In 1817 he adopted the sea as a profession; and by his genius and
industry he obtained the charge of an Indiaman, before he had reached
the age of twenty years, and by 1830 he was in command of a ship of
his own engaged in the trade with the East. He retired from the sea
in 1832, and, in 1839, he became the principal partner in one of the
largest mercantile establishments in China—the still well-known house
of Russell and Co. In November 1844 his _Midas_ (propeller schooner)
left New York for China: she was the first American steam-vessel that
went beyond the Cape of Good Hope, and the first to ply on the waters
of China. He was also interested in the propeller barque _Edith_, which
left New York for Bombay and China, on January 18th, 1845. She was
the first American steamer despatched to British India, and the first
square-rigged propeller to China under that flag. In April 1845 he,
with others, built an _iron_ paddle-wheel steamer, nearly 300 feet in
length, which they named the _Iron Witch_: she was designed by Ericsson
for great speed, to ply on the River Hudson, but as she did not prove
fast enough to compete with the regular Albany boats, her engines were
transferred to a wooden vessel named the _Falcon_; the _Falcon_ was the
first American steamer that plied to Chagres in connection with the
California route, as the _Iron Witch_ had been the first iron passenger
steamer that plied on the North River. In 1845 Mr. Forbes launched the
first iron steam-tug, built for mercantile purposes in New England,
designed so far back as 1838. In 1847 he loaded the ship _Bombay_ with
a full cargo of ice for Bombay, the first cargo taken there, a small
quantity having previously gone in the _Paul Jones_ in 1843. At that
period it used to be a joke that the Americans had nothing to offer in
return for the produce of India except _ice_, apples, and bills! On the
28th of March, 1847, he sailed from Boston to Cork in the sloop of war
_Jamestown_ with 800 tons of provisions, nobly contributed by citizens
of Boston and other inhabitants of New England for the famine-stricken
Irish—an act in itself which constituted a grand and imperishable
monument of their goodness. In 1847 he sent to China on the deck of a
ship, a small iron propeller called the _Firefly_, the first vessel
of the kind to ply on the Canton river. He states that when in China
in 1839-40, he sent the first cargo of tea to England in an American
ship, the _Oriental_. In 1857-8 he built and despatched from Boston,
an iron paddle-wheel steamer, called the _Argentina_, of 100 tons for
the survey of the La Plata, which ascended the Parana beyond where
any steamer had previously navigated. In 1861 he despatched the iron
propeller _Pembroke_ for China, where she was sold. She held the only
“letter of marque” issued by the United States’ Government during the
great civil war. Such are a few of the leading points in the active
life of Mr. R. B. Forbes, of whom his country may be proud, who still
in his fresh old age continues his career of usefulness. He now builds
boats for the “good boys” of his native town, and I had great pleasure
in executing for him the other day an order for no end of miniature
blocks, dead-eyes, anchors, and cables.
[190] “We have to say that, if the _Britannia_ beats the _Washington_
over (and they both, we understand, start the same day), she will
have to run by the deep mines, and put in more coal. We shall have,
in two years’ time, a system of Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific steamers
in operation that will tell a brilliant story for the enterprise of
Brother Jonathan. We are bound to go ahead, and steam is the agent of
the age. We expect yet to see the day when a traveller will be able to
leave New York, and going eastward all the time, will be enabled to
make the circuit of the earth, coming in by Huascualco, in the summer
interval between two sessions of Congress, spending a month or two in
the Mediterranean on the way.”
[191] “The _Washington_ is stated to be of 2000 horses’ indicated
power, and is 1750 tons Government measure, or 2000 tons carpenters’
measure; so her steam power is to her tonnage as one to one, while the
_Britannia_ has only one horse-power to 2¾ tons.[193] To go a little,
however, more into detail: both vessels have two cylinders, I believe,
of the same diameter, viz., 72 inches, and both have side beam engines;
the stroke of the _Washington_ is 10 feet; her boilers are able to
carry (they say) 30 lbs. of steam; but, if we allow her only 23 lbs.
⨉ 13 vacuum, she will be still double the power of the _Britannia_
with 5 lbs. ⨉ 13 lbs. i.e., = 900 horses’ power (450 ⨉ 2). I am now
speaking of full steam, or at least both cutting off at the same point.
The _Herald_ (New York) says the _Washington’s_ wheels are 39 feet in
diameter, and 7½ feet dip; but the latter is of course an error, and
probably means 7½ feet face; she has two boilers 36 feet ⨉ 15 on the
plan; there are three furnaces, each 7 feet ⨉ 4 feet 6 inches ⨉ 6 = 189
feet. Well then, there you have data from which you may calculate how
many horses’ power can be got off that great surface with anthracite
and blowers. Her recipient heating surface must be large; she has
flues, perhaps 12 inches in diameter.”
[192] The proportion was actually one to two as against one to two and
three-quarters.
[193] “In point of size she looked like an elongated three-decker, with
only one streak round her; but about as ugly a specimen of steam-ship
building as ever went through this anchorage. She did not appear to
make much use of her 2000 horse-power either, but seemed rather to roll
along than steam through the water. She excited considerable curiosity,
although her performance, as compared with the _Britannia_, had
evidently taken the edge off the feeling with which the vessel would
have been viewed had a different result been obtained in her favour.”
(Spithead correspondent of the _Times_.)
[194] In 1840 and 1841 the British Government entered into contracts,
to which I shall hereafter refer, for the conveyance of the mails with
the West Indies and also with the Pacific Steam Navigation Companies;
and, early in 1850, they concluded a contract with the Cunard Company
for the conveyance of the mails between Halifax, New York, and Bermuda
in small vessels of 350 tons and 80 horse-power, fitted with a proper
space for mounting an 18-pounder pivot gun. One of these vessels left
Halifax for Bermuda and another left for St. John’s within twenty-four
hours after the arrival of the packet from Liverpool; a third conveyed
the mails monthly between Bermuda and New York, the subsidy being
10,600_l._ per annum, or at the rate of 3_s._ per mile; on the main
line it was 11_s._ 4_d._ per mile.
In 1851, the British Government made another contract with the Cunard
Company for a monthly conveyance of the mails between Bermuda and St.
Thomas each way upon such days as might be fixed by the Admiralty, the
provisions as regards the size, power, and armament of the vessels
being the same in all respects as those in the other subsidiary
service, only that the price was to be equal to 4_s._ per mile, or
4,100_l._ per annum. This service connected the West Indies with
the United States and the North American provinces. The departure
of the one vessel engaged in it took place immediately after the
arrival of the homeward mail West India packet, so that she carried
the correspondence of the West Indian Colonies and of Her Majesty’s
officers on the station from that island to Bermuda.
[195] _Vide_ Official Reports from the Senate, 1850 and 1852, _passim_.
[196] The general dimensions of these celebrated steamers were:
length of keel, 277 feet; length on main deck, 282 feet; depth from
the maindeck, 24 feet; depth under the spar deck, 32 feet; breadth
of beam, 45 feet. They had rounded sterns, three masts with suitable
spars; a lower deck, main deck, and spar deck, as well as an orlop deck
extending from the engine-room forward and aft. The area of transverse
section of the _Arctic_, for instance, was 772 square feet. Launching
draught aft, 10 feet; average displacement per inch, from launching
to load line, 20½ tons; area of load line, 9369·10 square feet; whole
displacement to its circumscribing parallelopipedon, 601 per cent.;
weight of hull, 1525 tons; weight of spars and rigging, 34 tons;
ordinary load line aft, 20 feet; ordinary load line forward, 19½ feet.
[197] I have not room for these very valuable historical documents, so
much wanted in our own merchant navy, but the reader interested will
find them _in extenso_ in note, Appendix O, in Mr. C. B. Stuart’s work,
“On Naval and Mail Steamers;” U.S., published in New York, 1853.
[198] A description in detail of these boilers is given in the note,
Appendix O, already mentioned.
[199] The respective diameters of wheels in these steamers from
outside to outside of floats, were as follows, viz., _Arctic_, 35 feet
6 inches; _Baltic_, 36 feet; _Atlantic_, 35 feet; and _Pacific_, 35
feet. Those of the _Arctic_ and _Atlantic_ had thirty-six floats; the
_Baltic_, thirty-two; and the _Pacific_, twenty-eight.
The average performances of the engines of the _Arctic_ were as
follows: pressure, 16·9 pounds; revolutions, 15·8 per minute with
an average consumption of 83 tons of anthracite coals per day of
twenty-four hours, giving an average speed of 316·4 knots per day.
Her maximum pressure was 17·5 pounds; revolutions, 16·7 per minute;
consumption, 87 tons, and speed 320 knots per day. The consumption of
coal per day in the _Asia_ (Cunard line) was, on an average, 76 tons,
and her speed with this consumption 303 knots per day.
[200] The plates of this splendid engine will be found in the second
volume of Tredgold’s “Steam-Engine,” and well deserve the attention of
professional readers. Mr. Victor Beaumont’s account of the ship and
engine will be found in the same volume.
[201] See Reports of Proceedings in Congress.
[202] The comparative cost of driving a steamer on the average of
7 knots up to an average of 9 knots is very small compared to what
it would be to increase the speed from 9 to 11 knots an hour, and
it becomes enormous when that rate is increased (as the resistance
increases with the square of the velocity), but my readers must
take the very large sum mentioned as the extra cost of one extra
day’s saving of time with _very considerable qualifications_, as the
statement was made in Congress with the object of obtaining for the
Collins line further assistance either in the shape of a vote of money
or an enhanced annual subsidy.
[203] From a return which appeared in the _New York Herald_ on the 1st
of January, 1853, the number of persons carried in the course of eleven
months, January to November inclusive, 1852, was:
By Collins line to Liverpool, 2,420, to New York, 1,886.
By Cunard line to Liverpool, 1,783, to New York, 1,186.
[204] The dimensions of the _Africa_, built of wood by Messrs. Steele
and Company, of Greenock, were as follows:
_Builders’ Measurement._
Ft. In.
Length of keel and fore rake 267 0
Breadth of beam 40 6
Depth of hold 27 6
Tonnage 2128 78-94ths
_New Measurement._
Length on deck 265 0
Breadth on ditto at midships 37 2
Depth of hold at ditto 27 2
Tonnage 2226 24-100ths
She had a pair of side-lever engines, by Robert Napier of Glasgow, of
814 horse nominal power. Diameter of cylinders, 96 inches by 9 feet
stroke; paddlewheels, diameter, extreme, 37 feet 7 inches, and 30 feet
10 inches effective; twenty-eight floats, 9 feet 2 inches by 3 feet 2
inches, three sets of twenty-eight arms, eight floats in the water at
19 feet draft of water. Four flue boilers, twenty furnaces; bunkers
to hold 890 tons of coals; thirty-eight hands in the engine-room. The
_Africa_ was built of the best British oak, and planked double outside
and inside, and the space between the frames was filled up, from the
keel to the gunwale, with rock-salt, to preserve the vessel from the
dry rot. The number of her berths enabled her to carry 180 passengers.
She was manned by a full crew of chosen men, giving about one-third
to each department. She was estimated to carry 900 tons of coal; and
she had capacity for the transit of 600 tons of cargo, not including
the stores of ship and passengers. Fitted up for carrying guns, the
_Africa_ could at any time be transformed, from the peaceful original,
into an Admiralty ship of war. The saloons and berths were fitted with
an evident regard at once to elegance and utility: there was nothing
the most refined taste could desiderate, as there was nothing wanting
which could add to the comfort, convenience, and pleasure of the
passengers.
[205] See Appendix No. 8, p. 601. I give the authorities from whom
these returns were obtained, and all the figures on both sides of the
question, so that my readers may judge for themselves, but, having had
the log-books of the Cunard Company examined with great care, I can
vouch for the accuracy of the conclusions in my text.
[206] Mr. C. B. Stuart computes the power of the _Asia_ at eight
hundred and sixteen H.-P., and the _Atlantic_ and _Pacific_ at only
eight hundred each. On further comparing these steamers it will be
found that for each square foot of immersed section the _Atlantic_
had 1-10/100 horse-power; the _Pacific_, 1-12/100; and the _Asia_,
1-26/100, thereby giving the latter an important advantage over
the others. In the judgment of the Americans, therefore, whatever
superiority may have been exhibited in their vessels over those of
the British in speed, is justly ascribed to their models, effective
boilers, and ability in their preparation.
CHAPTER V.
Dangers of Atlantic Navigation—Collision of _Arctic_ and _Vesta_,
1854—_Arctic_ founders—Loss of _Pacific_, 1856—Renewed
exertions of the Collins and, also, of the Cunard Company—Launch
of the _Persia_—Collins line relinquished, 1858—_Scotia_—Her
great strength and speed—_Russia_, first Cunard iron
screw-steamer, 1862—_Bothnia_ and _Scythia_, 1874—Their
construction, outfit, and cabin accommodation—Vessels now owned
by Cunard Company—Comparison of _Britannia_ and _Bothnia_—Cunard
Company never lost a life nor a letter during thirty-five
years—Reasons—Value of punctuality—Admirable discipline in
their ships—Regulations of the Company—Most disasters may be
prevented by foresight—Success depends on fitting means—Cunard
line shows what can be done.
[Sidenote: Dangers of Atlantic navigation.]
A voyage across the Atlantic must ever be attended with greater peril
than almost any other ocean service of similar length and duration;
arising, as this does, from the boisterous character and uncertainty of
the weather, from the icebergs which float in huge masses during spring
along the northern line of passage, from the dense fogs frequently
prevailing, and from the many vessels of every kind to be met with,
either as employed in the Newfoundland fisheries, or in the vast and
daily increasing intercourse between Europe and America.
In such a navigation the utmost care and caution requires to be
constantly exercised, especially by steamships. Nevertheless, though
the Collins line of steamers performed this passage with a speed
hitherto unequalled, they encountered no accidents worthy of note
during the first four years of their career; but terrible calamities
befell them soon afterwards.
[Sidenote: Collision of _Arctic_ and _Vesta_, 1854.]
On the 21st of September, 1854, the _Arctic_, according to her usual
course, left Liverpool for New York. She had on board 233 passengers,
of whom 150 were first class, together with a crew of 135 persons, and
a valuable cargo. At mid-day on the 27th of that month, when about 60
miles south-east of Cape Race, and during a dense fog, she came in
contact with the French steamer _Vesta_. By this collision the _Vesta_
appeared at first to be so seriously injured that, in their terror and
confusion, her passengers, amounting to 147, and a crew of fifty men,
conceived she was about to sink, and that their only chance of safety
lay in getting on board the _Arctic_. Impressed with this idea many
of them rushed into the boats, of which, as too frequently happens,
one sank immediately, and the other containing thirteen persons was
swamped under the quarter of the ship, all on board of her perishing.
When, however, the captain of the _Vesta_ more carefully examined his
injuries, he found that, though the bows of his vessel were partially
stove in, the foremost bulkhead had not started. He, therefore, at once
lightened his ship by the head, strengthened the partition by every
means in his power, and by great exertions, courage, forethought, and
seamanship, brought his shattered vessel without further loss into the
harbour of St. John’s.
[Sidenote: _Arctic_ founders.]
In the meantime a frightful catastrophe befell the _Arctic_, and one so
little anticipated that the persons on board of her, supposing that
she had sustained only trifling injury by the collision, had launched
a boat for the rescue of the passengers and crew of the _Vesta_.
It was soon, however, discovered that their own ship had sustained
fatal injuries, and that the sea was rushing in so fast through three
holes which had been pierced in the hull below the water-line, that
the engine fires would be soon extinguished. The _Arctic’s_ head was
therefore immediately laid for Cape Race, the nearest point of land,
but in four hours from the time of the collision, the water reached the
furnaces and soon afterwards she foundered. As it was blowing a strong
gale at the time, some of the boats into which her passengers and crew
rushed were destroyed in launching, others which got clear of the
sinking ship were never again heard of, and only two, with thirty-one
of the crew and fourteen passengers, reached Newfoundland. Among those
who perished were the wife of Mr. Collins and their son and daughter,
but the captain, who remained on board to the last, and the first as
well as the second and fourth officers were saved. Seventy-two men and
four females sought refuge on a raft which the seamen, when they found
the ship sinking, had hastily constructed, but one by one they were
swept away—every wave as it washed over the raft claiming one or more
victims as its prey; and at eight o’clock on the following morning, one
human being alone was left out of the seventy-six persons who, only
twelve or fifteen hours before had hoped to save their lives on this
temporary structure. The solitary occupant of this fragile raft must
have had a brave heart and a strong nerve to have retained his place
upon it for a day and a half, after all his companions had perished,
for it was not until that time had elapsed that he was saved by a
passing vessel: his tale of how he and they were parted was of the most
heart-rending description.[207]
As a large proportion of the first-class passengers of the _Arctic_,
consisted of persons of wealth and extensive commercial relations in
the United States, as well as in England and her colonies, besides more
than one member of her aristocracy, the loss of the _Arctic_ and the
terrible incidents in connection with her fate caused an unusual amount
of grief and consternation on both sides of the Atlantic.
[Sidenote: Loss of the _Pacific_, 1856.]
Within little more than twelve months from this time, another great
calamity befell the Collins Company, and the sad loss of their steamer
_Pacific_, from the mystery in which it is shrouded, if not as
lamentable as that of the _Arctic_ (for the soul of man has never been
harrowed by its details), was equally deplorable. Though the ocean,
as in this instance, leaves no record of its ravages, the stern fact,
announced in the brief words _she was never heard of_, tells itself
the sad, sad tale, that a great ship, with all her living inmates, in
infancy, in manhood and in old age, it may be full of hope and joy,
has been engulfed in the deep blue waters of the Atlantic—summoned,
perhaps in a moment, to an eternity more mysterious than that which
still surrounds their melancholy fate.
This splendid but unfortunate ship left Liverpool on the 23rd of
January, 1856, having on board 25 first-class passengers, 20
second-class passengers, and a crew of 141 persons, almost all of
whom were Americans. She carried the mails and a valuable cargo; the
insurances effected on her amounting to $2,000,000. But no living soul
ever appeared to tell when and where or how she was lost, nor were any
articles belonging to her ever found to afford a clue to her melancholy
fate; it can only be supposed that she sprang an overwhelming leak, or
more probably struck suddenly, when at full speed, on an iceberg and
instantly foundered.[208]
[Sidenote: Renewed exertions of the Collins, and, also,]
These terrible disasters did not, however, quench the spirit of the
American people, however much they may have grieved over them. They
were still as resolved as ever to maintain an Atlantic mail service
of their own, and the requisite capital was soon found to supply the
place of the two vessels which had been lost; one of the new steamers,
the _Adriatic_, surpassing in size, speed, and splendour any of her
predecessors. Nor did these disasters check the passenger traffic
which, in eight years from the time of starting the Collins line, had
increased five-fold. This, however, is in a great measure accounted for
by the fact that, in the meantime, another line of steamers, specially
adapted for the emigrant trade, to which reference will hereafter be
made, had, during that period, been started, thus affording far greater
facilities for an economical and comparatively easy intercourse
between the two countries, than the sailing packets had hitherto
provided.
[Sidenote: of the Cunard Company.]
The Cunard Company having now other steam companies to contend against
besides the Collins line, made renewed and extraordinary exertions to
maintain their position. In 1852, they sent forth the _Arabia_, of 2400
tons, and of 938 horse-power, built on the Clyde and supplied with
engines by Robert Napier; and, in 1855, the first iron ship of their
fleet, the _Persia_, was dispatched to compete with the _Adriatic_.
[Sidenote: Launch of the _Persia_.]
The _Persia_[209] was a great step in advance of any other ship built
for the Cunard Company up to that period, and though they had added
twenty-six vessels to their fleet since they launched the _Britannia_,
she was not merely the first they had constructed of iron, but the
first ocean-going steamer in any way approaching her dimensions,
launched from the yard of Robert Napier and Sons, who had now added to
their business of engineers that of iron-ship builders.
Curious to relate, among the vast concourse of people who witnessed
the launch of this ship, there were persons who had been also present
at the launch of the _Comet_ on the Clyde, and who were thus living
witnesses of the extraordinary progress of steam navigation during the
course of their own experience. The _Persia_, besides being the largest
vessel hitherto owned by the Cunard Company, surpassed in speed all
their other vessels.[210]
With such vessels as the _Asia_, _Africa_, _Arabia_, and _Persia_ on
their line, the Cunard Company bade defiance to competition. In a
comparative statement of the voyages of the principal steamers then
engaged in the Transatlantic trade, including the Collins line, the
average speed of the Cunarders throughout the year 1856 exceeded that
of all others;[211] the _Persia_ during that year having, on four
occasions, made the passage from New York to Liverpool in less than
nine days and a half, indeed, in one instance, in nine days, four
hours, and thirty-five minutes.
[Sidenote: Collins line relinquished, 1858.]
But the Collins Company continued to run their ships with regularity
and undaunted vigour up till 1858, and it was only when the
shareholders discovered that they were competing with the Cunard and
other British steamers at a ruinous loss, and declined to provide more
capital, that this great but spirited undertaking was relinquished.
Though the most strenuous exertions were made, every effort failed to
resuscitate the Company. The losses had been stupendous: minor and
separate interests, moreover, as well as those persons who, from the
first, had been opposed to subsidies for the conveyance of the mails,
now brought their influence to bear upon Congress. The merchants and
shipowners of Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and other places,
envious of New York, complained loudly of that city having a virtual
monopoly of the Transatlantic trade, nor did the owners of the sailing
packets fail to renew their protests against the large annual grants
of public money voted for ocean steam communication. In the face of
these remonstrances, and of the numerous hostile interests now at work,
the American Government declined to grant any further subsidies to the
Collins Company, or to aid, from the public purse, another undertaking
which proposed to take its place.
[Sidenote: _Scotia._]
But the Cunarders did not relax their efforts to maintain the high
position they had now attained. In 1862 they sent forth the _Scotia_,
of which an illustration will be found on the following page.
[Sidenote: Her great strength,]
She also was built of iron, but superior in speed and strength to the
_Persia_, and of somewhat greater power and dimensions.[212]
[Illustration: CUNARD STEAM-SHIP “SCOTIA.”]
“In framing the _Scotia_, the utmost attention was bestowed for the
purpose of giving strength and firmness to the whole of her large hull
so as to enable her to resist strain, and make her invulnerable to
concussion. To secure strength she is bound in the strongest manner
throughout from stem to stern, and she is fitted with six transverse
bulkheads which, in the length of the ship, divide the hull into seven
perfectly water-tight compartments, and besides these she has also
four water-tight subsidiary or caisson compartments. She is traversed
from stem to stern by five keelsons, all of which are firmly secured
at each bulkhead. At the bow, her framing is diagonal to afford the
greatest possible resistance in case of concussion, and from the
various peculiarities of her construction and the excellence of the
material with which she has been built, the _Scotia_ is admitted to be
the strongest as she is certainly (1865) the finest merchant-steamer
afloat, and, as such, may be safely adopted as the champion and model
of a mercantile ocean steam-ship.”[213]
[Sidenote: and speed.]
This magnificent specimen of a merchant-steamer surpassed in all
respects any vessel which had hitherto crossed the Atlantic, having
made the passage (allowing for difference in time, but including the
detention of landing mails and passengers at Queenstown) in eight days,
twenty-two hours, from New York to Liverpool.
Though the Collins Company had collapsed, the Cunard Company were not
left in undisputed possession of the intercourse they had established,
except so far as regards any further competition from steam-vessels
subsidised by the Governments of Great Britain or of the United States.
But as no mean rivals in the trade had arisen from among their own
countrymen, they found it necessary to add vessel after vessel to their
fleet, each new one of a still more improved description, and therefore
wisely turned their attention to the screw as a means of propulsion.
[Sidenote: _Russia_, first Cunard screw-steamer, 1862.]
In 1862 they sent forth the _China_, in 1864 the _Cuba_, in 1865 the
_Java_, and in 1867 the _Russia_, all built of iron in the Clyde, but
fitted with the screw instead of paddle-wheels, and embodying various
improvements upon even the _Scotia_. The _Russia_ is 2960 gross
register, and, though her engines are only 492 horse-power,[214] her
speed equalled that of either the _Persia_ or _Scotia_, she having made
the passage from New York to Queenstown in eight days and twenty-eight
minutes, and from Queenstown to New York in eight days, five hours,
and fifty-two minutes mean time, thus affording another instance (if,
indeed, any more were required) of the superiority of the screw over
the paddle-wheels.
[Sidenote: _Bothnia_ and _Scythia_, 1874.]
[Sidenote: Their construction.]
But as the trade increased the Cunard Company found it necessary to
direct their attention to the adoption of every improvement, however
minute, which their experience, combined with the knowledge and science
of the age suggested, so as to increase considerably the capacity of
their vessels, without lessening their speed. Since they launched the
_Russia_ they have added to their fleet five vessels, the _Calabria_,
_Algeria_, and _Abyssinia_, each of 3300 tons, and the _Bothnia_
and _Scythia_, each of 4535 tons, all built of iron and fitted with
the screw. The _Bothnia_ and _Scythia_, (built by Messrs. James and
George Thomson, of Glasgow,) are in all respects similar. They are
each 455 feet in length over all, with a breadth of 42½ feet, and a
depth of 36 feet. In each, accommodation has been afforded for 300
first-class and 800 third-class passengers. They are barque-rigged,
and have four decks—the upper or promenade deck, the spar deck, the
main deck, and the lower or orlop deck; their engines are on the
compound principle.[215] Their engines are 507 nominal horse-power, of
the massive description common to the Cunard liners, so essential for
safety on an Atlantic voyage. They have each two jacketed cylinders,
the small cylinder being 60 inches and the large one 104 inches, with
eight tubular boilers and twenty-four furnaces.
[Illustration: “BOTHNIA.”]
The coal bunkers of the _Bothnia_ are capable of holding 1200 tons of
coals. Steam winches of extra size are attached to all the hatches, and
the weighing of the anchor is secured by the use of Harfield’s[216]
steam windlass. Her _steam_ steering gear is amidships, besides
which she has powerful screw gearing, and, in further supplement of
the guiding resources of the vessel, she can be directed, from a
wheel-house aft, in the event of the steam gearing getting out of order
while at sea.
[Sidenote: Outfit]
The _Bothnia_ (as well as the _Scythia_) is of unusual strength, being
double plated for a considerable distance round the bilge, and having
nine intercostal keelsons, while her spar deck, which is all of teak,
is plated with iron. She carries twelve lifeboats, an unusual number
for even a vessel of her large dimensions. Nor has the comfort and
luxury as well as the safety of the passengers been neglected. In her
main saloon, situated nearly amidships, 300 persons can conveniently
dine at one time. There are besides separate drawing-rooms for ladies,
and smoking and lounging-rooms for gentlemen.
[Sidenote: and cabin accommodation.]
Beyond the advance which has been made in the strength, speed, and
capacity of these ships, since iron has been employed in their
construction and the screw adopted as a propelling power, the improved
accommodation afforded to passengers of all classes has been equally
surprising. The state rooms of the _Bothnia_ are indeed splendid,
affording every comfort possible at sea, the sleeping-berths, in
space, light, ventilation, and convenience, more resembling the
rooms of an hotel than the cabins of a ship. (See illustration, p.
236.) By arrangements, which I have not space to describe in detail,
the scuttles, or rather windows, of the upper tier of berths are no
longer exposed to the wash of the sea, so that they can be kept open
if desired, without in any way jeopardizing the safety of the ship
in the most stormy weather; nay, even when closed, the ventilation
remains perfect, and is continued to the other range of cabins below.
Thus a passage across the stormy Atlantic is no longer one of enduring
discomfort or suffering, as it was in the days of our fathers, but,
to those who are not subject to sea-sickness, has now become a voyage
of pleasure; and, though many of my readers may not be disposed to
agree with me in this respect, the improvements in accommodation are so
great that I should prefer spending the proverbial “month’s holiday,”
which everybody now-a-days seems to require, on board of a modern
steam-ship to spending it in most of our European hotels.
[Illustration: SECTION AND DECK OF CABINS OF THE CUNARD STEAM-SHIPS
“BOTHNIA” AND “SCYTHIA.”]
The _Scythia_ was launched in October 1874, and the _Saragossa_ and
_Cherbourg_, now in course of construction on the Clyde by Messrs.
Thomson for the Cunard Company, are not likely to be in any way
inferior.
[Sidenote: Vessels owned by Cunard Company.]
[Sidenote: Comparison of _Britannia_ and _Bothnia_.]
This company now own forty-nine steam-vessels of 90,208 tons, and
14,537 horse-power;[217] and, in a foot note, will be found an
interesting table of the comparative consumption of coal in fourteen
of these steamers employed in different trades.[218] But, a much more
interesting and instructive table (embracing all the Cunard vessels
that have been employed in the Transatlantic trade since 1840) is
given in the Appendix,[219] and forms in itself a complete history of
the advance of steam-vessels during the last thirty-five years. It
is remarkable to note the extraordinary progress achieved since the
_Britannia_ made her first voyage in 1840. Though measuring 1,139 tons,
she had a capacity for only 225 tons of cargo, whereas the _Bothnia_,
of 4,335 tons, built in 1874, takes 3000 tons of cargo, or nearly
fourteen times as much, though only four times larger. The _Britannia_
carried ninety passengers, whereas the _Bothnia_ carries 340, or
close upon four times as many. The former steamed 8¼ knots an hour,
whereas the latter steams 13, or more than half as quick again, and the
_Bothnia_ does all this extra work on less than half the quantity of
fuel per indicated horse-power per hour, and on about the same quantity
for the actual number of miles run.
As it thus appears that engines of 507 nominal horse-power now drive a
vessel of 4,335 tons, at a speed nearly twice as great as engines of
425 nominal horse-power drove a vessel of only 1039 tons in 1840, with
not half the consumption of coals, may we not hope from the progress
of science and increased knowledge for still more extraordinary
results at the expiration of another thirty-five years?
[Sidenote: Cunard Company never lost a life or a letter during
thirty-five years.]
The Cunard Company have now afloat, and engaged in their Transatlantic
service alone, no less than twenty-three magnificent steam-ships and
two steam-tenders of a gross registered tonnage of 64,718 tons, and
10,000 horse-power.[220] And here I must state that, though they have
for thirty-five years been traversing that stormy ocean, now almost
daily, with surprising regularity and during the most tempestuous
weather, they have only lost two vessels; _but it is still more
remarkable,—indeed, it is an extraordinary fact,—that neither life
nor letter entrusted to their care has been lost through shipwreck,
collision, fire, or any of the too frequent causes of disaster, during
the numerous voyages made by the Cunard steamers across the Atlantic_.
[Sidenote: Reasons.]
_How is this?_ Here is a problem well worthy of solution, and one too
of great national importance. When we consider the terrible loss of
life and property at sea, as revealed by the returns of casualties
annually published by the Board of Trade, and observe the mass of
legislation to prevent or lessen, but in vain, these ever increasing,
and too frequently most lamentable casualties, we cannot but feel that
a noble work has yet to be achieved. What a boon would be conferred on
mankind if this great problem could be satisfactorily solved! I cannot
hope to do so, but I shall endeavour to show that, in the success of
the operations of the Cunard Company, in the regularity of the voyages
of their ships, and in the safety of life and property entrusted
to their care, there exists a wise power of control which might be
advantageously applied to vessels in other trades.
Now, regularity in itself, though perhaps more applicable to transit
on land than sea, is a means of safety, while irregularity or rather
want of punctuality has been the cause of an untold number of accidents
involving destruction of property beyond estimation, with a sacrifice
of life which no mathematician would attempt to value. Indeed it may
safely be affirmed that the number of persons who have lost their lives
through irregularity alone while travelling by land and sea during
the present century, would exceed that of the occupants of a town of
considerable size.
[Sidenote: Value of punctuality.]
[Sidenote: Admirable discipline in their ships.]
With the Cunard Company punctuality is a matter of the highest
consideration, for their ships sail as is the rule with the
Transatlantic lines in all weathers, not merely to the day but to the
hour and even to the minute of the time advertised. On board every
man has his allotted station and his special duty to perform. Nor is
this all, every commander and officer must show that he is thoroughly
competent, in all respects, for his duties, while attention to these
duties is rigidly enforced. From my own experience I can state (for
I have on two occasions crossed the Atlantic as a passenger in their
steamers) that I found prevailing on board a very superior state of
things to what I have noticed in too many steam-vessels in other
trades. The captain was seldom to be seen, except at his duty, nor was
he ever to be found mingling or gossiping with the passengers when
any duty, however trivial, required his attention, even though the
regulations laid down by the owners for his guidance might have allowed
him to do so. No officer was ever seen speaking to the passengers
except perhaps to answer a question. If you entered the engine-room,
the engineers in charge were invariably at their stations ready to stop
the machinery at a moment’s notice, while all the assistants, down
to the furnace-men and coal-trimmers, were at their respective posts
attending to their individual duties. Going aft, you would find the
men at the helm with an officer by their side to make sure that the
steering course was adhered to, and, whether you walked to the bridge
or the forecastle, you would find men on the “look out,” alike in fine
weather and in foul, with their attention steadily directed to the
ship’s course, and with the means of instant communication with the
officer of the watch, and, through him, with the engineer in case of
danger. In approaching land, when in soundings, seamen in both chains
were to be found casting or prepared to cast the lead, or with the
deep sea line on the weather bulwark ready to be run out according to
circumstances or the anticipated depth of water.[221] If you looked
around you would find everything in its place ready for instant action;
if you glanced at the boats you would find their tackles in order and
the boats themselves clear and free from all encumbrances with the
plugs, oars, and rudder ready for immediate use; if you looked below
you would observe the night-lamps carefully guarded from accident,
and the hose stretched out and attached to the engine so that water
could be instantly applied to quench any fire that might accidentally
arise in any part of the ship. Everywhere the most perfect order and
quietness prevailed.
[Sidenote: Regulations of the Company.]
That my readers may understand more thoroughly the nature and value
of these regulations, I furnish[222] for their information the more
important heads of the instructions given to all the commanders of the
Cunard ships. They are clear and to the point and, though every person
on board is subordinate to the commander, the engineer also receives
printed instructions for his guidance. Distinct regulations are laid
down for exercising the boats and fire-pumps, and for their prompt and
efficient use in case of accident:[223] even the duties of the stewards
and servants are as clearly defined, so that in the cabin the same
quiet and order prevails as in all other parts of the ship.
Neglect of these or similar orders has too often led to the most
serious consequences; hence, in all the ships of the Cunard Company,
as on the Transatlantic ships, generally, they are enforced even to
the most minute detail. Any negligence with regard to them would be
severely reprimanded, and any second offence or any wilful neglect,
would be punished by disrating or dismissal from the service. Every
person on board from the captain to the cook’s mate knows this:
consequently, these regulations do not hang neglected on the walls
as regulations of the same kind too frequently do in too many other
vessels, they are carefully studied, as every man on board knows full
well that they must be attended to. Nor does the care of the Company
for the safety of their ships and the lives of their passengers end
here. To avoid as far as possible collision at sea they have within
the last two or three years issued a notice, which is advertised almost
daily in the leading public journals, of the course their ships will
pursue in their passages across the Atlantic.[224]
[Sidenote: Most disasters may be prevented by foresight, &c.]
Though the “dangers of the sea” are proverbial, they might be reduced
by at least two-thirds of their present amount. This is neither an
exaggerated nor a haphazard statement, for upon a close examination
of the wreck returns, it will be found that a still larger proportion
could be prevented. A large volume might be indeed written to advantage
on this important subject. But as our space is limited, and, having
already (vol. iii. chap. xvii.) directed the attention of my readers
to it, I shall only now ask them to turn over in their minds the too
frequent accounts of shipwrecks which appear in the public journals,
and such expressions as “drunkenness,” “overloading,” “negligence,”
“incompetency,” “fire,” “collision,” and “unseaworthy ships and
sailors,” will recur to their recollection as the alleged causes of
too many of these disasters. This is no overdrawn picture, _it is but
too true_.[225]
With these facts in view, and having before them the regulations of the
Cunard Company with the knowledge, also, of the _perfect_ safety with
which their ships have traversed, at the highest rate of speed for a
long series of years, one of the most stormy oceans; one, too, where
icebergs abound, and where far more ships navigate than anywhere else,
they may ask themselves with advantage this question and study it in
their own minds: _Cannot this melancholy list of maritime casualties
be materially reduced?_ IT CAN and _must_. Opinions may differ widely
as to the most effective mode of carrying into practice the means at
our disposal for bringing about a more satisfactory state of things
than exists at present. But the work has to be done, and ought to be
done, when the great fact, which cannot be too often repeated, is
considered that the Cunard Company’s steamers have for thirty-five
years constantly traversed the Atlantic without the loss of the life
of a passenger, or of a letter entrusted to their care.
[Sidenote: Success depends on fitting means.]
Some persons may say that this arises from extraordinary “good luck.”
As a rule, I have no faith in such old sayings; good or bad luck are
expressions only applicable to games of chance where no skill, genius,
industry, or prudence are required, and where every man has an equal
opportunity of winning a prize. In all other matters success depends
on the means applied to obtain it. And there can be no doubt that the
freedom from accident on board of the ships of the Cunard Company
may be attributed, almost entirely, to the wise measures adopted to
prevent casualties, and to the rigour with which they are enforced.
If this conclusion is sound and borne out by the facts, why should we
not make the rules of that company or similar rules adopted by other
steam lines, the bases of our maritime legislation, especially in
passenger ships, and enforce them by legislative enactments? We could
thus dispense with a large portion of the confused mass of maritime
legislation now in force, and from its extent, in too many cases,
practically worthless.[226]
With regard to the seaworthiness, of a ship and the competency of her
crew, it would, while maintaining the valuable existing laws for the
examination of the officers, and the engagement and discharge of the
seamen, be desirable to sweep away the great bulk of the legislative
technical _details_, which even Parliament in its wisdom knows little
about, and require shipowners to produce vessels in all respects
seaworthy, under heavy penalties for negligence, while leaving them
to manage their own affairs as to the best mode of construction,
number, and efficiency of crew, outfits, load line, and so forth. Such
matters cannot be effectually dealt with by Act of Parliament; but,
if they could, is it just, is it proper, that the nation should be
required to take upon itself responsibilities, essentially, belonging
to individuals? If it does, we shall most assuredly create greater
dangers and bring about greater misfortunes and calamities, than those
we attempt to obviate by well-meant but injudicious legislation.
[Sidenote: Cunard line shows what can be done.]
The case of the Cunard Company is a striking instance of what
individuals can do. Legislative enactments are not required to regulate
the conduct of such men as constitute the managing owners of this
company, nor of that of the great majority of British shipowners. They
know that a good ship, well managed and well found, is a much better
investment than a bad one. But they likewise know, and therefore the
Government can always depend upon the support of such men in any wise
and necessary legislative measure, that there are interlopers in their
trade who “go down to the sea in ships and do business on the mighty
waters” of quite as knavish a character and, even more heartless, than
the swindlers who concoct joint stock undertakings on shore to rob the
widow of her mite and the fatherless children of their daily bread:
they know, also, that there are very bad men who send their ships
to sea to be lost, and villains who actually scuttle them. Nor are
they unaware that, among their number, there are men who smile when
their ships are lost _because_ they are well insured.[227] Therefore,
so far from objecting to general laws of even a much more stringent
character than those at present in force, they would welcome them if,
by their rigorous enforcement, the perpetration of crime could be more
effectually checked. If, for instance, punishment was made more certain
and severe, bad men would hesitate before they over-insured their ships
in the hope of realising profits out of disasters, especially where
loss of life occurs. It is only a question of degree between the man
who smiles when his ship founders, and the rogue who dispatches her
for the purpose of being cast away; and Parliament, when it again deals
with the loss of life and property at sea, might do well to direct its
attention more than has hitherto been done to _over-insurance_, and to
the insurance laws of our own and other countries. To limit the amount
insured to the honest value of the article thus protected from loss,
may appear a simple enough matter, but the whole subject is surrounded
with difficulties. It must not, therefore, be hastily dealt with, and
before any legislation is attempted, should be fully investigated,
either by a committee of the House of Commons or by a Royal Commission.
FOOTNOTES:
[207] See Annual Register, 1854, page 162.
[208] One reason why such ships as the _President_ and _Pacific_
have left no trace of their fate is, that they have foundered almost
instantaneously in deep water; the result of this would be that all the
wood in them, including their boats, would be carried down with them,
the wood being at the same time made so heavy by the water forced into
its pores, that it could never again float to the surface.
[209] The _Persia_ is 3766 tons gross register, being 350 feet length
of keel for tonnage, 45 breadth of beam, and 30 feet depth of hold,
with a mean draught of water of 20 feet. She has side-lever engines
of 917 nominal horse-power, working up at sea to 3600 indicated
horse-power.
[210] Shortly after the _Persia_ was dispatched, Mr. Vanderbilt of
New York launched a ship which he named after himself calculated to
surpass in speed any steamer then afloat, but, on the authority of the
_Philadelphia Ledger_, she was defeated by the _Persia_ by thirteen
hours on a passage of 3068 nautical miles across the Atlantic, the
average speed returned on this occasion being: _Vanderbilt_, 13·86
nautical, or 15·98 statute miles per hour; and that of the _Persia_,
13·95 nautical, or 16·08 statute miles per hour. Through the courtesy
of the owners of the latter ship I am enabled to furnish (Appendix No.
9, pp. 603-5) an abstract of her voyages from the 1st of January, 1856,
to the 31st of December, 1867, condensed.
[211]
_Comparative Statement of Average Sailings of various Transatlantic
Steamers during the Year 1856._
----------------------+------------------------+-----------------------
| Liverpool to New York. | New York to Liverpool.
+------------------------+-----------------------
Cunard (Boston) | 13·07 days | 11·12 days
Cunard (New York) | 12·67 days | 11·03 days
Collins | 12·16 days | 12·03 days
Bremen | 15·00 days | 14·12 days
Old Havre | 14·18 days | 13·16 days
Havre (Vanderbilt) | 13·00 days | 13·00 days
Havre (French) | 17·00 days | 15·00 days
Glasgow | 15·12 days | 13·08 days
Hamburg | 15·12 days | 16·00 days
----------------------+------------------------+-----------------------
[212] The dimensions of the _Scotia_ are, length of keel and forerake,
367 feet (nearly twice the length of the _Britannia_); breadth of
beam moulded, 47½ feet; depth for tonnage, 30½ feet; gross register
3871 tons. Her engines are 975 nominal horse-power, but she works at
sea up to 4200 horse-power. The diameters of her two cylinders are
respectively 100 and 144 inches. Her paddle-wheels are upwards of
40 feet in diameter, and her bunkers contain 1800 tons of coal. The
weight of iron in her hull alone is 2800 tons. On her trial trip she
attained a speed of 19 statute miles an hour. Her cost ready for sea
was 170,000_l._, but labour, iron, and other materials have risen
considerably in price since she was contracted for in 1860.
[213] “The Steam Fleet of Liverpool,” p. 17.
[214] This is her nominal power, but as her cylinder is 87 inches
diameter, and stroke 48, the power indicated is from 2700 to 3000
horses.
[215] The compound engine has two cylinders, one frequently double the
diameter of the other. Steam at a high pressure is admitted from the
boiler into the smaller cylinder, and, after it has driven the piston
_up_ or _down_, it is allowed to pass into the larger cylinder when,
by its expansive property, it assists in driving the larger piston
_down_ or up. When it has exerted its full expansive effect, it is then
in a condition to be condensed; and thus a compound engine combines
the advantages of both a high pressure and low pressure or condensing
engines. Compound engines are sometimes called “high and low pressure”
engines, and there are a great many modifications of them, their
principle however, being always the same.
[216] In the course of this work I have frequently had occasion to
refer to the skill and genius displayed by the Americans in their
adaptation of appliances to reduce or dispense with manual labour,
but perhaps none of their inventions with this object in view can be
compared with the windlass of Messrs. Harfield and Company (formerly
Brown, Harfield, and Company), of London, who, beyond other inventions,
have produced in their patent windlass, of which the following is an
illustration—
[Illustration]
a machine of strength, simplicity, and power, applicable to vessels of
all descriptions, which has never been surpassed. This very compact
instrument can be worked either by manual labour or by steam, and of
its value in the latter case Mr. Harfield remarks: “The two principal
points of advantage are (1) that the cable is led from the hawsepipe
to the _underside_ of the chain-wheel, then over and half round the
side standard (formed like a riding-bit) away to the after stopper,
thus forming the strongest means for riding securely; (2ndly), the
chain-wheels are not attached rigidly to the windlass, but have a very
simple _frictional_ connection which can be set up to any desired
extent so as to yield to a heavier strain.”
[217] See Appendix No. 10, pp. 606-608.
[218] _Comparative Statement of Consumption of Coal in various Cunard
Steamers._
--------------+-----------+--------------+-------------+-------------
| | | Consumption |
| | | of Coal per | Consumption
| Indicated | Consumption | Indicated | of Coal
Names of | Horse- | of Coal per | Horse-power | per Mile.
Ships. | power. | Day. | per Hour. |
--------------+-----------+--------------+-------------+-------------
| | Tons | lbs. | Cwts.
_Asia_ | 1,805 | 78 | 4·0 | 5·6
_Arabia_ | 3,005 | 116 | 3·6 | 7·5
_Persia_ | 4,026 | 150 | 3·47 | 9·0
_Scotia_ | 4,500 | 159 | 3·6 | 9·5
_Russia_ | 2,700 | 95 | 3·28 | 6·0
_Parthia_ | 1,950 | 42 | 2·0 | 3·3
_Bothnia_ | 2,543 | 64 | 2·34 | 4·1
_Abyssinia_ | 2,450 | 91 | 3·46 | 5·68
_Marathon_ | 1,450 | 35 | 2·25 | 2·5
_Sidon_ | 760 | 16 | 1·96 | 1·4
_Trinidad_ | 702 | 16 | 2·11 | 1·37
_Nantes_ | 687 | 15 | 2·03 | 1·38
_Sidon_ | 824 | 19 | 2·15 | 1·14
_Nantes_ | 620 | 13 | 1·95 | 1·32
--------------+-----------+--------------+-------------+-------------
[219] See Appendix No. 11, p. 608. For this most valuable and
instructive table I am altogether indebted to Mr. Burns, who considers
toil a pleasure if he can only furnish information which may prove
useful to the public. Indeed, had it not been for him and other
gentlemen largely engaged in maritime commerce, who have so readily
rendered me their aid (for which I tender my warmest thanks), I should
not have ventured to offer to the public so large an amount of purely
original matter as this volume contains.
[220] See Appendix No. 10, page 608.
_Note._—The Cunard Company, consisting, as I have explained, of only a
few private individuals who started business just half a century ago,
now own a fleet of steam-ships whose tonnage is greater by far than
the whole mercantile steam shipping of the German Empire, and nearly
half as great as that of France, Holland (once our greatest rival), and
Hamburg put together. Since they commenced they have had no less than
164 steam-ships under their flag. They employ 6000 men, shipping and
discharging in the course of one year, 42,000 seamen.
See evidence of Mr. John Burns before the Royal Commission on
Unseaworthy Ships, 1874.
In 1871, France owned (including the vessels of the Messageries
Maritimes) 160,478 tons; Holland, 36,644 tons; and Hamburg, 45,669 tons
of steam shipping.
[221] The chief-mate of the steam-ship _Schiller_, a German steamer
engaged in the Transatlantic trade, which was lost, with 333 persons on
board, on rocks contiguous to Scilly, in thick weather during the night
of the 7th of May, 1875, states in his evidence: “The _Schiller_ was
out of her reckoning: they _thought_ they were 25 miles from the land.
They had had fog for three days, had been unable to take observations,
and HAD NOT ONCE CAST THE LEAD.” (See report of official inquiry
ordered by the Board of Trade, _Times_, 2nd June, 1875.) If any of my
readers will look at the soundings marked on a Channel chart they will
see that this steamer would most probably not have been lost had only
one cast of the lead been taken during the three days of fog.
[222] The instructions to the captains are in print and of considerable
length, but the leading points in regard to the discipline and safety
of the ship and all persons on board are as follows:
“We rely on your keeping every person attached to the ship, both
officers and people throughout the several departments, up to the
high standard of discipline and efficiency which we expect in the
service. Your own practical knowledge may be your best guide, but
we will allude to the following things:—
“The charge of the ship, in all its departments, is put under the
command of the captain.
“The departments on board are classed under three heads:
“Sailing, engineers, stewards and servants.
“The captain to divide the sailors and officers into two watches
only, so that two officers may be always on deck.”
“Keep good look-outs.—The trust of so many lives under the
captain’s charge is a great responsibility; requiring vigilance
night and day.
“Be most careful as regards fire and the use of naked lights.—See
the rules in cabin regulations on this point attended to.
“Good steering is of great value.—Pick out the best helmsmen for
this duty.
“We beg your especial care to the drawing-off of spirits. The
spirit-room should, if possible, be entered during the day _only_.
See instructions to the purser under this head, and enforce them.
“Avoid familiarity with any particular set or portion of
your passengers; avoid national observations and discourage
them in others; keep yourself always a disinterested party
ready to reconcile differences; be civil and kind to all your
passengers—_recollect they will value your services on deck
looking after their safety more than talking with them in the
saloons_.
“The engine store-room (the place where the waste and oil are
kept) should have the engineers’ close attention, so as to prevent
fire, or even the alarm of it, not only on the passage but in port.
“It is to be borne in mind that every part of the coast-board of
England and Ireland can be read off by the lead; and, on making
land, you should never omit to verify your position by soundings;
rather lose time in heaving the ship to, than run the risk of
losing the vessel and all the lives on board.
“You are to understand that you have a peremptory order, that,
in fog or snow-storm, or in such state of the weather as appears
attendant with risk in sailing, you are on no account whatever
to move the vessel under your command out of port or wherever
she may be lying in safety, if there exists in your mind a doubt
as to the propriety of proceeding; and, at the same time, you
are particularly warned against being influenced by the actions
of other captains who may venture to sail their vessels in such
weather.
“In any case when, in sailing, you are overtaken by thick weather,
fog, or snow-storm, the most extreme caution is to be exercised,
and you are not to be actuated by any desire to complete your
voyage, your sole consideration being the safety of your ship and
those under your charge; and we caution and instruct you in such
circumstances to make CONSTANT USE OF THE LEAD, and to enter in
your log the fact of your having done so.
“In the navigating of our vessels generally, we have entire
confidence in the ability of our captains, and full reliance upon
their judgment and discretion, knowing, by experience, the fitness
of each man for the responsibility of his post; but in the matter
of fog, the best of officers become infatuated, and often attempt
to push through, when common sense and prudence would teach them
to exercise patience.
“You will bear in mind that we are now impressing upon you
stringent rules, long laid down by us for the guidance of our
captains, the terms of which are plain and unmistakeable, and
can leave no doubt as to your clear course of action in the
circumstances referred to, and we expect them to be implicitly
obeyed; but, if otherwise, the conduct of those who disregard them
can only be looked upon as extremely culpable, and deserving the
severest censure.”
[223] Appendix No. 12, pp. 609-10.
[224] “Cunard line.—Notice.—With the view of diminishing the chances
of collision, the steamers of this line will henceforth take a
specified course for all seasons of the year.
“On the outward passage from Queenstown to New York or Boston crossing
meridian of 50 at 43 lat., or nothing to the north of 43.
“On the homeward passage, crossing the meridian of 50 at 42 lat., or
nothing to the north of 42.”
_Note._—In July, 1871, the late Mr. William Wheelwright laid before
Mr. Chichester Fortescue (now Lord Carlingford), then President of the
Board of Trade, a large and beautifully executed chart, “showing an
eastern and western route for steamers crossing the Atlantic, whereby
collision may be avoided, and the fleet of fishing-vessels on the banks
of Newfoundland protected.” Mr. Wheelwright appears to have been the
first person to make known this valuable suggestion (which might with
advantage be enforced on all passenger steamers engaged in the northern
branch of the Transatlantic trade), as he published a pamphlet on the
subject so far back as 1846.
[225] If my readers will refer to the Report of the Royal Commission on
Unseaworthy Ships (1873-74), they will find the following summary of
the losses of ships at sea from 1856 to 1872 inclusive, which have been
the subject of enquiry at the instance of the Board of Trade:—Losses
attributable to unseaworthiness of hull, compasses, equipment, and
outfit, within the power of the owners to remedy, 4½ per cent.; losses
to be attributed to carelessness, drunkenness, ignorance, incompetency,
and absence of discipline, 65 per cent.; losses from stress of weather,
and causes not apparently preventable, 30½ per cent. This last item
includes 38 wrecks of which no cause is assignable. See also article,
“Merchant Shipping Legislation,” in the ‘Westminster Review’ for April,
1875, by Mr. Charles Lamport; and a very able article by his brother,
the late Mr. W. J. Lamport, of Liverpool, entitled the “Plimsoll
Agitation,” which appeared in the ‘Theological Review’ for January,
1874.
[226] It is satisfactory to note by the official returns, that, with
respect to ships _carrying passengers_, the loss of life is not so
great as is generally supposed. Between 1847 and 1873 inclusive, 22,186
vessels left the United Kingdom, with 5,388,163 passengers and 847,550
of crew—in all 6,235,713 persons. Out of the above number, 103 ships
were lost, and 6129 lives, giving a percentage in the loss of ships
of ·46, or not one-half per cent., and in the loss of life ·09, or
less than one person in the thousand thus conveyed. This return refers
to ships which come under the “Passenger Act.” See “Report of Royal
Commission of 1873-74.”
[227] There are probably very few shipowners who actually over-insure
ship or freight with a view to their loss, but when these are fully
covered, so that a loss may become a gain, it is not in human nature to
be, under such circumstances, as careful as if a loss were _really_ a
loss; and, when times are bad or ships unprofitable, the temptation to
carelessness is very great.
Not long since a shipowner of high reputation and on whose word I can
implicitly rely, met another shipowner, who, complaining of the bad
times, in the course of conversation said: “And to make matters worse
I have also had a bit of very bad luck.” “What was it?” enquired my
friend. “Oh!” said he, “a ship of mine I had just sold was lost the
first voyage after I parted with her.” “Well,” replied my friend, “and
where was the bad luck there?” “_Where?_” exclaimed this “unfortunate”
shipowner, “why I bought her twenty years ago, and insured her at her
full value, and had kept her so insured till I parted with her.” “And
what made you do that?” enquired my friend. “Oh!” replied he, “she was
an old ship, and an old-fashioned ship, and I thought that if she _did_
happen to go to the bottom I might as well have a good and a new one in
her place.”
In relating this incident, my friend added that he was not less taken
aback by the _naïveté_ and apparent innocence with which these remarks
were made, than by the story itself.
CHAPTER VI.
Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company—_City
of Glasgow_, 1850—_City of Manchester_, 1851—Speed of _City of
Paris_ and _City of Brussels_—Exertions of Mr. Inman to improve
and facilitate cheap emigration to the United States—Large
number of emigrants carried in the Inman steamers—_City
of Chester_, 1873—_City of Berlin_, 1875—Ocean steamers
to Canada, 1853—First mail contract, 1852—Allan line of
steamers, 1856—Extent and capacity of its fleet—Speed of
these vessels—Galway line a failure—Loss of _Connaught_,
1860—Rapid passage of _Adriatic_, 1861—Struggles between
sailing-clippers and iron screw-ships—National Steam Navigation
Company, 1863—Their splendid ships—Old Black Ball line—The
Guion line, 1863—Mississippi and Dominion Company—White
Star line, 1870—Strict regulations for safety—_Britannic_
and _Germanic_—Their great speed—Details of _Britannic_
and form of her screw—Difficulty of estimating real cost of
steamers—Pennsylvania Company, 1873—Anchor line from the
Clyde, 1856—Prodigious range of their trade operations—The
_Victoria_—Hamburg American Steam Packet Company—North German
Lloyd’s.
[Sidenote: Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam-ship Company.]
The year 1850 proved somewhat remarkable in the history of steam
navigation. But among the various undertakings commenced in the course
of that year, the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam-ship
Company, better known as the Inman line, was perhaps the most important.
[Sidenote: _City of Glasgow_, 1850.]
Mr. William Inman, the managing owner, by whose energy their present
large fleet of iron screw-steamers was created, had for some time
given his attention to the application of the screw, for the purpose
of propelling ocean-going steamers. Impressed with its superiority
over the paddle-wheel, he entered into communication with the late
David Tod, of the firm of Tod and Macgregor, iron shipbuilders and
engineers in Glasgow, who had formed, in common with the owners of the
_Great Britain_, the idea of starting a continuous service of voyages
across the Atlantic with vessels built of iron and driven by screws,
an experiment at that time considered rather hazardous, and, with that
object, had in 1850 launched the _City of Glasgow_, a vessel of 1600
tons, and 350 horse-power. Subsequently, she was purchased by the Inman
Company, and sailed from Liverpool for Philadelphia on the 17th of
December, 1850, continuing in that service for many years.
[Sidenote: _City of Manchester_, 1851.]
In 1851, the Inman Company purchased the steam-ship _City of
Manchester_, of which the following is an illustration, built also by
Messrs. Tod and Macgregor,[228] and with these vessels a fortnightly
service between Liverpool and Philadelphia was established and
continued up to the year 1857. Between 1851 and 1856 the _City of
Baltimore_, the _Kangaroo_, and the _City of Washington_, all iron
screw-ships, were added to this line.
[Illustration: “CITY OF MANCHESTER.”]
In the year 1857 the Inman Company enlarged the area of their
operations by making New York one of their ports of arrival, and
establishing a regular fortnightly line thither. In 1860 they increased
the service of their steamers to once a week; in 1863 to three times a
fortnight, and in 1866 they sent forth their steamers twice every week
during the summer months.
[Sidenote: Speed of _City of Paris_, and _City of Brussels_.]
To some extent the failure of the Collins line proved the fortune
of the Inman, for, when that unfortunate undertaking collapsed, Mr.
Inman at once assumed their dates of sailing, and carried the United
States’ mails between England and America for some time afterwards with
great regularity. Nor were the vessels of the Inman line less swift
than their predecessors. Indeed, their _City of Paris_,[229] of 3081
tons gross register, and 500 nominal horse-power, and their _City of
Brussels_, of 3747 tons, and 600 horse-power, far surpassed the fastest
steamers of the Collins Company, and they in turn were surpassed by the
_City of Richmond_.[230]
[Sidenote: Exertions of Mr. Inman to improve and facilitate cheap
emigration to the United States.]
But whatever advantages may have been derived by carrying the United
States’ mails, Mr. Inman, apart from these, specially directed his
attention to the conveyance of emigrant passengers (who found in his
ships greater comfort, and a much more rapid means of reaching the
United States than could be obtained in the fastest of the American
sailing packets), and thus laid, at the outset, the foundation for
the future prosperity of the company he had formed. It was he who
first gave to the masses from the overcrowded cities of Europe, more
economical and rapid means than they had hitherto enjoyed of reaching
a country where their labour was in demand, and, by wise and judicious
arrangements in his steamers, supplied what had hitherto been to a
great extent wanting, the more complete separation of the sexes on
the voyage to the land of their adoption. While reaping the reward to
which his meritorious services were justly entitled, he conferred a
boon worthy of remembrance on myriads of poor people, and I should ill
perform the duty I have undertaken, were I not to specially notice his
exertions on behalf of those of the industrious working classes, who
felt it necessary to seek for themselves and their children, the means
of obtaining honest employment in other and in distant lands.[231]
[Sidenote: Large number of emigrants carried in the Inman steamers.]
In 1856 and 1857, the Inman Company conveyed in their steamers
eighty-five thousand passengers, to and from the United States of
America, or about one-third of all the persons who crossed the Atlantic
in steamships during these two years; and that this company long
maintained the favourable prestige they had at first secured, may be
seen by the official returns of emigrants landed in New York for the
year 1870.[232]
[Sidenote: _City of Chester_, 1873.]
In 1873 this Company added two magnificent screws to their fleet,
the _City of Chester_, of which an illustration will be found on the
following page, and the _City of Richmond_, each of 4700 gross, or 3000
net register tonnage, and 800-horse power. These vessels were built by
Messrs. Caird and Co., of Greenock, and by Messrs. Tod and MacGregor,
of Glasgow, and are each 453 feet 6 inches in length over all, with a
beam of 43 feet, and a depth of hold of 36 feet. They are spar-decked,
have iron masts and solid iron bulwarks, and they are ship-rigged.
In midships, there are long rows of centre and side houses, for a
portion of the passengers and crew, and where accommodation is likewise
afforded for the steering gear which is wrought by manual labour or
steam power. There are also “the galley-saloons,” providing cooking
apparatus sufficient for 1500 persons; while five of the side houses
are devoted to the purpose of male and female hospitals. The engines
of these vessels are compound with inverted cylinders and surface
condensers; the large cylinder being 120 inches, and the smaller one 76
inches in diameter; the length of stroke of the piston is 5 feet; and
their speed on trial was 16 knots an hour.[233]
[Illustration: S.S. “CITY OF CHESTER.”]
[Sidenote: _City of Berlin_, 1875.]
But the Inman Company has recently launched from the yard of Messrs.
Caird and Company a still larger and more magnificent vessel, the
_City of Berlin_, being the longest and perhaps the largest merchant
steam-vessel afloat, the _Great Eastern_ alone excepted. Her dimensions
are: length over all, 520 feet; breadth 44 feet; and depth to spar
deck, 37 feet; her gross register is 5500 tons; she is supplied with
two direct-acting high and low pressure engines (compound condensing)
of 900 nominal, but indicating, as proved on trial, 4799 horse-power;
her cylinders being 120 and 72 inches diameter respectively, with a
piston stroke of 5 feet 6 inches; she has twelve boilers and thirty-six
furnaces; and she has accommodation for 202 first-class passengers, and
1500 intermediate passengers and emigrants.[234]
A list of the Inman Company’s vessels on the 1st of January, 1875, will
be found in the Appendix.[235]
The success which had attended the British steamers engaged in the
trade with the United States, led to further projects for extending
this beneficial agency to the British North American Colonies,
and induced the attempt to introduce a regular line of steam-ship
communication between Liverpool and Canada by means of the natural
estuary of the St. Lawrence. Magnificent, however, as this river
unquestionably is, when looked on as an artery of commerce between the
rich agricultural and mineral districts along its margins, and the vast
tracts of fertile country around its lakes, its navigation is attended
with many difficulties and presents numerous dangers. Not the least
of these arises from the ice, which, on breaking up, is apt to choke
the river, and at the same time to cause the elimination of quantities
of watery vapour, which, partially condensed by the surrounding low
temperature, is converted into dense fog, so thoroughly impervious
to the sun’s rays, as to bewilder the most skilful mariner, and
incalculably to increase the dangers to which voyaging in these waters
is otherwise exposed.
[Sidenote: Ocean steamers to Canada, 1853.]
But the indomitable spirit of British shipowners refuses to recognise
dangers or to acknowledge difficulties save with a resolution to
combat and overcome them; and so it has fared with the suggestion
made in June, 1852, for applying steam-ships to carry on the mail and
other rapid traffic with British North America. Previously, the trade
between this country and Canada, had been carried on by a superior
class of sailing-ships, many of which during its early history were
commanded by their owners or their sons. Among these early merchant
traders to Canada, Mr. Alexander Allan, the father of the family that
gives its name to the present Allan line of steamers, had a prominent
place.[236] When the success of screw-steamers upon the Atlantic had
been assured, the members of the Allan family turned their attention
to the advantages to be derived from their employment of such vessels,
and established a line of them to run between Liverpool, Quebec, and
Montreal during the period of open navigation, and between Liverpool
and Portland when the St. Lawrence is icebound.[237]
[Sidenote: First Mail Contract, 1852.]
Before, however, their vessels were finished, the Canadian Government
advertised (June, 1852) for the conveyance of their mails between this
country and Canada in summer, and Portland in winter. For this service
a contract was concluded with Messrs. McKean, McLarty, and Lamont of
Liverpool, who formed a company and opened the line in the spring
of 1853, with a vessel of 500 tons register named the _Genova_: the
line was continued for about eighteen months by means of the steamer
_Cleopatra_, of 1467 tons, and two smaller vessels, the _Ottawa_ and
_Charity_, and the _Canadian_, the first steamer built for Messrs.
Allan, who had chartered her to the company.
[Sidenote: Allan Line of Steamers, 1856.]
[Sidenote: Extent and capacity of its fleet.]
But the service, which was conducted with varying regularity, proving
unprofitable, was transferred to the Allans, who undertook with the
fleet they were building, specially for this trade, to carry on a
fortnightly service to Quebec in summer, and a monthly voyage to
Portland (Maine) in winter, for the annual subsidy of 24,000_l._ The
Crimean war, however, occurring in 1854, offered more remunerative
employment to the steamers of the fleet of both contractors. And,
consequently, the regular mail service by the Allan line (which at the
first was designated the Montreal Ocean Steam-ship Company) was not
commenced until April, 1856. Since then it has been maintained with
unbroken regularity, with the exception of various serious losses,
which might almost have been anticipated in the early history of
the service, considering the dangerous character of the navigation.
From a fortnightly line in summer, and a monthly line in winter, the
operations of the company have been expanded into a regular weekly
service, supplemented by an additional fortnightly mail service
between Liverpool and Halifax, extending during summer to St. John’s,
Newfoundland, and continued, monthly, during winter by means of an
iceboat, between Halifax and St. John’s, when the latter port cannot be
approached by ocean steamers.
Steamers of the Allan fleet also trade between Liverpool and Baltimore,
and a weekly line of this company is maintained between Glasgow and
Canada in summer. A list of the Allan steamers will be found in the
Appendix:[238] and I must add that they are now unsurpassed in their
efficiency and regularity by any of the Atlantic lines.
Their steamer, the _Hibernian_, built in 1861, was the first in the
Atlantic trade, where the deck-houses were covered by a promenade
deck, stretching from stem to stern, which prevents a sea, when it
breaks on board, from filling the passages between the deck-houses and
bulwarks. Indeed, so highly was the plan approved by Government, that
the unproductive spaces under this deck were made, by order of the
Board of Trade, the subject of a special exemption from tonnage measure
by the deck-shelter clause of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854. Other
Atlantic lines adopting this protection obtained like privileges, but,
difficulties arising in connection with ships of somewhat different
construction which however claimed the same exemption, Government was
obliged to abolish all such immunities.
[Sidenote: Speed of these vessels.]
Some of the vessels of this line are remarkable for their speed. For
instance, in October, 1872, the _Polynesian_ on her first voyage, made
the passage between Quebec and Londonderry in seven days eighteen hours
and fifty-five minutes; while her sister ship, the _Sarmatian_, was
engaged by Government to convey the 42nd Highlanders to the Gold Coast,
in the recent Ashantee war.
The _Hungarian_, one of the earliest of these steamers, made the
passage from Quebec to the Rock Light in nine days six hours and
thirty-five minutes, or from land to land in six days. Another, the
_Peruvian_, completed one of the fastest round voyages on record in any
Atlantic line; on the 16th of December, 1864, she left Moville (port of
call, near Londonderry in Ireland, for the Allan boats) at 6.24 P.M.,
discharged her cargo at Portland (State of Maine, United States), took
in her homeward cargo, and sailing, arrived back at Moville on the 10th
of January, 1865, at 9.15 A.M., thus making the passage out and home,
including detentions at Portland, while discharging and loading her
cargoes, in twenty-four days fifteen hours.
In the limited space at my disposal it would be impossible for me
to notice all the lines of steamships now traversing the ocean, and
I must, therefore, in a great measure, confine my remarks to those
which have led the way and have become either famous by their success
or conspicuous by their failure, so that my readers may, it is to
be hoped, learn in their day and generation, wisdom from them both,
seeing, in the former, what they ought to imitate or if possible
improve on; in the latter, what they had better avoid and condemn.
Thus, in the Parliamentary Report[239] on the “Royal Atlantic Steam
Navigation Company,” better known as the “Galway line,” will be found
an account of the brief career of one of the most unfortunate and
disastrous of these undertakings.
[Sidenote: Galway line a failure.]
Having in view the success of the three British lines of steamers to
which I have just referred, but at the same time paying no heed to
the warning presented by the Collins Company in their endeavours to
traverse, with unusual speed, the fickle and stormy Atlantic, a company
of English and Irish gentlemen, most of whom had little knowledge and,
certainly, no experience of the business they were about to undertake,
proposed to the British Government, in January 1859, to carry Her
Majesty’s mails from Galway to Portland, Boston or New York, _viâ_ St.
John’s, Newfoundland, or otherwise, for the sum of 3000_l._ per voyage,
“such voyage being the passage out and home.” The great attraction,
however, of the offer lay in the further condition that “they would
undertake to convey telegraphic messages from the United Kingdom to
British North America and the United States in _six_ days, casualties
excepted,” the Atlantic cable being then only in contemplation: that
is, they offered to make the passage between Galway and St. John’s,
Newfoundland, at all seasons of the year, in the unprecedented short
time of six days. A contract based on this proposal was entered into on
the 21st April, 1859, to which a table was annexed[240] of the time in
which this company further agreed to deliver _letters_ at New York and
at Galway. With the object of carrying out this contract, the “Royal
Atlantic Steam Navigation Company concluded, on the 10th June, 1859,
an agreement with Messrs. Palmer of Newcastle, for the construction of
two ships at a cost of 95,000_l._ each, and, on the 15th June, they
entered into another contract with Messrs. Samuelson of Hull, for the
construction of two other ships at a cost of 97,500_l._ each. These
vessels were to be built according to lines, plans, and specifications
approved by the Admiralty, and were to be delivered within eleven
months from the date of the agreements, the commencement of the postal
service according to contract having been fixed for June 1860.”[241]
The dimensions of these ships were 360 feet long, 40 feet beam, and 32
feet depth of hold. They were each 2800 tons measurement, with engines
of about 850 nominal horse-power; in model and equipment they were
somewhat similar. Indeed, the _Connaught_ and the _Hibernia_, built
by Messrs. Palmer, were “precisely the same;”[242] a clause in their
agreement with the company requiring, “that each of the said vessels
when completed was, on a fair and proper trial thereof, to accomplish
a speed at _the rate of 20 statute miles_ per hour in smooth water,
and to consume not more than 8800 pounds of fuel per hour.”[243] But,
on the trial of the _Connaught_, the Government inspector reported
that the speed of this “vessel was about thirteen knots; the average
revolutions of the engines, 16·6; the average pressure of steam in
the boilers being 22½ lbs. on the square inch, and the vacuum in the
condensers 24½ inches.”[244]
[Sidenote: Loss of the _Connaught_, 1860.]
Difficulties and differences of various kinds having arisen, none of
these vessels were delivered within the time agreed upon, and the
company was consequently obliged to start the service with a hired
vessel—the _Parana_—which sailed from Galway on the 27th of June,
1860, arriving at St. John’s in seven days thirteen and a half hours,
and at New York in eleven days seventeen and three-quarter hours after
her departure, or fifteen hours and three-quarters behind the contract
time for the delivery of the mail bags at her final destination, and
one day thirteen and three-quarter hours beyond the stipulated time
for delivering the telegraph messages at St. John’s. The _Connaught_
followed, in her case direct for Boston, on the 11th of July, and
was twenty-two and a half hours over time in reaching that place.
But serious disasters soon befell these steamers: the _Connaught_
was totally lost on her second voyage in October, of this year when
approaching Boston, she having, on this occasion, been one day and
twenty and a half hours behind time in reaching St. John’s. One voyage
had, consequently, to be omitted altogether. The second ship belonging
to the company, the _Hibernia_, encountering a severe gale on her way
from the Tyne to Galway was so thoroughly disabled that she never
entered the service at all,[245] while their third new ship, the
_Columbia_, which sailed for the United States on the 9th of April from
Galway, returned in May disabled by ice,[246] after making the slowest
passage outwards of any of the fleet, having been ten days seven and
a half hours in reaching St. John’s, and seventeen days twenty and
three-quarter hours before she arrived at Boston.[247]
[Sidenote: Rapid passage of the _Adriatic_, 1861.]
The steamship _Prince Albert_ was chartered to take the place of the
_Connaught_, and in February 1861 the Company purchased the _Adriatic_,
one of the most famous ships of the Collins line. The transfer of this
ship to the British flag does not seem to have reduced her speed or
detracted from her celebrated sea-going qualities, for she made the
run from Galway to St. John’s in six days, the specified time, and,
having completed the passage to New York in one day fifteen hours and a
quarter less than the contract time, returned from St. John’s to Galway
in _five days nineteen hours and three-quarters_, perhaps the quickest
passage on record from port to port across the Atlantic.[248]
But, having, within six months, lost one of their vessels, while
another was disabled by storm, and a third rendered unfit for the
mail service in her encounter with ice off Newfoundland, the Company,
finding it impossible to raise fresh capital in the face of such
disasters, had no course left but to abandon their undertaking and
terminate their contract in May 1861. The return[249] of the earnings
and costs to Government of the Galway line of mail steamers shows a
heavy loss to the public, but, though I have no means of knowing the
amount of the losses of the company itself during its brief career,
these must have been far greater; indeed, it was currently reported
that the shareholders lost in eighteen months nearly all, if not the
whole, of their capital.
[Sidenote: Struggles between the “clippers” and the iron screw-ships.]
But, however disastrous the results to the American shareholders of
the Collins line on the one hand, or to the British shareholders of
the Galway line of steamers on the other (both these undertakings
being, it should be remembered, largely subsidized), the ardour of
private and unsubsidized energy in no way abated. The ocean race for
supremacy in the carrying trade of the Atlantic was still maintained;
and the struggle continued with quite as much spirit as ever between
the American owners of sailing-clippers and the British shareholders
of iron screw-steamers. It was a brave fight: but the wooden clippers
of America had no chance against the iron screws of Great Britain,
although the race was not then so unequal as might appear, arising
from the fact that the current expenses of the clippers were far
less then than those of the steamers, while their capacity for cargo
was far greater. Indeed, for a time, it was questionable whether the
clippers did not yield their owners quite as good returns on the
capital invested as the steamers. The wooden clipper, however, had
reached perfection, (the world having never previously seen a more
splendid class of sailing-ships than the “Yankee liners of that day,”)
whereas the screw, being still in its infancy, moved onwards with the
progress of science, improvements in machinery tending to reduce the
current expenses and to increase the capacity of the ship by reducing
the consumption of fuel, so that the sailing-ships were obliged to
succumb. At last, the screw-steamers slowly but surely obtained an
almost complete supremacy, and have now no competitors (except among
themselves) in the more valuable portion of the carrying trade across
the Atlantic.
[Sidenote: National Steam Navigation Company, 1863.]
The success which had attended the Inman and the Allan lines of
steamers induced others to follow their example; and various
undertakings of a similar character were started in rapid succession.
Thus, with the view of availing themselves of recent legislative
measures for the encouragement of mercantile associations, a number of
Liverpool merchants and shipowners established, in 1863, the National
Steam Navigation Company with a capital of 700,000_l._ The original
intention of the promoters of this undertaking was to provide for the
large trade they felt assured must arise between this country and the
Confederate States whenever the lamentable war then raging in America
should have exhausted itself, and when peace returning should have
showered down its many blessings on that fertile and teeming land;
their first plan, therefore, was to carry on a regular periodical line
of first-class steam-ships between Liverpool and the Southern States.
The anxiously hoped for peace between the contending parties in America
did not, however, arrive so soon as they had anticipated, and, as the
requisite capital had been obtained, and their ships were ready for
service, they sent forth their steamers to compete for a portion of the
passenger and goods trade of the Northern States, which the Cunard,
Inman, and Allan lines were now carrying on with great success.
[Sidenote: Their splendid ships, and complete success.]
The first vessels of the National Company dispatched to ply between
Liverpool and New York, were the _Louisiana_, the _Virginia_, and
the _Pennsylvania_ screw-ships of a gross tonnage, respectively, of
3000 and 3500 tons; at that time being the largest vessels afloat. In
1864, the company added to its fleet the _Erin_, the _Queen_, and the
_Helvetia_, each of an increased tonnage. With these six vessels the
company was enabled to lay the foundation of so successful a trade
that, at the conclusion of the war, the directors found the utmost
capacity of their vessels insufficient to accommodate the rapidly
increasing traffic between the two nations. In 1865, their fleet was
again increased by the further addition of the _England_ and the
_Denmark_, of 3723 tons, and these vessels, again, were followed in
1866, by the _France_, of nearly similar dimensions. In 1868, the
_Italy_, of 4300 tons, was placed on the line, and was the first in
that trade in which engines on the compound principle were placed. The
_Holland_, of 3847 tons, followed in 1869. The year 1870 proving to be
one of great prosperity to the company, the _Egypt_ and the _Spain_, of
4669 and 4512 tons respectively, were added to the fleet. These vessels
were built by the Liverpool Shipbuilding Company, and by Messrs. Laird
of Birkenhead, and are justly considered very fine specimens of naval
architecture.
This Company now maintain a weekly service, leaving Liverpool every
Wednesday and New York every Saturday; and a fortnightly service from
London to New York _viâ_ Havre. Following the example of the Cunard
Company, the commanders of the ships are required to navigate at
certain seasons within fixed limits of latitude, and to furnish a chart
to the Company with the lines of their course during each voyage laid
down upon it. Stringent regulations are also issued and enforced, and,
to the credit of the Company, they have not during their existence,
lost a single passenger through negligence or any accident of the sea.
[Sidenote: Old Black Ball line.]
It is a curious fact that, as a rule, the owners of the principal
American clipper lines of sailing-ships were among the last to see that
their vessels, however splendid, were being daily eclipsed by the screw
steamers of Great Britain. Thus, conspicuous among the lines which
bravely contended against the new motive power, and long maintained
itself in full force, may be mentioned the Old Black Ball line, which,
when I remember it, a quarter of a century ago, possessed upwards of
twenty of the finest sailing-packets I ever saw. They were grand ships
of their class, and admirably fitted for the trade in which they were
engaged, carrying, during some of the later years of their career, a
thousand passengers every week, during the summer months, from our
shores to the United States. But even the _Black Ball_ was at last
obliged to give in, having previously merged into or formed part of the
Guion line of sailing-ships, which in their day were equally celebrated
for the regularity of their passages.[250]
[Sidenote: The Guion line. 1863.]
In 1863, however, Mr. S. B. Guion, the chief owner of the line bearing
his name, finding it no longer possible to contend against the screws,
though evidently still doubtful of their permanent success, entered
into an arrangement to supply, through his old connections and agents
in America, the Cunard and National Companies, with emigrants and cargo
for their steamers; but in 1866, he and his co-partners, most of whom
are citizens of the United States, started a steamship of their own.
In August of that year, their _Manhattan_, built in this country of
iron and fitted with the screw, to their orders, sailed from Liverpool
for New York, being the pioneer of their new fleet of liners. The
_Minnesota_, _Nebraska_, _Colorado_, _Idaho_, _Nevada_, _Wisconsin_,
and _Wyoming_, vessels each of about 3000 tons, and built of iron,
specially for this trade, followed in rapid succession. In 1873, they
added the _Montana_, another fine vessel of 3500 tons, to their fleet,
which, in 1874, was further increased by the addition of the _Dakota_,
and two similar vessels, so that the Liverpool and Great Western
Steam-ship Company, better known as the Guion line, already possesses a
fleet of very fine steam-ships.[251]
Although the American sailing-packets engaged in the trade between
Great Britain and the Northern States were, about the year 1860,
obliged, in a great measure, to give way to steamers, they maintained
their position undisputed for ten years longer between Liverpool and
New Orleans; steamers, it was thought, not being able to compete with
sailing-vessels in the transport across the Atlantic of such bulky
articles as cotton, the chief article exported from New Orleans to
Europe. But in 1870, the American merchants and shipowners engaged
in the trade of that place found it desirable, if not necessary, to
substitute for some of their sailing-vessels a line of screw-steamers
similar in many respects, though smaller, to those of the other
lines already described, their merchants forming themselves into an
association known as the “Mississippi and Dominion Steam-ship Company
(Limited).”
[Sidenote: Mississippi and Dominion Company.]
This company now trades between Liverpool and New Orleans in the winter
when the cotton crops are shipped and, in the summer season, between
the former port and Canada with passengers and general cargoes. Like
the Guion line, their ships are chiefly, if not entirely, owned by
Americans and managed by them. On their passages to the south, they
usually call at Bordeaux, Corunna, Lisbon and Havana, and thus secure a
considerable number of the emigrant passengers who find their way from
the southern portions of Europe to that portion of the New World where
the climate is not unlike their own, and where the character of the
labour is more in accordance with their habits and abilities than would
be that of the Northern States.
[Sidenote: White Star line, 1870.]
But another important line of steamers has been added, which in speed
has since surpassed, and in other respects is equal to, any of the
great Transatlantic lines now competing for the traffic of the New
World. The White Star Line, under the management of Messrs. Ismay,
Imrie, and Co. who have adopted the name of a once celebrated line of
sailing-packets,[252] commenced running their steamers from Liverpool
to New York in 1870: they now maintain a weekly communication with
these ports, with extra boats available for intermediate sailings as
the requirements of the trade demand, the regular days being Thursday
from Liverpool (calling at Queenstown, Ireland, on Friday), and from
New York on Saturday.
[Illustration: THE WHITE STAR S.S. “BRITANNIC.”]
[Sidenote: Strict regulations for safety, &c.]
These vessels, which are nearly uniform in size and speed, were
designed and built with a view of affording the public an extra
supply of steamers, such as would best attain the three-fold purpose
of safety, speed, and comfort; and certainly their performances have
realised the objects and expectations of their enterprising owners.
Built of iron with watertight and fire-proof compartments, they afford
in their strength every guarantee for safety, nor are their owners
behind their rivals in the caution exercised to avoid the ordinary
dangers of rapid navigation.[253] But speed with them, as with all
well-regulated navigation companies, appears to be only a secondary
consideration, for, not satisfied with a general regulation, Messrs.
Ismay and Imrie, in their own interest, as well as in that of the
public, have wisely issued to the commanders of their ships a special
manuscript letter[254] reminding them, in the most distinct manner,
that the safety of the ship under their charge and of all on board of
her must ever be their first consideration. That their ships have
attained an average rate of speed hitherto unrivalled, combined with
great regularity, may be seen by their logs.[255] Their _Adriatic_[256]
has far surpassed the famous American steamship of that name
which once belonged to the Collins line, she having attained the
extraordinary speed of 455 statute miles in one day.[257] Nor has the
comfort of the passengers been in any way neglected.
[Sidenote: _Britannic_ and _Germanic_.]
At page 278 I furnish a drawing of their newest vessel; and for the
information of my nautical readers I may state that the _Britannic_ and
_Germanic_[258] are similar in all respects. These vessels were built
of iron by Messrs. Harland and Wolff, Belfast.[259]
[Sidenote: Their great speed.]
The engines of the _Britannic_ are by Maudslay, Sons, and Field; they
are 760 nominal, but indicated 5090 horse-power on the trial trip. They
have four inverted cylinders, the high pressure above the low; the
diameters of the cylinders are 48 inches and 83 inches respectively,
and the length of stroke 5 feet. The pressure of steam is 70lbs. per
square inch, and the boilers, eight in number, are fired at both ends
with thirty-two furnaces. The propeller has four blades, and is 23 feet
6 inches in diameter, with 28 feet to 31 feet 6 inches pitch. The mode
of lifting the screw is novel, as may be seen by the drawing on the
following page.
[Sidenote: Details of _Britannic_, and form of her screw.]
The plan is that of Mr. Harland, the senior partner of the firm by
whom the _Britannic_ was built. His reasons for introducing this new
principle (which he styles, “a lifting-propeller”) are, that in long
ships, the pitching in a heavy sea way and the vertical motion of the
waves tend to expose the upper portion of the screw as usually fitted,
the evil effects arising from this being the ‘racing’ of the engines
and its attendant dangers, together with a diminished speed of the
vessel.[260]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
It is possible, also, that a further advantage may be derived from
the fact that, as one-half of the propeller works below the vessel’s
bottom,[261] there is a somewhat denser medium of water for it to
work against, consequently affording (but to what extent, my limited
scientific knowledge will not allow me to offer an opinion) the means
of obtaining, as I conceive, an increased power of propulsion.[262]
But into such questions as these I will not enter, as I prefer stating
the facts and furnishing an account of what has been done, leaving
others more competent than I am to deal with them. As scientific men
may consider another question of still greater importance, the best
form for the midship section of a steamship, to which I have already
referred, I furnish (see page 281) a sketch, drawn to scale and
supplied by her owners, of the midship section of this magnificent
vessel, and, without further comment, give an account of her
performances on her first voyage across the Atlantic.[263]
“The average speed of the _Britannic_ is fifteen knots per hour on a
consumption of 75 to 80 tons of coals per day, and her approximate
cost, built without contract, is 200,000_l._”[264]
These steamers run in connection with the Erie Railway from New York
(as do also other of the lines) booking their passengers through to
all parts of the United States, as far as Aspinwall and San Francisco,
and also to Canada. As their arrangements and scale of provisions for
steerage passengers are, in nearly all respects, the same as that of
the other Transatlantic lines, a copy is furnished for the information
of my readers, together with the conditions on which alone passengers
are received.[265]
[Sidenote: Difficulty of estimating the real cost of steamers.]
Recently an American Company have with great spirit sent forth from
their own country, a line of steamers to trade between Philadelphia
and Liverpool.[266] They consist at present of the _Pennsylvania_,
_Illinois_, _Ohio_, and _Indiana_, each of about 3100 tons gross,
or about 2000 tons nett register; they are all built of iron, on
the Delaware (U.S.), and are fitted with screw-propellers. The
_Pennsylvania_, launched 1873, cost, according to the statement of her
owners, “ready for sea, about 600,000 dollars” (120,000_l._); who add
that, “if built on the Clyde of as good materials, the saving would
have been trifling.” In any attempt, however, to estimate the cost of
a steamship I may state, for the information of non-nautical readers,
that the outlay on one vessel, even of a similar grade or class, when
built for the conveyance of passengers as well as cargo, gives but
an imperfect idea of the cost of another vessel, of the same tonnage
but not so appropriated. If we take simply the hull, the power of the
engines, and the ordinary outfit for a sea-going ship of a particular
class, the comparative cost of constructing such a vessel in different
countries, or even at different ports in any one country, may be easily
ascertained, but, in a passenger-ship so much depends on the quality of
the outfit and furnishing, and, especially, on the cabin accommodation,
varying as these do almost as much as from a cottage to a palace, I
should certainly mislead my readers were I to attempt to supply a
comparative cost of passenger-ships built in America and in England.
[Sidenote: Pennsylvania Company, 1873.]
The vessels of this line are each 355 feet in length, with 43 feet
beam, and 33 feet depth of hold. They have each accommodation for
76 first class, and for 800 intermediate and steerage passengers.
The actual steam-power of each of these vessels is given as “2800
horse-power indicated,” but this furnishes, as I have before stated,
but a vague idea of the nominal power on which the cost is based, as
the actual power depends on the dimensions of the engines, the mean
pressure on the piston, and the speed with which the engines move. On
the other hand, nominal horse-power is fixed by certain arbitrary rules.
Though the Philadelphia line of steamers has much to contend against,
owing to duties imposed by the American Government on all articles
required for their construction and outfit, and may, consequently, find
it difficult to rival successfully the steam-ships of Europe engaged
in the Transatlantic trade, they are supported, if not owned, by one
of the largest railway undertakings in the United States of America.
The lines of this company cover more than 6000 miles of communication
within the interior, extending over States which produce the
breadstuffs of the north as well as the tropical fruits of the south
with a teeming and almost virgin soil, sufficient in itself to produce
cargoes for a fleet of ships far in excess of that it as yet possesses,
and affording fields of remunerative employment for hundreds of
thousands of persons now huddled together in many of the over-peopled
countries of Europe.
Indeed, from the accounts which reach us, the valley of the Mississippi
in itself still affords room, and, in time, will give profitable
employment for 100,000,000 persons, and if the industrious and frugal
of our own people and of Europe, are unable to gain a living by honest
means in the land of their birth, they will find, sailing daily from
the port of Liverpool, alone, at the present moment, as also from other
ports, steam-ships[267] of the finest description, ready to convey them
in a hitherto incredibly short space of time, to the United States of
America, and at a cost very little more than they would require for
their maintenance at home, during a similar period of time to that
occupied on the passage.
[Sidenote: Anchor line from the Clyde, 1856.]
But, besides the magnificent lines of steamers which now connect,
_viâ_ Liverpool, the Old and New Worlds together by a ferry, easier
of accomplishment, and attended with less danger than was even the
passage between England and France half a century ago, there are
other important lines of steamers from Glasgow and London, as well as
from various continental ports, which I must notice. Not the least
important of these is the Anchor line from the Clyde, one of the many
extraordinary developments, during recent years, of our maritime
power, and entirely due to individual energy. Within only a few years
Messrs. Henderson Brothers, the managing owners of the Anchor line,
have created a fleet of steamships of 71,328 gross tons and of 15,147
horse-power.[268]
[Sidenote: Prodigious range of their trade operations.]
Though this line was established by Messrs. Handyside and Henderson
in 1856 (their vessels then sailing from Glasgow to Quebec and the
Mediterranean ports), it was not until 1865 that their owners commenced
regular communication, every fortnight, between Glasgow and New York.
Since then the service has been gradually increased, and a steamer is
now dispatched, at all seasons, weekly each way, and, during summer,
twice, and occasionally three times a week, according to the demands
of the trade. Like many other gigantic concerns, this one had a very
humble beginning. Commencing with only one or two vessels, they were
steadily and rapidly increased on the well-founded anticipation
of a successful trade. With the increase of the New York branch of
the service, that of the Mediterranean increased also. Indeed, it
supplies the main or American line with a considerable portion of its
most valuable employment, and now runs weekly to Lisbon, Gibraltar,
Marseilles, Genoa, Leghorn, Naples, Messina, and Palermo; fortnightly
to Trieste and Venice; and monthly to Algiers, Tunis, Malta, and
Alexandria, thus connecting the whole of the ancient trade of Spain,
of the Italian Republics, and of far-famed India itself, with the New
World through the medium of the Suez Canal[269] and the Mediterranean.
The Anchor Company also despatches steamers, weekly, during the season
of open navigation, to Christiania, Christiansund, and Gottenburg, thus
securing another valuable feeder to the New York line of steamers. The
Scandinavian and other passengers from the extreme north of Europe are
brought across from Gottenburg, to Granton (near Edinburgh) in two
days, or from Christiansund in a day and a half, and, as Granton is
only about two hours by rail from Glasgow, they can embark on board the
Anchor line of steamers for the United States or for Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick, on the third day after leaving their homes in the far
north.
The steamers of this firm also sail from Genoa, Leghorn, Naples,
Messina, Palermo, Marseilles, and Gibraltar, once a fortnight, direct
for New York, and every month from Trieste and Venice—once the great
emporium of commerce in the East—to the still greater commercial
emporium of the West; and every fortnight, during the six autumn and
spring months, or fruit season, Messrs. Henderson likewise dispatch
steamers direct from Malaga, Almeria, Valentia, and Denia to the United
States.
[Illustration: ANCHOR LINE S.S. “VICTORIA.”]
[Sidenote: The _Victoria_.]
In their _Victoria_ may be seen a good specimen of a business ship,
perhaps not so swift or so elegantly fitted as some of her competitors
from Liverpool, or equal to their own latest ships, the _Ethiopia_,
_Bolivia_, and _Anchora_,[270] but a vessel well adapted for the trade
on which she is employed. The _Victoria_ is a sister ship to the
_California_, launched from the shipbuilding yard, on the Clyde, of
Messrs. Alexander Stephens and Sons, who have constructed a great many
vessels for the Anchor Company. She is like all the other steamers
now engaged in the Transatlantic trade, built of iron and propelled by
the screw.[271] Though of larger capacity, she is said to have cost,
complete for sea, somewhere about 100,000_l._ or 20,000_l._ less than
the American iron screw ship _Pennsylvania_, to which reference has
just been made, which was built about the same time on the Delaware.
[Sidenote: Hamburg American Steam Packet Company.]
But besides the fleets we have specially named there are other equally
fine British steamers, plying between London and New York and Boston
direct, and also _viâ_ Southampton and Havre; together with various
other lines of first-class steamers engaged in the American trade
belonging to France, Hamburg, and Belgium, though most of these are
British built: for instance, the Hamburg and American Steam Packet
Company have a large fleet of high classed steamers, comprising the
_Suavia_,[272] _Pomerania_, _Thuringia_, _Hammonia_, _Westphalia_,
_Silesia_, _Cimbria_, _Frisia_, and _Holsatia_, which leave Hamburg
every Saturday throughout the year for New York; and another line of
eight equally fine steamers, which trade with the West Indies and
Mexico every month from Hamburg, calling alternately at Grimsby and
Havre.
[Sidenote: North German Lloyd’s Company.]
There are also the steamers of the North German Lloyd’s, an old
established company, trading between Bremen, Baltimore, and New York
_viâ_ Southampton and Havre; while, besides those engaged in the trade
with the United States, two lines of French steamers, most of which
were built in England, now maintain a weekly intercourse between the
ports of that country and the West Indies and Brazil.
FOOTNOTES:
[228] The dimensions of the _City of Manchester_ are as follows:—Length
on deck, 274 feet with 38 feet breadth of beam. She registers 2125
tons, and is propelled by engines of 400-horse power, driving a
three-bladed screw. Her two foremasts are of tubular plate-iron.
[229] The _City of Paris_ conveyed, in 1869, His Royal Highness Prince
Arthur (now Duke of Connaught) to America in _six days twenty-one
hours_, the quickest passage ever made to any port of the New World
from Cork. The Prince attended Divine Service at Queenstown on Sunday,
embarked at four P.M. that day, and was landed at Halifax, Nova Scotia,
at half-past ten A.M. on the following Sunday in time for Morning
Service at that place, which he also attended, much to his credit.
[230] The following is an extract from the logs of the _City of
Brussels_ and _City of Richmond_.
“CITY OF BRUSSELS.”
---------------+---------+--------+----------+---------+----------+-------------
Sandy Hook to | | | Distance | | |
Queenstown. | Wind. |Courses.| from |Latitude,|Longitude,| Remarks.
December, 1869.| | | Sandy | N. | W. |
| | | Hook. |
---------------+---------+--------+-------------+---------+----------+----------
Saturday, 4 |Southerly| East. | 37 | 40·30 | 73·09 |{A.M.—9.15,
| | | | | |{ passed
| | | | | |{ Sandy Hook.
| | | | | |
Sunday, 5 | ” |N. 85 E.| 330 | 41·27 | 66·00 |{Moderate
| | | | | |{ breeze and
| | | | | |{ calm.
| | | | | |
Monday, 6 |Easterly |N. 69 E.| 320 | 43·21 | 59·15 |{Moderate
| | | | | |{ breeze.
| | | | | |
Tuesday, 7 |S. S. W. |N. 67 E.| 336 | 45·32 | 52·00 |{Light
| | | | | |{ breeze.
| | | | | |
Wednesday, 8 | ” |N. 68 E.| 346 | 47·44 | 44·14 |{Light
| | | | | |{ breeze.
| | | | | |
Thursday, 9 | S. W. |N. 72 E.| 371 | 49·42 | 38·18 |{Moderate
| | | | | |{ breeze.
| | | | | |
Friday, 10 |West. |N. 85 E.| 365 | 50·11 | 25·51 |{Moderate
| | | | | |{ breeze.
| | | | | |
Saturday, 11 | N. W. |N. 80 E.| 353 | 51·15 | 16·44 | Fresh gale.
| | | | | |
| | | | | |{A.M.—6.20,
| | | | | |{ past
| | | | | |{ Fastnet;
Sunday, 12 | To Fastnet 266 | | |{ 10.10,
| | | | | |{ Queenstown.
---------------+---------+--------+----------+---------+----------+-------------
“CITY OF RICHMOND.”
---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+-------------
Queenstown to | Wind. |Courses. | Dis- |Latitude.|Longitude.| Remarks.
Sandy Hook. | | | tances. | | |
December, 1875.| | | | | |
---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+-------------
Saturday, 17 | Calm. |S. 84 W. | 290 | 50·58 | 15·41 |{P.M.—4.10,
| | | | | |{ Received
| | | | | |{ Mails.
| | | | | |{ Calm and
| | | | | |{ Cloudy.
| | | | | |
Sunday, 18 |Variable.|S. 80 W. | 362 | 49·56 | 25·01 | Light airs.
| | | | | |
Monday, 19 |Variable.|S. 72 W. | 360 | 48·08 | 33·43 | Light airs.
| | | | | |
Tuesday, 20 | S. E. |S. 68 W. | 380 | 45·42 | 42·18 |{Moderate
| | | | | |{ breeze.
| | | | | |
Wedn’sday, 21 |Variable.|Variable.| 366 | 43·25 | 50·14 |{Light and
| | | | | |{ Variable.
| | | | | |
Thursday, 22 | Calm. |S. 81 W. | 363 | 42·00 | 58·11 |{Light airs
| | | | | |{ and calm.
| | | | | |
| | | | | |{Light airs
| | | | | |{ and fog,
| | | | | |{ 9.25 A.M.
| | | | | |{ Received
Friday, 23 |Variable.| | 361 | 41·03 | 66·07 |{ Pilot.
| | | | | |{ P.M. 10.00
| | | | | |{ stopped
| | | | | |{ and
| | | | | |{ sounded.
| | | | | |
Saturday, 24 |Variable.| | 361 | | |{P.M. 10.30
| | | | | |{ Sandy
| | | | | |{ Hook.
---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+-------------
[231] Mr. Inman was the first to start a regular line of steamers
across the Atlantic consisting entirely of iron ships propelled by the
screw; and as he and Mrs. Inman, greatly to their credit, made a voyage
in one of their earliest emigrant steamers, expressly for the purpose
of ameliorating the discomforts and evils hitherto but too common in
emigrant ships, my readers may naturally desire to know something of
Mr. Inman’s history.
In a few words therefore I may state that he was born at Leicester in
the year 1825, where his father (a partner of Pickford and Co.) then
resided. Educated at the Collegiate Institution at that place, and
at the Liverpool Royal Institution, he, in 1841, preferring business
to a profession, entered a mercantile office; passed through various
grades of clerkship under the late Mr. Nathan Cairns (brother to Lord
Cairns), Messrs. Cater and Co., and Messrs. Richardson Brothers, (all
merchants of Liverpool): of the latter firm he became a partner in
January 1849, and had the entire management of their fleet of American
sailing packets then trading between Liverpool and Philadelphia. Here
he first gained an intimate knowledge of the emigrant business which he
has since pursued with so much success and public advantage.
Mr. Inman having watched with considerable interest the performances
of the _City of Glasgow_ on her first trip to America, was convinced
of the advantages she possessed over, not merely their sailing-ships,
but over paddle-steamers for the purposes of navigation, and therefore
recommended her purchase to his partners. Acting on his advice, they
bought and dispatched her with 400 steerage passengers in the winter
of 1850 across the troubled waters of the Atlantic, very much to the
dismay of that numerous body of men who had still no faith in the
screw, and who dreaded the performances of any vessel thus propelled in
so stormy an ocean, even though they had seen what the _Great Britain_
had done years before. But the _City of Glasgow_ did her work right
well, and completely falsified the prophecies of the foreboders of
disaster. The _City of Manchester_, which followed, “left a profit in
the first year of her movements of 40 per cent.” to her enterprising
owners, and hence no more has been heard since that time of the
inferiority of the screw to the paddle-wheel. One is often surprised to
see a man so fully occupied, as he must have been, with his own affairs
taking an active part in public matters; but we find Mr. Inman in his
useful and busy career (like numerous other active men of business)
a member of the Local Marine Board, a member of the Mersey Docks and
Harbour Trust, a member of the first Liverpool School Board, a captain
of the Cheshire Rifle Volunteers and the holder, too, of prizes, a
magistrate for the county of Cheshire where he resides, the chairman
of the Liverpool Steam Shipowners’ Association of Liverpool, and an
active politician, frequently called on to give evidence before Royal
Commissions and Committees of the House of Commons. His life indeed
affords an excellent example for the rising generation to follow.
[232] Passengers landed at New York from the United Kingdom in 1870 by
the following steamers:—
---------+------+------+---------+------+-------
Line. |Trips.|Cabin.|Steerage.|Total.|Deaths.
---------+------+------+---------+------+-------
Inman | 68 | 3,635| 40,465 |44,100| 22
National | 56 | 2,442| 33,494 |35,736| 35
Guion | 55 | 1,115| 27,054 |28,569| 18
Anchor | 74 | 1,637| 23,404 |25,041| 19
Cunard | 70 | 7,638| 16,871 |24,509| 10
---------+------+------+---------+------+-------
[233] On the average of the first seven voyages the _City of Chester_
performed the passage from New York to Queenstown in eight days, eleven
hours, and twenty-six minutes. The _City of Richmond_, too, in her
first seven voyages made the same passage on an average of eight days,
eleven hours, and fifty-eight minutes; the last-named ship, having on
one occasion (April 1874) made the run from Sandy Hook (New York) to
Fastnet (60 miles from Cork Harbour) in seven days, twenty-three hours.
[234] To these particulars Mr. Inman, in his evidence before the
Committee of the House of Commons (Session 1874, p. 185) on tonnage
measurement, adds, “the _City of Berlin_ is about 40 feet (depth) to
the hurricane deck, and about seven feet six inches in addition to the
poop, and about seven feet to the captain’s bridge above that.... The
depth from the main deck is about twenty-four feet.” This ship on her
trial trip over the measured mile indicated 5200 horse-power, and an
average speed of 14·825 knots per hour.
[235] The _City of Berlin_ has just (Sept. 1875) made the two fastest
passages across the Atlantic yet on record. See Appendix No. 13, pp.
611-2.
[236] The founder of this firm, Mr. Alexander Allan, a native of
Saltcoats, North Britain, afterwards removed to Glasgow, and owned a
numerous fleet of sailing-ships, one of which in early life he himself
commanded. His eldest son, James, followed his example, as did also his
third son, the late Bryce Allan, of Liverpool. Other two, Hugh (now Sir
Hugh Allan) and Andrew, established themselves in Montreal, where they
managed the shipping business of the family, and James, when he retired
from the sea, formed with Bryce and their youngest brother, Alexander,
the now important branch of their business at Liverpool.
[237] The first four steamers of this firm were built by the late
Mr. William Denny, of Dumbarton, and the skill of this eminent
builder is evinced by the fact that one of these early steamers, the
_Anglo-Saxon_, although designed, for economy of fuel and capacity,
for cargo and passengers, rather than for speed, made the passage
from Quebec to the Rock Light, Liverpool, in the then altogether
unprecedented short time of nine days and five hours.
[238] Appendix No. 14, p. 612.
[239] Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 23rd of July 1861.
[240]
TIME TABLE.—(A.) GALWAY TO AMERICA.
_Summer Service—Outward Voyages._
From Galway to New York, during the months of
April, May, June, July, August, September, and
October 11 days 2 hours.
From Galway to Boston, during the like months. 11 days 16 hours.
_Summer Service—Homeward Voyages._
From New York to Galway, during the like months 10 days.
From Boston to Galway, during the like months 10 days 4 hours.
_Winter Service—Outward Voyages._
From Galway to New York, during the months of
November, December, January, February, and
March 13 days.
From Galway to Boston, during the like months 13 days 12 hours.
_Winter Service—Homeward Voyages._
From New York to Galway, during the like months 10 days 10 hours.
From Boston to Galway, during the like months 11 days 2 hours.
[241] See Report of Committee, 1861, p. iii.
[242] See Evidence, Questions 1583 and 1587, p. 139.
[243] Question, 1573, Ibid.
[244] Question 243, p. 25.
[245] The government inspectors, in their Report, state (Question
256, p. 26): “We surveyed the _Hibernia_ in dry dock at Messrs.
Laird’s yard, at Birkenhead,” in reference to the Postmaster-General’s
communication respecting the leaky state of that vessel, “and we found
the whole of the ‘bolts of the flat keel’ and bottom plating, for about
150 feet amidships, very much strained.”
[246] Report of Committee, page iv.
[247] Appendix to Report of Committee, page 298, “Table of Voyages.”
[248] See Appendix No. 6 to the Report of the Committee of the House of
Commons.
[249] Paper delivered in by Sir Rowland Hill, K.C.B., 12th July, 1861:—
_Statement of the Earnings and Costs of the Galway Line of Mail
Steamers._
Sea postage of correspondence (including newspapers £
and transit letters) from 26th June to 23rd October,
1860, inclusive, when the voyages were suspended
(estimated) 1,400
-------
Trips: Out, 7; home, 6 Total, 13.
Earnings, 108_l._ per trip.
_Cost to Post-Office in same time._
£
Contract payment (less penalties) 14,764
Incidental payments 500
-------
£15,264
-------
(Signed) _Frank James Scudamore_,
12th July, 1861. Receiver and Accountant-General.
[250] There is still a line of sailing-packets, named the “Old Black
Ball” line, trading between Liverpool and New York, sailing from the
former port on the 1st and 16th of each month. They are large and fine
ships, and are under the management of Messrs. C. H. Marshall & Co.
[251] In 1873 the _Wisconsin_ made the passages from Liverpool to New
York and back in each case within ten days.
[252] The White Star Line was originally composed of a fleet of fast
sailing American clipper-ships, such as the _Champion of the Seas_,
_Blue Jacket_, _White Star_, _Shalimar_, &c., sailing to Australia:
to this line, Messrs. Ismay, Imrie, and Co. succeeded, and they still
carry it on with similar fast high-classed vessels built of iron, such
as the _Belfast_, _British Commerce_, _Knight Commander_, _Houghton
Tower_, _Glengarry_, _Knowsley Hall_, &c., and they have applied the
title “White Star” to their New York line of steamers.
[253] Extract from “Book of Regulations” of the White Star line of
steamers:
“The commanders must distinctly understand that the issue of the
following instructions does not, in any way, relieve them from
entire responsibility for the safe and efficient navigation of their
respective vessels; and they are also enjoined to remember that,
whilst they are expected to use every diligence to secure a speedy
voyage, _they must run no risk which might by any possibility result in
accident to their ships. It is to be hoped that they will ever bear in
mind that the safety of the lives and property entrusted to their care
is the ruling principle that should govern them in the navigation of
their ships, and no supposed gain in expedition, or saving of time on
the voyage, is to be purchased at the risk of accident._ The company
desires to establish and maintain for its vessels a reputation for
safety, and only looks for such speed on the various voyages as is
consistent with safe and prudent navigation.”
[254] See Appendix No. 15, p. 613.
[255] _The First Eleven Passages of the_ “BALTIC.”
QUEENSTOWN TO NEW YORK. NEW YORK TO QUEENSTOWN.
Voyage. Days. H. M. Voyage. Days. H. M.
1. September, 1871 8 19 52 1. October, 1871 8 15 3
2. February, 1872 9 19 22 2. March, 1872 9 3 38
3. March, 1872 8 18 32 3. April, 1872 8 3 58
4. April, 1872 9 3 52 4. May, 1872 8 20 10
5. May, 1872 8 14 35 5. June, 1872 8 22 20
6. June, 1872 9 4 52 6. July, 1872 8 19 8
7. August, 1872 8 13 57 7. August, 1872 8 12 8
8. September, 1872 8 14 40 8. September, 1872 8 10 53
9. October, 1872 8 17 52 9. October, 1872 8 11 50
10. November, 1872 10 17 12 10. December, 1872 7 23 22
11. December, 1872 10 8 11 11. January, 1873 7 20 9
[256] _Copy of the_ “ADRIATIC’S” _Log_.
QUEENSTOWN TOWARD NEW YORK.
-------+-----------+--------+---------+----------+----------+------------------
Date. | Winds. |Courses.|Distance.|Latitude. |Longitude.| Weather.
-------+-----------+--------+---------+----------+----------+------------------
1872. | | | | |
May 16 | .. | .. | Left |Liverpool | .. | {5.10 P.M., Rock
| | | | | | { Light abeam.
| | | | | |
May 17 | .. | .. | Left |Queenstown| 11·05 | {A.M., Roche’s
| | | | | | { Point abeam.
| | | | | |
| | | | North. | West. |
May 18 | E.N.E. | W. | 381 | 51·22 | 18·12 | {Fresh breeze and
| | | | | | { fine weather.
| | | | | |
May 19 | Northerly |S. 87 W.| 348 | 51·13 | 27·27 | {Mod. breeze and
| | | | | | { fine weather.
| | | | | |
May 20 | Northerly | 75 | 366 | 49·31 | 36·42 | Calm.
| | | | | |
| | | | | | { Light breeze;
May 21 | N.N.W. | 72 | 353 | 37·44 | 45·11 | { dense fogs at
| | | | | | { times.
| | | | | |
| | | | | | { Mod. breeze;
May 22 | N.N.W. | 62 | 362 | 44·57 | 52·57 | { dense fogs at
| | | | | | { times.
| | | | | |
| | | | | | {Light breeze;
May 23 | W. by N. | 78 | 333 | 43·20 | 60·21 | { dense fogs at
| | | | | | { times.
| | | | | |
May 24 | .. | 68 | 357 | 41·08 | 67·51 | Ditto, ditto.
| | | | | |
May 25 |To S. Hook,| .. | 278 | .. | .. | {Anchd.off Sandy
| | | | | | { Hook, 6 A.M.
-------+-----------+--------+---------+----------+----------+------------------+
[257] See Appendix No. 16, p. 614, for particulars of this passage.
[258] The _Germanic_ (June 1875) made the passage from Queenstown to
Sandy Hook in 7 days, 23 hours, and 7 minutes actual time. See details
of her log, Appendix No. 17.
[259] The following are some of the principal dimensions of the
_Britannic_:
Feet. In.
Length between perpendiculars 455 0
Length over all 468 0
Breadth of beam 45 3
Depth of hold 34 0
Net register tonnage 3,174-15/100 tons.
She has accommodation for 1,300 passengers, and 150 crew.
[260] _Engineering_, weekly journal, London, 20th November, 1874.
[261] On arriving in shallow water or nearing a port the screw is
raised, so that the bottom of it is above the level of the keel, and
when the blades require examining or replacing, the shaft can be
raised still higher, thus exposing the boss and allowing ready access
when the ship is in light trim. The last two lengths of shafting are
connected with an universal joint which works in a chamber in the after
end of the tunnel and is at all times accessible to the engineers.
The bush is guided by two cheeks on the stern-post, and raised by
means of rods with gearing on the middle deck either by a steam-engine
or by a hand winch placed on the upper deck, additional power being
always at command through the medium of the capstan. The want of the
customary keel pieces joining the inner and outer stern-post conveys an
appearance of weakness, but this is amply compensated by the increased
width and additional thickness at the head of the screw aperture; and
the centre of effort of the rudder being raised above the ordinary
height. A false foot is fitted to the bottom of the rudder-post and
this foot can be readily removed, allowing the screw boss to be
changed without disturbing the shaft, which is another very important
feature.—_Ibid._, 20th November, 1874.
[262] Messrs. Ismay, Imrie, & Co. state: “With regard to the
_Britannic’s_ screw propeller, it can be worked at any depth, and need
not be stopped whilst the lowering or raising is being proceeded with.”
[263]
_Abstract of Log, S.S._ “BRITANNIC.”
FIRST VOYAGE FROM LIVERPOOL TOWARDS NEW YORK.
-------+------------+--------+---------+-----+-----+-------------------------
Date |Direction of|Course. |Distance.|Lat. |Long.| Remarks.
| Wind. | | | | |
-------+------------+--------+---------+-----+-----+-------------------------
1874. | | | Miles | | |
June 25| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Left Liverpool, 5 P.M.
| | | | | |
| | | | | |{ Anchored in Queenstown
June 26| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |{ Harbour, 11.35
| | | | | |{ A.M. Proceeded at
| | | | | |{ noon.
| | | | | |
June 27| N.W. |Various.| 350 |51·20|17·16|{ Moderate breeze and
| | | | | |{ fine weather.
| | | | | |
June 28| S.E. |S. 87 W.| 351 |51·05|26·34|{ Moderate breeze,
| | | | | |{ cloudy, with head sea.
| | | | | |
June 29| N.E. to S. |S. 76 W.| 352 |49·38|35·25|{ Light breeze, with
| | | | | |{ cloudy weather.
| | | | | |
| | | | | |{ Moderate breeze,
June 30| W.N.W. |S. 72 W.| 351 |47·49|43·39|{ cloudy, with head
| | | | | |{ sea.
| | | | | |
July 1| N. to N.E. |S. 66 W.| 367 |45·22|51·42|{ Moderate breeze, with
| | | | | |{ dense fog.
| | | | | |
July 2| N.E. |S. 66 W.| 375 |42·52|59·34|{ Moderate breeze, and
| | | | | |{ cloudy.
| | | | | |
July 3| E.S.E. |S. 72 W.| 376 |40·56|67·32|{ Light breeze, and
| | | | | |{ dense fog.
| | | | | |
July 4| .. |Various.| 285 | .. | .. |{ Sandy Hook abreast
| | | | | |{ at 9.15 A.M.
-------+------------+--------+---------+-----+-----+-------------------------
[264] Letter from Messrs. Ismay, Imrie, and Company, 3rd December, 1874.
[265] “Passengers will be provided with berths to sleep in, each adult
having a separate berth; but they have to provide themselves with a
plate, mug, knife, fork, spoon, and water-can, also bedding. Married
couples, with their children, will be berthed together; females will be
berthed in rooms by themselves.
“_Bill of fare._—Each passenger will be supplied with three quarts of
water daily, and with as much provisions as he can eat, which are all
of the best quality, and which are examined and put on board under the
inspection of her Majesty’s Emigration Officers, _and cooked and served
out by the company’s servants_.
“_Breakfast at eight o’clock._—Coffee, sugar, and fresh bread and
butter, or biscuit and butter, or oatmeal porridge and molasses.
“_Dinner at one o’clock._—Soup and beef, pork, or fish, according to
the day of the week, with bread and potatoes, and, on Sunday, pudding
will be added.
“_Supper at six o’clock_—Tea, sugar, biscuit, and butter. Oatmeal
gruel will be supplied at eight P.M. when necessary.
“_Luggage._—Ten cubic feet will be allowed for each adult steerage
passenger, and twenty for each adult saloon passenger, free; for all
over that quantity a charge of 1_s._ 6_d._ for each cubic foot will be
made.
“All passengers are liable to be _rejected_ who, upon examination,
are found to be lunatic, idiot, deaf, dumb, blind, maimed, infirm, or
above the age of sixty years; or any woman without a husband with a
child or children; or any person unable to take care of himself (or
herself) without becoming a public charge, or who, from any attending
circumstances, are likely to become a public charge. Sick persons or
widows with children cannot be taken, nor lame persons, unless full
security be given to the United States’ Government, that the parties
will not become chargeable to the State.”
[266] In 1866, an American company started a line of steamers between
Boston and Liverpool. Two large and elegantly fitted wooden screws
built in Boston, named the _Erie_ and _Ontario_, were the precursors
of this line, but were so unfortunate that, after making two or three
passages across the Atlantic, the enterprise had to be abandoned.
[267] In the Appendix No. 17, pp. 617-632, will be found a table of
the several passages of the steamers of some of the lines employed
in the Transatlantic trade during the years 1873 and 1874. I must,
however, add (as I am anxious to be impartial and strictly accurate),
that the steamers of three of these lines, the “Cunard,” “Inman,” and
“National,” adopt the “Lane route,” that is, the route to the south of
the Newfoundland banks, which increases the distance of each passage
by about 90 miles, or allowing for the favourable Gulf stream by from
50 to 60 miles. I must also direct the attention of my readers to
certain figures in these returns where I have placed an asterisk. For
instance, one of the Cunard steamers (the _Cuba_) was on the passage
of the 19th January, 1873, about seven days beyond her usual time, no
doubt arising from some uncontrollable cause, which would increase the
average passages outwards of the steamers of this line for that year
by about 3 hours 10 minutes. Similar remarks apply to the steamers of
the other lines, as the increased time there noted affects the annual
average length of their passages, also, in a greater or less degree.
The _Canada_ (National line), 16 January, 1873, was, for instance,
about seven days, while three other vessels of this line were three and
a half, six and a half, and six days respectively behind their usual
time. The _America_ (Bremen line) was on one passage more than eleven
days. A steamer of the White Star line, on one occasion, four and a
half days; while the Guion line, on four occasions, four, five, six,
and ten and a half days respectively; and the Inman line, four and a
half, three and a half, four and a half, and ten days respectively
longer than their usual time, occasioned, I am informed, by serving
ships in distress and other laudable or unavoidable causes. Though some
are faster than others, the speed and regularity with which all these
lines of steamers traverse the Atlantic is very remarkable, and no
better illustration could be given than this table of the perfection
we have reached in ocean navigation. Indeed, the time of the arrival
of these vessels can be depended on with almost as much certainty as a
railway train.
[268] See Appendix No. 18, p. 633.
[269] These steamers, which sail monthly from Glasgow for Alexandria,
run in connection with the Peninsular and Oriental, and British India
Steam Navigation Companies, by means of which system, passengers can
be forwarded from Suez to Colombo, Madras, Calcutta, Rangoon, and
Moulmein, and to all the principal towns in India and China. The
Anchor Company has also a monthly service of its own vessels between
Glasgow, Liverpool, and Bombay, _viâ_, the Suez Canal, taking goods and
passengers for the ports on the West coast of India and the Persian
Gulf in connection with the British India Company’s steamers.
[270] These steamers are each 400 feet in length, 40 feet breadth, and
33 feet depth from upper deck. They measure 4000 tons gross. They can
accommodate in their cabins, which are fitted in first-class style,
250, and in the steerage 900 passengers.
[271] The _Victoria_ is 361½ feet in length, 40½ feet beam, 24½ feet
depth of hold to main, and 32 feet to spar deck; her measurement is
3287 tons gross. She has compound engines of 500 nominal horse-power,
with cylinders of 57 inches and 108 inches diameter respectively,
having 4 feet length of stroke of piston, and six boilers with eighteen
furnaces, consuming, when at full speed, “14 knots per hour on the
measured mile, 45 tons of coal per day of twenty-four hours.” She has
accommodation for 150 first-class and 900 steerage passengers, besides
her crew, and also large cargo space.
[272] The _Suavia_, which was built in 1874 by Messrs. Caird and Co.
of Greenock, is 361 feet in length, 41 feet in breadth, and her depth
to the upper spar deck is 34 feet. She measures 3623 tons gross, and
has accommodation for ninety-two first-class passengers, eighty-two
second-class and 930 third-class passengers, besides her crew of 120
men; she has likewise space for 2000 tons of cargo. The _Suavia_ is the
twenty-second steam-ship built by Messrs. Caird and Company for the
Hamburg American Steam Packet Company.
CHAPTER VII.
Royal West India Mail Steam Packet Company, 1841—Number of
their ships—Conditions of mail contract—Large subsidy—Heavy
loss during the first year of their operations—Capital of
the Company—Liberal concessions by Government—Complaints of
the public—Improved prospects of the company from improved
management—Contract renewed, 1850—Its conditions—Fresh
conditions, 1857—Contract again renewed, 1864—Further renewal,
1874—The steam-ship _Forth_—Losses of various ships of the
company—Causes of these losses—Loss of the _Amazon_—Terrible
sufferings—Loss of the _Demerara_—Additions to their fleet, and
superior class of vessels.
[Sidenote: Royal West India Mail Steam Packet Company, 1841.]
[Sidenote: Number of ships.]
Soon after the Atlantic Ocean began to be regularly navigated by
steam-vessels, the importance of a better means of intercommunication
with the West Indies led to the formation of the Royal Mail Steam
Packet Company, which entered into a contract with the Board of
Admiralty in March 1841 for the conveyance of the mails between
England, the West Indies, and the Gulf of Mexico. This company
commenced operations on a much more comprehensive and grander scale
than either the Cunard Company or the Peninsular and Oriental. Fourteen
large steam-ships were at once ordered to be built for the service;
they were to be substantial and efficient in all respects, and of such
strength as would enable them to carry guns of the largest calibre then
in use on board Her Majesty’s war-steamers, with engines of not less
than 400 collective horse-power.
[Sidenote: Conditions of mail contract.]
[Sidenote: Large Subsidy.]
When complete, the conditions of the contract required one of these
vessels to be ready to take the mails on board, twice in each calendar
month, and to proceed, _viâ_ Corunna and Madeira, to the island of
Barbadoes and, after staying there not more than six hours, thence,
_viâ_ St. Vincent, to the island of Grenada, where the stoppage
was limited to twelve hours, and thence, again, to the islands in
succession of Santa Cruz and St. Thomas, Nicola Mole in Haiti, Santiago
de Cuba, and Port Royal, in Jamaica. After a stay not exceeding
twenty-four hours at Port Royal, the steamer was to proceed to
Savannah-la-Mer, in the same island, thence to Havannah, and, on her
return thence, to call again at Savannah-la-Mer, thence to Port Royal,
and, thence, to Santiago de Cuba, Nicola Mole, and Samana, in the
island of Haiti, delivering mails at each place, “care being taken that
the said steam-vessel shall always arrive at Samana aforesaid (after
performing the said voyage from Barbadoes under ordinary circumstances
of wind and weather) on the twenty-second day after the arrival from
England of the mails at Barbadoes;” and, after delivering and receiving
the mails at Samana, “the steam-vessel shall make the best of her
way back from Samana to such port in the British Channel as the said
Commissioners of the Admiralty shall from time to time direct.” The
scheme, also, embraced other places in the West Indies, the Spanish
Main, and the United States, for which mails were to be carried. In
consideration of the services thus to be performed, the company was to
receive at the rate of 240,000_l._ per annum, in quarterly payments;
the contract to commence on the 1st of December, 1841, or at an earlier
day if possible, and to continue in force for ten years, subject to
twelve months’ notice on either side for its termination.
[Sidenote: Heavy loss during the first year of their operations.]
But this subsidy, large as it doubtless was for the service to be
performed, was not sufficient to cover the heavy outlay the company
had considered necessary in the construction and equipment of their
fleet. Perhaps, too, part of this outlay arose from the fact that,
though Mr. McQueen, the projector of the company, was a gentleman who
had had considerable experience in the promotion of large undertakings,
his knowledge of maritime affairs was limited, while he was not
sufficiently conversant with those details, the practical knowledge of
which is so essential to the success of all shipping operations. The
directors, as a body, were not competent, from previous experience,
to manage such an undertaking; while the choice also of commanders,
selected from the Royal Navy, with little or no experience of steam,
and none whatever of the numerous requirements of a merchant-ship,
was unfortunate, and may have in some measure tended to produce a
balance sheet which, though embracing to its credit the large permanent
subsidy, showed at the close of the first year’s operations a loss of
no less than 79,790_l._ 16_s._ 8_d._ to the company!
It may, however, be remarked that the projectors of this undertaking
had entered on an entirely new field, and that merchants who had been
accustomed to dispatch their produce in sailing-vessels were unprepared
to pay the enhanced rates required for steam-ships, while the
passenger and goods trade in itself was not then nearly sufficient for
a remunerative return on the large capital subscribed.
[Sidenote: Capital of the Company.]
[Sidenote: Liberal concessions by Government.]
Originally, the company was authorized to issue fifteen thousand
shares of 100_l._ on which calls of 50_l._ per share had been made
up to the time of the first meeting of shareholders, with power to
borrow 260,000_l._ But as another call of 10_l._ per share, sanctioned
at this meeting, was found insufficient for the requirements of the
Company, the directors appealed to Government for further assistance.
By the original arrangements, the annual mileage traversed by the
company’s ships would have been 684,816 miles. Government, however, in
reply to their appeal, generously consented to reduce the distances
to be performed to 392,976 miles, and to allow the annual subsidy of
240,000_l._ to remain undisturbed. By these important and liberal
modifications the annual expenditure of the company which, according
to their own calculations, would have been 360,000_l._ per annum, was
reduced to 235,000_l._
It was further conceded that if, at any time, and from causes, in the
opinion of Government, of a public and national character, such as
war, the insurance on steam-vessels should rise above six guineas per
cent. per annum, or on coals above two guineas per cent. on the outward
passage, the company was to receive an additional sum to be settled by
arbitration, but which was not to exceed 10,000_l._ per annum.
[Sidenote: Complaints of the public.]
In process of time, and notably after the necessity of greater
economy in the public finances had been admitted, great discontent
was expressed through the press with regard to these very liberal
concessions,[273] which was materially aggravated by a statement, the
accuracy of which I have no means of testing, that the amount paid
for the West India mail service exceeded the sum received for postage
by 183,938_l._, and that, though the Brazil branch left a margin of
3478_l._ in favour of the Post-office, the direct loss to the public
amounted to no less than 180,460_l._ per annum.[274]
To most of these complaints the company was altogether indifferent,
believing them to have their origin in disappointment and jealousy;
but there was no answer to the well-founded remonstrances of the
colonists that the service was, after all, performed with great
irregularity. Indeed, it is beyond cavil that during their earlier
operations, the vessels did not arrive at the time named in the tables
of routes attached to the contract, that, for instance, the duplicate
correspondence from Chagres, sent round by way of New York in American
vessels, and thence by the Cunard or American steamers to Liverpool,
often arrived in England sooner than the original letters brought
directly by the Royal Mail vessels; and, further, that much confusion
was constantly caused by the non-arrival of the outward mails till days
after the dispatch of the homeward ones. Unnecessary delays also took
place in coaling at St. Thomas and in the receiving and transferring
freight there and elsewhere. There was also, it was alleged, a want of
sufficient steamers for the intercolonial service, while the occasional
negligence and incompetency of the commanders of the vessels led to a
needless loss of time between port and port; complaints were likewise
made of insufficiency of accommodation for passengers on some of
the intercolonial steamers, and, also, that a pernicious system of
gambling was permitted in the vessels of the main line. Some of these
complaints, as frequently happens under similar circumstances, were
frivolous and unwarrantable, but too many of them were unanswerable;
indeed the bitter attacks on the company might naturally have been
expected considering the numerous favours supposed to have been
conferred on it, and, above all, the notorious fact, that the contract
for the conveyance of the mails was never exposed to public competition.
[Sidenote: Improved prospects of the Company]
On the other hand, the company had great difficulties to contend
against, while its shareholders, so far from receiving any dividend
on their capital, sustained during the first year of its operations
a heavy loss. Moreover, though liberal concessions had been made by
the Government, together with various unusual allowances, these were
more than counterbalanced by the loss of two valuable ships during the
second year of its operations. Yet, taking into account these and other
losses, to which reference will hereafter be made, the trade increased
so rapidly as to recoup the disasters of the company, and to leave,
in 1843, a surplus of receipts over expenditure of 94,210_l._ and in
1844 of 147,749_l._: the directors were therefore enabled to recommend
a dividend on the half-year ending 31st December, 1844, of 30_s._
per share; in October, 1846, 35_s._; and in April, 1848, 2_l._ per
share.[275]
From this time the prospects of the company steadily improved, and
when, in 1850, various capitalists in the United States projected the
construction of a railway across the isthmus of Panama—a project
which promised extensive additions to its business—the company was
in a position to render this new undertaking considerable assistance
by advancing, in the course of the year 1851, the sum of 25,480_l._
towards its completion. At that time, too, the direct and most
advantageous route to the Australian colonies appeared to be across
that Isthmus; indeed the Panama route was recommended by a Committee
of the House of Commons who inquired into this subject in the session
of 1849. But, apart from the Australian trade, that of San Francisco
was then being rapidly developed by the discovery of the gold mines, by
attracting (as these did) large numbers of passengers from Europe, and,
thereby, laying the foundation of the present enormous traffic in grain
and other produce from California, perhaps the most fertile district of
the United States—the valley of the Mississippi not excepted.
[Sidenote: from improved management.]
From that period the operations of the company have from various
causes yielded a very fair return to its shareholders, some of these,
doubtless, being due to the rapid increase of the trade, to the
knowledge the directors have gained from experience, and, not the
least, to the fact that their ships are now commanded by men who have
been either trained in their own service, or have acquired, while
employed by other shipowners, the sort of knowledge essential for the
successful management of merchant-steamers.
[Sidenote: Contract renewed, 1850.]
[Sidenote: Its conditions.]
In 1850, Government granted a renewal of the mail contract to the
company for a further term of ten years from the 1st January, 1852, the
conditions being, that the subsidy should be raised from 240,000_l._
to 270,000_l._ per annum, and that the company, on its part, should
undertake the additional cost and expense of a monthly service to the
Brazils, thus increasing the mileage to be performed from 389,448 to
547,296 miles, and, at the same time, reducing the mileage rate from
12_s._ 3_d._ to 9_s._ 10_d._ per mile. The company was also required to
accelerate the speed on the West Indian line from 8 knots an hour, as
originally agreed, to 10 knots an hour, and to add five new steamers to
their fleet, each of 2250 tons burden and 800 horse-power. Besides an
increased outlay of capital, these conditions entailed on the company a
very considerable increase in the wear and tear of ships and machinery;
hence their general expenditure rose in the course of the year, after
these new arrangements came into force, from 264,802_l._ to 403,769_l._
per annum.
[Sidenote: Fresh conditions, 1857.]
In 1857, other changes were made in their contract. The first
condition—a somewhat extraordinary one—had reference to an
amalgamation with the European and Australian Mail Company for the
conveyance of the mails, _viâ Egypt_, to and from Australia, which
subsequently proved a great failure, this Company having altogether
broken down; the second required an acceleration of the mails between
England and Rio Janeiro from sixty-six days twenty-two hours, the time
hitherto allowed for the performance of the round voyage, to fifty-five
days nineteen hours. The company was, also, ordered to provide three
more vessels, of 3000 tons and 800 horse-power, for the West India
and Atlantic service, and a fourth of smaller dimensions to increase
the speed of the mails between Rio Janeiro and the River Plate. These
changes proved to be of considerable public advantage, as the time of
the post between England and the isthmus of Panama was thus reduced
from fifty-nine to forty-two days, while, as the homeward mails arrived
three days before the departure of the outward ones, the mercantile
community obtained important additional facilities for transacting
their business with that part of the world.
[Sidenote: Contract again renewed, 1864.]
When the second contract expired in January 1864 fresh arrangements
were made whereby the annual subsidy was reduced to 172,914_l._ and
the speed increased on the West India Transatlantic service to 10½
knots an hour. In 1866 it was further agreed that each alternate
fortnightly packet should proceed from St. Thomas direct to Colon
instead of touching first at Jamaica, thus shortening the route between
England and Panama. In 1868 another and, in this case, most important
modification, was suggested in the conditions of the contract.
Hitherto, the steamers of this company had been propelled, principally,
by paddle-wheels, its directors being, perhaps, among the last to see
the advantages to be derived from the application of the screw. But,
though now convinced of the many advantages of the screw over the
paddle, before entering on the large expenditure required for such a
change, they naturally wished to know the intentions of Government
with regard to the continuation of their mail contracts; the result of
this application being the extension of the period till 1874, with,
however, the condition, that Government should participate in all
profits beyond eight per cent.
[Sidenote: Further renewal, 1874.]
As a considerable amount of discontent had, in the meantime, again
found expression through the medium of the public press with regard
to the very large sums of money which this company had received for
the conveyance of the mails, and, as different members of the House of
Commons had insisted that the service should be thrown open to public
competition, the directors were obliged to consider the alternative of
either abandoning it altogether, or of conducting the service for a
much less amount than they had hitherto received: they wisely adopted
the latter course, and, on public tenders being invited, undertook
to convey the West India mails for the annual subsidy of 84,750_l._,
not much more than one-third of what they had originally received—a
sum, however, subsequently supplemented by 2000_l._ per annum as a
recompense for the ships calling at Plymouth and there landing the
mails, instead of at Southampton, their final port of destination.[276]
In subsidizing the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company during the earlier
portion of its career to the large extent I have named, the British
government were evidently actuated by reasons similar to those, which
induced the government of the United States to make the like liberal
concessions to the unfortunate Collins line; and there can be no doubt
that the original vessels of this company were well adapted for one
of the objects Government had then in view—the creation of a fleet
of a class of large and strongly built merchant-steamers, which could
be made use of in the event of war. Hence, all these vessels were
built to carry heavy guns when necessary, so as to be serviceable for
the purpose of the navy at a comparatively small subsequent outlay. A
drawing is furnished on the following page of one of those ships which,
in nearly all respects, resembled the government steamers of the period.
[Illustration: S.S. “FORTH.”]
[Sidenote: The steam-ship _Forth_.]
[Sidenote: Losses of various ships of the company.]
The _Forth_ was altogether a very fine vessel of her class, and the
largest of any of the original fleet of the company. She was somewhere
about 1900 tons gross, or builders’ measurement, 1147 tons register,
and 450 nominal horse-power. She was built at Leith in 1841, by
Messrs. Menzies and Co., and, as Government reserved its right of
purchasing any of these ships at a valuation, she was, like the others,
constructed in accordance with a specification from the Admiralty,
under the survey and immediate control of officers appointed for this
purpose. Indeed, the fleet of the Royal Mail Company consisted of
the finest class of vessels of that description built of wood which,
previous to 1841, had been sent to sea either for naval or mercantile
purposes. Nor were they inferior to any vessels then afloat either in
the completeness of their equipment, or in the elegance and convenience
of their accommodation for first-class passengers. But, from some
cause or other, arising either from those I have already ventured to
suggest or from the unavoidable dangers of the ocean, the company at
first was most unfortunate in the number of losses they sustained. Nor
can it be urged that such disasters were due to any special dangers
in their line of navigation, for they had no fogs and ice to fear,
like their more northern Transatlantic voyagers: with the exception of
occasional hurricanes among the West India Islands, their course was a
comparatively safe one, and, yet, no fewer than six of the West India
Royal Mail Company’s packets were lost in the first eight years of
their career.
Besides the _Isis_ which, on the 8th of October, 1842, sank off
Bermuda, having previously struck on a reef, the company lost, on
the 15th of April, 1843, the _Solway_, 20 miles west of Corunna. She
was one of their finest vessels. Her captain, the surgeon, various
passengers, and a portion of the crew, consisting in all of sixty
persons, perished with the ship. The _Tweed_, another of their
first-class vessels, of 1800 tons burden and 450 horse-power, was
totally lost on the 12th of February, 1847, on the Alicranes reefs off
Yucatan, in the Gulf of Mexico, while on her voyage to Vera Cruz. Her
loss was most disastrous, and caused great excitement at the time. The
crew and passengers amounted to 151 persons (seventy-two of whom were
drowned), and their sufferings, as graphically described by one who
had escaped,[277] formed a subject of conversation for a longer period
than such calamities now do. After five days’ suffering, the remainder
of the passengers and crew were rescued from the barren reef of rocks
on which they had been cast. Again, on the 1st of February, 1849, the
_Forth_ was also completely lost on the same rocks which had caused
the total destruction of the _Tweed_; while, in the following year the
_Actæon_ was wrecked in rounding the point near Carthagena on a shoal
extending, as was alleged, much further into the sea than had been
laid down on the Admiralty charts. Nor must the loss of the _Medina_,
wrecked on the 12th of May, 1844, on a coral reef near Turks Island, be
omitted, as this was, certainly, one which ought not to have occurred.
[Sidenote: Causes of these losses.]
Some of these disasters, no doubt, arose from the intricate nature of
the navigation among the West India Islands, and others may have been
caused, as the supporters of the company alleged, “by those sudden
changes of the weather, hurricanes, squalls, northers, &c., with
which the West India Islands, Spanish Main, and Gulf of Mexico are so
frequently visited,” but the rocks and shoals of the Gulf could have
had nothing to do with the loss of the _Solway_ off Corunna, and, as
the company has met with much fewer disasters of late years, I may be
allowed to suspect that incompetency had too much to do with the almost
periodical losses of the first eight or ten years of its career.
[Sidenote: Loss of the _Amazon_.]
But by far the greatest disaster which befell any of this company’s
ships was the destruction of the _Amazon_ by fire at sea; indeed,
nothing could be more terrible than the loss of this ship and the
sufferings of those who perished with her.
The _Amazon_ was built by Messrs. R. and H. Green, at Blackwall, and
launched from their yard on the 28th of June, 1851: she was the largest
wooden merchant steam-ship which had up to that time been constructed.
An illustration of her, as she lay at anchor ready for sea, on her
first and only voyage, will be found on the following page.[278]
When surveyed by the Admiralty before her departure from Southampton,
she was reported capable of carrying fourteen 32-pounders, and two
10-inch pivot guns of 85 cwt. each on her main-deck; her coal bunkers
were constructed to carry 1000 tons of coals, or upward of sixteen
and a half days’ consumption at the rate of 2½ tons per hour for her
twenty-six furnaces. Her engines were fitted in a framework independent
of the vessel, so that little or no perceptible vibration was felt when
they were at work: moreover, allowing 12 superficial feet for each man,
she had accommodation in her lower decks for 360 soldiers, besides
elegant cabins for first-class passengers. Her cost, when ready for
sea, was somewhat over 100,000_l._
[Illustration: “AMAZON.”]
On the 2nd of January, 1852, the _Amazon_, under command of Captain
Symons, took her departure from Southampton with the usual mails for
the British and foreign West Indies, the Gulf of Mexico, Spanish
Main, &c., fifty passengers, and a large and valuable cargo. Her crew
numbered 110, exclusive of the Admiralty officer in charge of the
mails. The _Amazon_ was the first of the direct line of steam-ships
arranged by the company to run fortnightly between Southampton and
Chagres, touching only at St. Thomas, at which place various lines of
branch packets for the accommodation of the West Indies, the Gulf of
Mexico, &c., were to meet, diverging thence to the different islands
and ports embraced in the new arrangements with Government, and thus
establishing, as it was termed at the time, “a great steam ferry
between Europe and the Isthmus of Panama.”
In the course of the day after her departure, when steaming at the
rate of about 9 miles an hour against a stiff south-west gale, the
bearings of the paddle-shafts became so hot from the excessive friction
of the new machinery, that on two occasions the engines had to be
stopped to cool them, in one case for two and a half hours; after which
everything appeared to be in order. But at midnight of the evening
of the 4th January, when the _Amazon_ was somewhere about 110 miles
west-south-west of the Scilly Islands, the watch on deck, to their
dismay, discovered that a fire had broken out suddenly on the starboard
side forward between the steam-chest and that portion of the deck
whereon the galley stood, the flames at once rushing up the gangway in
front of the foremost funnel. So sudden, indeed, was the conflagration
that when the alarm bell, instantly sounded, brought the captain upon
deck, it was only to witness the inevitable destruction of his ship;
the force of the gale then blowing having spread the flames with such
rapidity that every appliance, by means of wet swabs, buckets of water,
and at last the fire pumps (for they had not been ready), proved alike
utterly futile to check the progress of the fire.
The most terrible consternation and confusion now prevailed. Passengers
and crew rushed on deck in the wildest dismay, while the gale which
raged overhead increased their fears. To add if possible to the terrors
of this awful calamity, the smoke and flames had driven the engineers
from their stations, so that the machinery could not be stopped;
consequently the _Amazon_ dashed through the waves at full speed. Thus
the raging fire, made more fearful by the storm, consumed everything
animate and inanimate within its reach, spreading with the most
alarming rapidity over the deck of the ship and extending to the cabins
below, where many of the passengers were either suffocated by the smoke
or consumed by the flames.
Recourse was now had to the boats: of these there were nine, including
four life-boats. As too often happens in cases of emergency, the boats
were neither clear nor ready for lowering. In this instance, too, the
life-boats had been fitted with crutches on which their keels rested.
These fittings now obstructed their clearance from the sides of the
ship, and but for this fatal arrangement so serious a loss of life
might have been lessened. To make matters worse, the two best and
largest boats had been stowed on the top of the sponsons, which were
now surrounded by the flames and could not be approached. When the
mail-boat was lowered, it was immediately swamped with twenty-five
persons on board, all of whom perished; the pinnace, when lowered,
sheered across the sea before the people in her could unhook the
foretackle, and they too were all washed out and drowned, except two
men who had clung to the thwarts and were enabled to scramble back
to the deck of the ship: the boat itself, which hung by the single
tackle, was soon afterwards dashed to pieces against the side of the
vessel. By extraordinary efforts fourteen of the crew and two of the
passengers were enabled to remove from the cranes and lower in safety
one of the starboard life-boats, while nineteen of the crew and six
of her passengers escaped in another: these, with a young midshipman,
named Vincent, who displayed great bravery and intrepidity, the chief
steward, one passenger (a young lady), and two of the seamen, who
had managed to lower without accident a small boat, the dingy, were
the only persons saved out of the 161 who had embarked on board the
_Amazon_ only two days previously. All the others perished, including
the captain, either by the flames or the waves; and, perhaps, in the
melancholy annals of the sea, there is no shipwreck more appalling than
that of the _Amazon_.
[Sidenote: Terrible sufferings.]
No writer of romance in the wildest dreams of fancy could have pictured
a scene more terrible than this reality. Young Vincent, in his vivid
narrative, describes two passengers rushing from their cabins
enveloped in flames and falling lifeless upon deck. He speaks of a
lady, with an infant in her arms, entreating some one to take care of
her child, heedless of her own safety, but before assistance could be
rendered perishing with her child amid the flames. Others, he says,
fled from them, only to be engulfed in the ocean. One lady passenger,
who had been lifted into the boat, was so terrified by the waves which
dashed over the sides of the ship that she preferred death among the
flames, and wildly rushed back to her destruction. Others fell through
the burning decks or hatchways, and were instantly consumed, while some
resigned themselves calmly to their terrible fate; when Vincent left
the ship he states that “some of those who yet lived were kneeling on
the deck in prayer, while others, almost in a state of nudity, were
running about screaming with terror.”
Between three and four o’clock in the morning the masts of the vessel
fell over her sides; the foremast on the port and the mainmast on the
starboard, but the mizen still stood while the fire raged from stem to
stern. One poor fellow then appeared perched on the extreme end of the
jib-boom, the only living thing amidst the burning mass; but he, too,
perished. About five in the morning, when the life-boat was “passing
the ship in a leewardly direction,” the gunpowder in her magazines
exploded, and in about twenty minutes afterwards, the mizenmast went by
the board; the vessel herself then making a heavy lurch, as if eager
to escape from the flames, went down, her funnels still standing, but
red hot, with everything on board which the fire, in its fury, had left
unconsumed.
[Sidenote: Loss of the _Demerara_.]
The destruction of the _Amazon_ following so quickly upon the stranding
of the _Demerara_ at Bristol (another of the five additional vessels
which the company had just launched), materially inconvenienced the
directors in the fresh arrangements they had made with Government for
the more expeditious delivery of the mails. They had now only the
_Oronoco_, _Magdalene_, and _Parana_ to conduct the direct service
between Southampton and the isthmus of Panama; but these misfortunes
appear to have stimulated the shareholders to renewed exertions.
Other vessels were engaged and fresh contracts entered into for the
construction of steamers of a still finer description.[279] When,
at length, Government relieved the company from the condition of
building wooden vessels adapted for purposes of war, and the directors
themselves discovered that iron was preferable to wood and the screw
a better mode of propulsion than the paddle-wheel, they produced
vessels equal to most of those now engaged in Transatlantic navigation.
Of late years, their average of loss, until very recently, has been
comparatively small.
[Sidenote: Additions to their fleet,]
There are not now many finer steamers afloat than their _Tagus_ and
_Moselle_, which were launched in the year 1871 from the yard of
Messrs. John Elder and Co. The former, a vessel of 2789 tons builders’
measurement and 600 horse-power, attained a mean speed of 14·878 knots
per hour on the occasion of her official trial; while the _Moselle_,
a sister ship, of about 3200 tons gross register, surpassed her,
having made 14·929 knots per hour as the average of four runs over
the measured mile. Equally satisfactory results have attended many of
their other vessels, and not the least remarkable is the case of the
_Tasmanian_, an iron screw-vessel they purchased from the unfortunate
European and Australian Steam Navigation Company. This vessel, which
was also fitted in 1871 by Messrs. John Elder and Co. with engines on
the compound principle, accomplished her first voyage to St. Thomas in
338 hours (14 days, 2 hours) on a consumption of only 466 tons of coal,
though she formerly consumed 1088 tons on a run of 349 hours (14 days,
13 hours).
[Sidenote: and superior class of vessels.]
An entire change of management combined with a superior class of
vessels have had a very material effect on the prosperity of the
company, enabling the directors at their last meeting to declare a
dividend of 10 per cent. per annum. Their fleet[280] is now a large and
excellent one, and well adapted, on the whole, for the due performances
of the various mail services[281] undertaken by the company. It is
further only just to the company, before closing this sketch of its
operations, to record the services which it rendered to the British
Government in placing some of its finest ships at the disposal of the
naval department for the conveyance of troops during the Crimean War,
more especially as the operation was carried out with only a trifling
interruption to the contract mail service.
FOOTNOTES:
[273] See articles in the _Civil Engineer and Architects’ Journal_,
1862, pp. 174 and 242, and other journals of the period.
[274] It should, however, be added that these figures apply to an
estimate made during the time of high postage rates, when as few
letters as possible were sent through the Post-office.
[275] “Our Steam Fleets,” _Liverpool Journal of Commerce_, October
26th, 1874.
[276] “The mail services of the company on the West India, and Brazil
and River Plate lines are now (1875) carried on under arrangements with
the Government, involving a still further reduced subsidy;” and the
Directors in their report of the 28th April last, add:—
“Since the last Report a contract has been entered into by the Company
with her Majesty’s Government to carry on the Brazil and River Plate
Mail Service, from the 1st January, 1875, for a payment according to
the weight of letters, etc., conveyed by the packets. The contract
is terminable at six months’ notice on either side, and is for a
service twice a month from Southampton; the vessels, which have for
a considerable time past left on the 24th of the month, being thus
placed on the same footing as those dispatched by the company under the
previous contract on the 9th of the month.”
[277] _Vide_ _Times_ newspaper, 9th April, 1847.
[278] The dimensions of the _Amazon_ were 300 feet in length, 41 feet
in width, and 32 feet in depth; she was about 3000 tons burthen or
2256 tons register. Her engines, of 800-horse power, were constructed
by Messrs. Seaward and Capel of Millwall, Poplar, the diameter of the
cylinders being 96 inches each and the stroke 9 feet. The engines made
fourteen revolutions of her wheels (which were 41 feet in diameter) per
minute, giving a speed by log of 11 knots an hour on her trial trip, at
a draught of 19 feet forward and 19 feet 9 inches aft.
[279] The following is a return of the vessels which were added to the
fleet of the Company between 1851 and 1860 inclusive:
-------------------+-----------+-------------+------------
| Number of | Tonnage. |Horse-power.
| Vessels. | |
+-----+-----+------+------+-----+------
|1851.|1860.|1851. |1860. |1851.|1860.
+-----+-----+------+------+-----+------
Under 1,000 tons| 5 | 4 | 2,949| 2,838|1,030| 900
1,000 to 1,500 tons| Nil | 2 | .. | 2,371| .. | 680
1,500 to 2,000 tons| 9 | 6 |16,593|11,057|3,900| 2,510
2,000 to 3,000 tons| 1 | 6 | 2,069|14,683| 440| 4,120
Over 3,000 tons| Nil | 3 | .. |10,070| .. | 2,400
+-----+-----+------+------+-----+------
| 15 | 21 |21,611|41,019|5,370|10,610
-------------------+-----+-----+------+------+-----+------
[280] See Appendix No. 19, p. 634.
[281] These services from Southampton with mails, passengers, and
cargo, are as follows:
_2nd of each month_—for West Indies, Cuba and Mexico, Colon
(Aspinwall), Savanilla, Panama, Central America, South and North
Pacific, San Francisco.
_9th and 24th of each month_—for Brazil and River Plate Routes, viz.
Lisbon, St. Vincent (Cape de Verde), Pernambuco, Bahia,[282] Rio de
Janeiro, Monte Video, Buenos Ayres.
_17th of each month_—for West Indies, Belize, Grey Town, Colon
(Aspinwall), Savanilla, Panama, Central America, South Pacific,
Acapulco, Mazanillo, San Francisco, British Columbia, Japan, China.
An additional steamer also leaves Southampton the 10th of each month
for Barbadoes, Trinidad, La Guayra, Porto Cabellos, Curaçoa, Santa
Marta, Savanilla, and Colon.
[282] The steamers of the 24th of each month do not call at Pernambuco
or Bahia.
CHAPTER VIII.
Pacific Steam Navigation Company—First steamer on the Pacific,
1825—Mr. Wheelwright—Obtains a charter, 1840—First vessels,
the _Chili_ and _Peru_—Warm reception at Valparaiso—The
Company persevere—Appointment of Mr. Just, 1846—Extension
of contract, 1850—Marked improvement in the prospects of
the Company, 1860—New lines—Vast increase of capital,
1867—Further increase of capital to 3,000,000_l._, 1871—Capital
increased, to 4,000,000_l._, 1872—Extent of fleet, _Iberia_
and _Liguria_—_Chimborazo_, 1871—Too rapid increase—Loss
arising therefrom—Modification of mail contract and reduced
services—West coast steamer _Bolivia_—Future prospects of
the Company—Trade with Mexico—First line of steamers from
Liverpool to Chagres—West India and Pacific Steam Navigation
Company—Liverpool, Brazil, and River Plate Steam Navigation
Company.
[Sidenote: Pacific Steam Navigation Company.]
About the period when the West India Steam Line was in course of
formation, another company, destined to surpass it in importance, had
obtained from the British Government a charter for establishing “steam
navigation along the shores of North and South America in the Pacific
Ocean,” as well as between those shores and China, the Australasian
Colonies, and certain ports in the West Indies and in the Atlantic
Ocean.
To establish a line of steam-ships for the purpose of carrying on
efficiently the large and valuable, but hitherto undeveloped, commerce
within the area named was indeed a bold undertaking, and one requiring
extensive and varied knowledge, with a large amount of experience and
judicious management combined with the necessary amount of capital.
These various requisites were not, however, readily obtained at a
period when ocean steam navigation was comparatively in its infancy,
and were rendered still more difficult by the knowledge that the
endeavours of the original projectors of steam navigation on the shores
of the Pacific had not been attended with success. Indeed, the first of
those undertakings proved most unfortunate, and was, also, accompanied
by a good deal of romance.
[Sidenote: First steamer in the Pacific, 1825.]
So early as 1825, when the struggles among the republics of the South
Pacific for supremacy were at their height, a few merchants resident
in Panama formed themselves into an association for the purpose of
trading along those shores, but they had so many difficulties to
overcome that a long time elapsed ere they could obtain the required
capital. The first steamer on the Pacific coast was a small craft named
the _Telica_, commanded and owned by a Spaniard named Mitrovitch;
but his career and that of the vessel under his charge was a short
and melancholy one. In a fit of despair at his want of success, with
some further annoyance from the complaints by his passengers, caused
chiefly by delay, and his inability to find a sufficient supply of
fuel, he fired his pistol into a barrel of gunpowder, blowing up his
vessel in the harbour of Guayaquil, and destroying himself and all on
board except one man. An occurrence of this lamentable nature, though
it happened ten or fifteen years previously, would, in most cases,
have destroyed, for many years subsequently, any attempts, by means of
steamers, to trade between Valparaiso and Panama, had not a gentleman,
then resident in Guayaquil and familiar with the trade of the coast,
taken up the business with the determination to carry it through at all
hazards.
[Sidenote: Mr. Wheelwright.]
William Wheelwright,[283] an American citizen, and at that time United
States’ Consul in Guayaquil, was no common man. He saw the advantages
to be derived from developing the rich resources of the eastern shores
of the Pacific, and the facilities which steam communication would
afford to the more frequent and more rapid intercourse between the
then rival republics. Nor was he mistaken in the views he entertained,
though he had many difficulties to overcome. Steam, while it eventually
became the chief means of settling the petty wars which had so long
raged, offered, at the same time, so many new sources of profitable
employment, with the opening up so many new channels of trade, as
happily to direct the attention of the native inhabitants from the
struggles of war to the peaceful pursuits of commerce. Studying the
wants of those countries and the most efficient means of affording
profitable employment to the people, Mr. Wheelwright spent six of the
best years of his life in arranging plans for steam communication
between the different republics, and, at last, obtained from the
Peruvian, Bolivian, and Chilian Governments the privilege of thus
navigating their coasts for the term of ten years. He then made a
journey to England for the purpose of endeavouring to influence the
wealthy merchants of this country to aid him in the undertaking.
[Sidenote: Obtains a charter, 1840.]
Here, however, he had still many difficulties to overcome, for the
trade he proposed to develop was then comparatively unknown, and the
little wars between the republics of the Pacific naturally led English
merchants to hesitate, ere they embarked their capital in a company
whose prospects were at that time far from encouraging. Nevertheless,
he succeeded in his object, and, on the 17th of February, 1840,
obtained, under letters patent, a charter for the establishment of the
undertaking now known as the Pacific Steam Navigation Company, together
with a small subsidy for the conveyance of the mails.
This contract differs from all others, in this respect, that the
vessels employed under it do not touch at any port of Her Majesty’s
dominions, although, practically, it may be considered as providing a
continuation of the line from Southampton. The extension of British
influence and British commerce was, doubtless, the chief inducement
for supporting this communication between the republics of New
Grenada, Bolivia, Peru, and Chili; the nature and extent of that
traffic rendering it necessary for the English to maintain mercantile
establishments in the chief ports and towns on the western coast of the
Pacific, and thus justifying Government in incurring this expense.[284]
The capital of the Pacific Company at first was limited to 250,000_l._
in 5000 shares of 50_l._ each. Though the whole capital, after a good
deal of labour, was subscribed, only an amount was called up sufficient
at the time to enable the directors to provide two boats, the _Chili_
and the _Peru_, which were dispatched to commence operations towards
the close of the year 1840.
[Sidenote: First vessels, the _Chili_ and _Peru_.]
[Sidenote: Warm reception at Valparaiso.]
These vessels were built of wood by Messrs. Charles Young and Co. of
Limehouse, London. They were sister ships, each of about 700 tons gross
register, though with a capacity of not half of that tonnage, and
with engines of about 150 horse-power constructed by Messrs. Miller
and Ravenhill. Through the courtesy of the directors, I am enabled to
furnish the following illustration of the _Peru_, whose dimensions were
198 feet extreme length and 50 feet extreme breadth. They were at that
time considered fine vessels and certainly they have a comfortable
business-like appearance. No wonder, therefore, that, on their arrival
at Valparaiso, they were received with great rejoicing and with
“salvoes of artillery, everybody wishing to visit them, the President
of the Republic, accompanied by his ministers, being among the first to
welcome the steam-ships to the shores of the Pacific.”
[Illustration: “PERU.”]
[Sidenote: The Company persevere.]
[Sidenote: Appointment of Mr. Just, 1846.]
But here again, Mr. Wheelwright had many difficulties to overcome, the
scarcity of fuel, as in the case of the _Telica_, being one of the
greatest. Under these circumstances, the Company, during the first five
years of its operations, sustained a loss of no less than 72,000_l._
upon a paid-up capital of 94,000_l._ In the face, however, of these
heavy losses, the shareholders resolved to persevere with their bold
undertaking, seeing in it the germs of future success. Under the
impression that the business of the Company could be better conducted
in Liverpool, where most of the shareholders resided, the directors,
on the 4th May, 1846, obtained a supplemental charter to remove from
London to that city, where the head office and general management,
have since been conducted by Mr. William Just, who, in January of the
following year, was appointed its managing director. In December 1847,
the directors were enabled to give to the shareholders for the first
time a dividend, though only 2½ per cent., on their paid-up capital.
[Sidenote: Extension of contract, 1850.]
In 1850, the Company obtained an extension of its mail contract of
1845-46, whereby the directors were required to provide not less than
six steamers, of at least 170 horse-power each, but, at the suggestion
of the Company, the Government, in November of that year, allowed four
steamers of 1000 tons and 300 horse-power to be substituted for the six
smaller vessels originally contemplated.[285]
The prospects of the undertaking were, however, still far from
encouraging, and when, in February 1853, the directors represented
to the Board of Admiralty that the expense arising from the greatly
increased price of coals rendered the portion of their service between
Callao and Panama altogether unremunerative, and asked for an increase
of subsidy, they were refused. The directors then solicited permission
to employ between these two places vessels of only 100 horse-power and
400 tons, which they considered would be sufficiently large for the
passenger traffic, and would restore the balance of profit by reducing
the cost of fuel. They also undertook that these vessels should be
capable of maintaining an average speed of 10 knots an hour, and that
the mail service should not suffer. This proposal Government acquiesced
in, temporarily, reserving to itself the right of reverting to the
original agreement.
The more frequent and more speedy services had, indeed, become, if not
necessary, at least desirable, since the West India Mail Packet Co.
had doubled the services of their ships between England and Colon. The
Pacific Co. therefore felt that, if they did not run their vessels to
and from Panama in connection with the steamers from England, those
of the United States of America, now rapidly increasing in the trade
of the Pacific, might soon monopolize the lines they occupied from
the Isthmus to the southern ports. Consequently, the directors of the
Pacific Company were glad to accede to the proposal of the Admiralty to
run steamers with the mails monthly from Panama, for the small increase
of 5000_l._ per annum to their original contract of 20,000_l._
This Company had now in its service seven vessels of 5719 tons and of
2396 horse-power; but, though they touched at no less than thirteen
ports between Panama and Valparaiso inclusive, the average annual
amount of receipts for postage, for five years previously to 1860,
amounted to only 5441_l._
In 1856, Mr. Just visited the west coast, and re-organized the
management and the service generally with very successful results.
Towards that success his adoption of the compound engine,[286] then
almost a novelty, materially tended, effecting as it did, an enormous
saving in the consumption of fuel and, consequently, in the current
expenses of the Company.
[Sidenote: Marked improvement in the prospects of the Company, 1860.]
[Sidenote: New lines.]
From 1860, the trade of the Pacific rapidly developed itself. The
inhabitants of the coast now saw the incalculable advantages to
be derived from regular and increased intercourse between other
countries. Steam here, as it has done everywhere else, opened up new
and hitherto unthought of branches of commerce; the natives learned
what other nations required, and, to meet these demands, they turned
to cultivating their fields instead of fighting among themselves.
Consequently, the Pacific Company soon found it necessary to increase
the number of their fleet. In December 1859, a second supplemental
charter was obtained, which extended the incorporation of the Company
for twenty-one years from the 17th of February, 1861. On the 15th of
June, 1865, a third supplemental charter was applied for and obtained,
extending the powers of the Company, to the establishment of lines of
communication “between the west coast of South America and the River
Plata, including the Falkland Islands and such other ports or places
in North and South America, and other foreign ports, as to the said
Company shall seem expedient.”
[Sidenote: Vast increase of capital, 1867.]
During these years the profits of the undertaking had been steadily
increasing, and at a special meeting of shareholders held in December
1867 it was determined to add to the operations of the company by
establishing a monthly line _from Liverpool_ to the west coast of South
America, _viâ_ the Straits of Magellan.
This entirely new and important, though hazardous, branch of the
service necessitated an increase of the capital of the company to
2,000,000_l._ In furtherance of their views the directors sent their
steamer _Pacific_, of 2000 tons register and 450 horse-power, from
Valparaiso, in May 1868, as the pioneer of the new mail line.
[Sidenote: Further increase of capital to 3,000,000_l._, 1871.]
The bold undertaking of dispatching steamers on so distant a voyage,
and at so high a rate of speed as that maintained, proved for some
years more successful than could have been anticipated, and, in 1869,
the profits of the four new steamers, which had made nine voyages from
Liverpool to Valparaiso, were so satisfactory that the directors in
1870 determined to make the line bi-monthly, and extend the voyage from
Valparaiso to Callao. Seventeen voyages made in the course of that year
with still greater success, induced the directors to recommend that
the departures thenceforward should be three a month; and, in December
1871, the shareholders authorized a further increase of the capital to
3,000,000_l._, so that the company might be enabled to dispatch every
week one of their steamers on this distant voyage.
Considering the then comparatively limited amount of the trade it was a
very bold experiment. While directors of undertakings of this nature
very properly consider it their duty to meet and even to anticipate
the requirements of the public, so as to prevent others occupying
their field of operations, and thus avoiding injury from competition,
it may well be questioned if this extraordinary increase of steamers
could be justified by any reasonable anticipations of the increase of
the trade to be developed by these additional facilities, and within
so limited a space of time. The result, indeed, soon showed that they
were now too far in advance of the requirements of commerce. Though,
in 1871, twenty-nine round voyages were performed between Liverpool,
Valparaiso, and Callao, the profits, so far from being increased, gave
signs of falling off; and, in 1872, thirty-seven round voyages were
made with, as the result proved, a further diminished rate of profit,
the directors having, in January of that year, recommended at a special
meeting of shareholders the addition to their fleet of four more
steamers at a cost of 500,000_l._
[Sidenote: Capital increased to 4,000,000_l._ 1872.]
In the course of the following July, a further charter had been
obtained authorizing an additional 1,000,000_l._ of capital to be
raised, and thus, with power to draw on the shareholders to the extent
of 4,000,000_l._, the whole capital of the company, the directors did
not hesitate to still further increase their already gigantic fleet!
[Sidenote: Extent of fleet.]
[Sidenote: _Iberia_ and _Liguria_.]
The company now owns no less than fifty-four steamers, of an aggregate
of 119,870 tons, and 21,395 horse-power.[287] Two of these, the
_Iberia_ and _Liguria_, built and supplied with engines by Messrs.
John Elder and Co., of Glasgow, in 1873, are each 4671 tons gross
register with a capacity for 4000 tons of cargo, besides space for
916 tons of coals, and accommodation for no less than 800 third-class
passengers. They are each of 700 horse-power nominal, and attained a
speed on their trial trips of 15 knots per hour.[288]
[Sidenote: _Chimborazo_, 1871.]
[Sidenote: Too rapid increase.]
But, though inferior in power and dimensions, the vessels the company
had built previously to this time for their Liverpool and Valparaiso
line were equal in other respects to the new ones. Indeed, as may be
seen by the following representation of the _Chimborazo_, launched in
1871, also from the yard of Elder and Company, they were not surpassed
by any steamers afloat. She is a sister ship of the _Cuzco_, built by
the same firm, as also of the _Garonne_ built by Robert Napier and Sons
and launched the same year. They are each 370 feet in length between
perpendiculars, 41 feet beam, 35 feet depth of hold, and about 3850
tons gross register tonnage. They perform their passages on the coast
with remarkable speed and regularity, while the voyage from Liverpool
to Valparaiso is usually made in forty-two days. But, for the time
being, the company has found itself overtaken by severe competition
and depression in the west coast trade, and has been obliged to reduce
the services on the line from Liverpool to that coast to two voyages
each month instead of one weekly; in consequence of which nine of their
steamers are, at present, laid up for want of employment.
[Illustration: “CHIMBORAZO.”]
[Sidenote: Loss arising therefrom.]
Although the loss thus sustained may be attributed in no small
degree to the over-sanguine views of the directors in regard to the
development of the trade between Great Britain and the west coast of
South America, some portion of it is also due to the competition on the
coast and to the opposition they met in performing the weekly service
for which they had obtained a postal contract from Her Majesty’s
Government in December 1872. Bound to a speed in excess of what had
been required of other companies, and with a grant of only the sea
postage, it was impossible for them to hope to compete successfully
with such highly subsidized companies as the Royal Mail and the French
Messageries Maritimes, both of which maintain an opposition race to
those ports of the Brazils whence the Pacific Steam Navigation Company
hoped to derive some advantage by the conveyance of passengers on their
way to Valparaiso.
[Sidenote: Modification of mail contract and reduced services.]
Indeed, where a high rate of speed is required, and where heavy
penalties are inflicted for any irregularity in the performance
of the stipulated service, it is very questionable, unless when
highly subsidized, if any advantage whatever is to be gained by the
conveyance of mails on so distant a voyage as that which the Pacific
Company had undertaken to perform. But, by reducing the number of
services and modifying the rate of speed, which the Government at
last consented they should do—requiring, however, a reduction in the
amount of subsidy—the directors, on the one hand, may hope to secure
a sufficient amount of remunerative freight; and, on the other, to
effect a saving in the consumption of coal—a matter of the highest
consideration on such distant voyages.
Although the anticipations of the directors, in the more recent and
expensive portion of their great undertaking, have not been realised,
while the services of the steamers on the West Coast have periodically,
and especially of late, been subjected to considerable depression,
the trade of the Pacific has steadily and, compared with any previous
development, marvellously increased since first opened out by the
energy of Mr. Wheelwright. Moreover, this trade is likely to go on
increasing, especially as the company has now a class of vessels
admirably adapted for its still increasing wants, and affording many
comforts to passengers who, induced by numerous attractions travel
either for business or pleasure, along the shores of the Pacific.
[Sidenote: West Coast steamer, _Bolivia_.]
The following is an illustration of one of the steamers now engaged
on the Pacific coast line; but the _Santa Rosa_ and the many similar
vessels belonging to the Pacific Company now trading along these
shores,[289] have been greatly surpassed by their screw-steamer
_Bolivia_, of 1925 tons, launched from the building yard of Messrs. T.
Wingate & Co., Glasgow, in 1874, and which is perhaps the finest, or at
least, one of the finest vessels now afloat on the Pacific. The details
of this handsome ship, which has an average speed of 14 knots an hour,
as have also those of the other vessels of the company, will be found
in the Appendix, together with interesting and instructive returns of
the cost of each ship complete for sea.[290]
[Illustration: “SANTA-ROSA.”]
[Sidenote: Future prospects of the company.]
With the losses this company have sustained during the last few years,
the differences between the shareholders and directors, and the charges
of mismanagement and extravagance which have been alleged, it is not
my province to deal. Companies and nations, like individuals, are
frequently too prone to spend more than they ought, if unusual success
has attended their efforts, or they find more money at their disposal
than they can prudently or wisely expend. It has been so throughout
all time and in all countries, and we daily see it in the case of
individuals managing their own affairs.
It is, therefore, not surprising, and certainly nothing new to learn
that, when the directors of the Pacific Steam Navigation Company were
favoured with many years of unusual prosperity, after many years of
hard up-hill work, and were able to divide an average of over 20 per
cent. per annum among their shareholders, they should have followed
the example of individuals, of companies, and of nations throughout
all history; and that, in the sanguine hope of being able to maintain
this prosperity, they should have expended money in the construction of
ships not required, and for, perhaps, even less justifiable purposes.
It should, however, be remembered, of this great undertaking when its
failings are noticed, that it has rendered very important services in
developing British commerce and that, in bringing so many civilizing
influences to bear upon the people of various republics, who, from
their constant warfare with each other, were little better than tribes
of semi-barbarians, the Pacific Company has essentially aided the cause
of progress and the happiness of mankind. These advantages will be
felt long after its mishaps are forgotten.
The field which the directors have chosen for their operations, is
still only very partially developed, and there is, consequently, a
great future for this company, if wisely and prudently conducted. It
requires no prophetic vision to see that, as the commerce of the world
moves westward, the principal highway to the ever envied and far famed
East will be by the route which Columbus sought in vain across the
Pacific Ocean. Indeed, San Francisco will soon be a greater entrepôt
for trade than ever Venice was, and may, even before long, rival in
many respects the now gigantic commerce of Great Britain.
[Sidenote: Trade with Mexico.]
The steady increase of trade along the whole of the western shores of
the Pacific has already rendered necessary greatly increased means
of intercourse with Europe and the United States of America, which
the line of railway across the Isthmus has assisted to develop with
extraordinary rapidity. Other channels of trade in that quarter have
likewise been recently opened, rich in themselves and capable of vast
extension, through the medium of steam.
[Sidenote: First line of steamers from Liverpool to Chagres.]
Although many schemes had been set on foot during the last three
centuries, for re-opening the commerce of Central America, and,
especially, of that portion of it which has its outlet into the Gulf of
Mexico and the Caribbean Sea,—among these none being so conspicuous as
the unfortunate Darien expedition—all attempts proved abortive until
the latter half of the present century. Indeed, till the completion
of the railway, none of these were worthy of any notice. So rapid,
however, has been its increase since then, that the undertakings of
more recent years have been attended with considerable success. Perhaps
the most important of these is the line of steam navigation between
Liverpool and the West Indies, and, thence, by the Isthmus of Panama,
to the Pacific Ocean, originally due to Mr. Alfred Holt, of Liverpool,
who about the year 1855, dispatched steamers to trade between that port
and Colon (the Atlantic terminus of the Panama Railroad) and other
ports on the Spanish Main. His first was a vessel of only 535 tons
burden, but she was then more than sufficient for any surplus commerce,
which the American boats, on the one hand and those of the West India
Mail Packet Co., on the other, could not convey. The regularity,
however, with which this additional service was performed, created
increased sources of employment, so that within a very short time, Mr.
Holt considered it desirable to establish a monthly line of steamers
of increased size and power, and so rapid was the rise of trade that
other steam-vessels were soon engaged in similar traffic. In 1863,
Messrs Leach, Harrison, and Forwood of Liverpool, large importers of
produce from the West Coast, found it necessary to establish a line
of steamers in a great measure for their own requirements, and about
the same time, Messrs Imrie and Tomlinson, in association with Messrs
Duranty and Co., of Liverpool, who had long been engaged in the trade
with Mexico and the West Indies, formed another line of steamers on the
limited liability principle. The trade in its various ramifications
had now become so large that, towards the close of that year, it was
considered desirable to form a public company to amalgamate these
three undertakings, and thus more thoroughly to conduct the rapidly
increasing commercial intercourse between Liverpool, Mexico, Honduras,
Venezuela, and the Windward Islands.
[Sidenote: West India and Pacific Steam Navigation Company.]
The capital of 1,250,000_l._ was at once subscribed, and this new
undertaking now known as the West India and Pacific Steam Navigation
Company (Limited), finding it necessary to re-organize the whole
business and, in addition, to embrace the Colon trade, and other lines
of traffic, subdivided the services into five separate branches—one
to Belize, one to Tampico, one to Colon, one to St. Thomas, and one to
Trinidad.[291] It was also arranged to dispatch steamers to Barbadoes
and Demerara. The trunk or principal line of the company is that to
Colon, in connection with the Panama railroad, and, by it, with the
various steam lines on the Pacific, the company signing through bills
of lading for no fewer than seventy ports, at sixteen of which their
vessels call to land goods and passengers.
This undertaking, which has met with considerable success, conveys the
British mails to Honduras and Mexico. It now owns thirteen steamers
of 24,680 tons gross register. Though inferior in size and power to
the steam-ships of the other Transatlantic lines, they are a very fine
class of iron screw propelled vessels, maintaining an average speed
of more than 10 knots an hour, and performing the passage with great
regularity from Liverpool to St. Thomas in eighteen, and to Colon in
about twenty-two days.
Besides those I have mentioned, various other lines of steam-ships now
traverse the Atlantic north and south, as well as casual steamers and
large numbers of sailing-vessels, most of the former being the property
of associations carrying on business, either under the old law or under
the Limited Liability Act.
[Sidenote: Liverpool, Brazil, and River Plate Steam Company.]
Among the largest of these may be mentioned the Liverpool, Brazil, and
River Plate Steam-ship Company (Limited), which was formed in 1865, the
principal shareholders being Messrs. Lamport and Holt, of Liverpool,
by whom the steamers are managed, and a few of their personal friends.
There is nothing, however, in their fleet of vessels requiring
special notice, except that they are a very fine class of business
steamers and have performed their work with great regularity. They
are now thirty-one in number, of a gross tonnage of 49,294 tons,[292]
and have excellent accommodation, combined with every comfort which
passengers can desire, offering all the means of safety in their
prudent management, and regularity of system, which can be hoped for in
Transatlantic voyages.
Although the vessels of this company are principally engaged out
of Liverpool, some of them sail from London and Antwerp, calling
frequently at Havre and Lisbon in the course of their trade with
the ports of Brazil and River Plate, Pernambuco, and Buenos Ayres.
One of them proceeds monthly, up the River Parana to Rosario, and,
occasionally, others return from Brazil to the United States with
cargoes of coffee. Three are permanently engaged in the service of
the Government of Brazil for the conveyance of mails between Rio de
Janeiro and the southern ports, while others maintain a direct line
of communication with Brazil and Antwerp. The Company is also under
contract with the British Government to dispatch, on the 20th of each
month, a steamer with the mails from Liverpool to Bahia, Rio Janeiro,
Monte Video, and Buenos Ayres, returning with a monthly mail from each
of these ports. Steamers are likewise dispatched on the 3rd, 10th, and
12th of each month to the other ports, with extra vessels at such dates
as the requirements of the trade may demand. The last new steamer, the
_Herelius_, of 2610 tons register, was built by Messrs. Andrew Leslie
and Company, Hebburn-on-Tyne, and her engines, of 300 horse-power
nominal, are by Messrs. Robert Stephenson and Co., Newcastle; she is an
excellent specimen of a merchant-steamer, being 345 feet in length, 37
feet in breadth, and 27 feet depth of hold from maindeck, with a large
capacity for cargo, and a speed on the measured or trial mile of from
11 to 12 knots an hour, on a moderate consumption of fuel.
Though, by an ancient Act of Parliament, the responsibility of
shipowners has been limited—no doubt for the purpose of encouraging
navigation—to the value of the ship and freight, numerous companies
of shipowners have been formed, under the Limited Liability Act of
1862, consisting of a few individuals, as in the case of Messrs.
Lamport and Holt’s line, for the purpose of conducting different
branches of maritime commerce. Many of these are larger and more
important undertakings than the great bulk of the public steam
navigation companies, and have generally proved more successful from
the fact that their managing directors usually hold themselves a very
large amount of capital invested in them. To some of these I shall
have occasion to refer hereafter. In the meantime, I must invite the
attention of my readers to the trade with the East, as now conducted by
steam-vessels.
FOOTNOTES:
[283] Mr. Wheelwright was born at Newburyport, Massachusetts, U.S., in
1798, where his ancestors from Bilsby, in Lincolnshire, had settled
so early as the year 1629. His first visit to South America was in
command of one of his father’s vessels, where he was wrecked at Cape
Corrientes in 1821. In the following year, he sailed as supercargo in
a vessel to Valparaiso and thence proceeded viâ Peru to Guayaquil,
where he established himself as a commission merchant and was, in 1824,
appointed United States’ Consul. Having frequent occasion to make
voyages along the Pacific coast, he saw the advantages to be derived
from steam communication, which subsequently led to the formation of
the Pacific Steam Navigation Co. His intimate connection with that
company, as one of its most active managers and directors, continued
until 1855, when he directed his attention more especially to the
construction of railways in South America, his first line between
Caldera and Copiago proving so great a success that “in a few years the
dividends paid to its shareholders amounted to double the entire cost.”
Subsequently, he, in association with Messrs. Brassey and Wythes,
constructed the line between Cordoba and Rosario, which was opened in
1870, when the President, addressing him, said, “The Argentine Republic
have not wherewith to acknowledge the greatness of your works.” Mr.
Wheelwright died in London, 16th September, 1873.
[284] “A broader and more promising field for steam operations than
that which the Pacific affords, does not exist in any part of the
world. The prevailing south winds, the calms, and the currents of that
ocean render navigation by sailing-vessels tedious and uncertain in
the extreme; while the nature of the whole country, from Valparaiso
to Guayaquil—presenting a succession of mountains and deep ravines,
intersected by sandy deserts—offers every imaginable obstacle to
land travelling; and, yet, there are four millions of inhabitants
within the proposed line of intercourse ready to participate, to a
greater or less degree, in the benefits to arise from the proposed
undertaking.”—Pamphlet on ‘Steam Navigation in the Pacific,’ by Mr.
Wheelwright: London, 1838.
[285] The four steamers supplied (at a cost of 140,000_l._), in
pursuance of the company’s contract with the Admiralty, were the
_Lima_, _Santiago_, _Quito_, and _Bogota_: they were to be employed in
the bi-monthly service between Valparaiso and Panama.
[286] The directors of the Pacific Co. by degrees applied the compound
engine after 1856 to all their steam-ships, and it is worthy of record
that they were not only among the first, if not the first, to adopt
the compound engine for ocean-going steamers, but were almost singular
in this respect for upwards of fourteen years. This description of
engine has now entirely superseded all others for the purposes of steam
navigation.
[287] See Appendix No. 20, pp. 635-6.
[288] The length of these steamers is 425 feet between perpendiculars
and 449 feet over all. Their breadth is 44½ feet, and their depth
of hold 35½ feet. The engines, which are compound, have each three
cylinders, one of 4 feet 8 inches diameter and two of 6 feet 6 inches
diameter, with 5 feet length of stroke.
[289] The _Santa Rosa_ is 320 feet in length, 38 feet in breadth, and
28 feet deep to the main deck on which a range of cabins extend for
nearly the whole length, as may be seen from the drawing, affording the
perfect system of ventilation so much required in steamers employed in
tropical climates. She is 1816 tons gross register, and is propelled
by a screw, although some others of smaller class still use the
paddle-wheels.
[290] Appendix No. 20, p. 637.
[291] “Steam Lines of Liverpool,” page 37.
[292] See Appendix No. 21, p. 637.
CHAPTER IX.
Steam to India and overland routes—East India Company establish
a Tátar post between Constantinople and Baghdad—First public
meeting in London to promote steam communication with India,
1822—Captain Johnston—Calcutta meetings, 1823—The _Enterprize_,
first steamer to India by Cape, 1825—Sold in Calcutta to East
India Company—Other steamers follow—Pioneers of overland
route viâ Egypt—Sir Miles Nightingall in 1819 and Mount-Stuart
Elphinstone in 1823 return home by this route—Mr. Thomas Waghorn
visits England to promote the Cape route, 1829-30—Returns
to India by way of Trieste and the Red Sea—Still advocates
Cape route, 1830—Mr. Taylor’s proposal—Reply of Bombay
Government and discussion of the question—Supineness of the
Court of Directors—Their views—Official report of the first
voyage of the _Hugh Lindsay_, 1830—Report of the Committee of
1834—Decision of the House of Commons Committee influenced by
political considerations—Admiralty packets extended from Malta
to Alexandria—Steamers of the Indian navy—Modes of transport
across the Isthmus of Suez—Great exertions of Waghorn in the
establishment of this route—Suez Canal—Popular errors on this
subject—M. de Lesseps—His great scheme—Not fairly considered
in England—Commencement of M. de Lesseps’ works in 1857—General
details—Partial opening of Canal, April 18th, 1869—Finally
opened by Empress Eugénie, November 17th, 1869.
[Sidenote: Steam to India, and overland routes.]
Having in the early portions of this work endeavoured to trace the
various commercial routes to the East by land and sea in the most
remote periods as well as in the Middle Ages, I now invite my readers
to accompany me while I attempt to furnish an outline of the modes by
which commercial intercourse is maintained with India and China at the
present time, and of the transport service employed in conveying this
commerce.
Although nearly the whole of the European trade with the East has,
since the time of Vasco de Gama, been conducted by sea round the Cape
of Good Hope, caravans through Arabia and Asia Minor and along the
shores of the Red Sea, as well as by the more frequented route of the
valley of Mesopotamia and the River Euphrates to the Persian Gulf,
have never, since the days of Herodotus, altogether ceased. Indeed,
during the reign of Elizabeth, and for sometime afterwards, many
English merchants preferred the Euphrates route to the sea voyage, the
course they then adopted, being apparently through Syria or Asia Minor
to Bir, where a fleet of boats or barges, resembling those described
by the Father of History, was at all seasons ready to convey them
and their merchandise down the Euphrates to Hillah, near the site of
Ancient Babylon, or by Mosul to Baghdad, the chief Eastern centre of
commerce during the early part of the Middle Ages. From Baghdad their
course was down the Tigris to Bussorah, where they embarked in native
sailing-vessels for various parts of India.
[Sidenote: East India Company establish a Tátar post between
Constantinople and Baghdad.]
An overland route between Europe and India had thus from time
immemorial been sustained; and, though there was no established service
between England and the East until a comparatively recent period, the
East India Company, from the time they first became possessors of
land in India, frequently sent despatches by the way of the Persian
Gulf, thus creating at length a regular monthly communication between
Constantinople and Baghdad, by Tátars, maintained at the cost of the
Indian Government. Thus, at last, private letters as well as official
despatches, were transmitted by these means, while, on important
occasions, special despatches were forwarded by the same route at other
than the monthly periods. This, so far as the East India Company was
concerned, was the original, and the only official overland line of
communication; and so it continued to be till it was superseded by the
route through Egypt. Another generation may see it resumed by an iron
highway.[293]
[Sidenote: First public meeting in London to promote steam
communication with India, 1822.]
[Sidenote: Captain Johnston.]
It was not, however, until steam-vessels began to attract attention
that any regular postal service other than by sailing-vessels was
seriously considered. But on this subject opinions differed widely,
the prevailing one at that time being at first in favour of the Cape
route, transferring the conveyance of the mails from the old East
Indiamen to steamers. Nothing, however, was definitely proposed till
1822, when a public meeting was held in London with the view of forming
a Steam Navigation Company to trade with India, the result of which
was the despatch of Lieutenant (afterwards Captain) J. Johnston, to
Calcutta to see what could be done to prosecute the object in view.
Johnston went through Egypt and became subsequently one of the ardent
supporters of the route by Suez, though his own employment and the
intention of those for whom he then acted, was more especially the
promotion of the Cape route.
[Illustration: S.S. “ENTERPRISE.”]
[Sidenote: Calcutta meetings, 1823.]
Soon after his arrival in Calcutta, several meetings took place,
the most important of which was held in the Town Hall of that city,
December 17th, 1823,[294] with Mr. Harrington in the Chair. Various
routes were then considered. At the meeting it was announced that
the proposal of a more speedy communication with England by means of
steam-vessels had met with the cordial approval of Lord Amherst in
Council, who was prepared to recommend towards the promotion of the
enterprise a “gift of 20,000 rupees” by way of premium “to whoever,
whether individuals or a company, being _British_ subjects, should
permanently, before the end of 1826, establish a steam communication
between England and India, either by the Cape of Good Hope or Red
Sea, and make two voyages out and two home, occupying not more than
seventy days on each passage.” For this object somewhere about 80,000
rupees were raised in India, of which 12,000 were subscribed by the
Rajah of Oude; and, on the news reaching England, another meeting
was held in London, at which more money was collected, sufficient on
the whole to justify the promoters to order as an experiment, the
construction of the _Enterprize_, the first steamer destined to double
the Cape of Good Hope.
[Sidenote: The _Enterprize_, first Steamer to India, by Cape, 1825.]
Captain Johnston having completed the object for which he had been
despatched to India, returned to England in the _Eliza_ by way of the
Cape, and, on his arrival in London, the _Enterprize_,[295] which had
been laid down in the yard of Gordon and Co., Deptford, was two-thirds
finished. On her completion she was placed under his command, and
sailed for Calcutta on the 16th of August, 1825, where she arrived
on the 7th December following. Although 113 days on the passage,
she was only 103 days under way, as ten were spent in stoppages to
replenish her stock of coal; but her greatest average speed, during any
twenty-four hours, not exceeding 9·36 miles per hour, accounted for by
the large quantity of coals she was obliged to carry,[296] disappointed
the expectations of the seventeen passengers who had embarked in her.
(An illustration of this vessel is furnished on p. 340.)
[Sidenote: Sold in Calcutta to East India Company.]
The voyage of the _Enterprize_, ought to have convinced the advocates
of the ocean route that it was not advisable, commercially, to
persevere in such an undertaking, moreover, though this steamer was
admittedly unsuited for so distant a voyage, other considerations,
especially at that early period of steam navigation, made it doubtful
whether vessels thus propelled, and by a route so long as that round
the Cape, could yield remunerative returns. However, the _Enterprize_,
though she did not receive the 20,000 rupees premium, was sold when she
arrived at Calcutta, to the Indian Government for 40,000_l._, who then
required every ship they could get for the first Burmese war. She was
at once appropriated by the East India Company, who employed her in
carrying despatches from Calcutta to Rangoon, a service in which she
proved of great value in aiding the operations of that campaign.
[Sidenote: Other steamers follow.]
The success thus far of the _Enterprize_ encouraged the introduction of
steam-vessels into the local trade of India; the comparatively narrow
seas, excellent harbours, and safe inlets, as well as the many large
and important navigable rivers of that part of Asia affording almost
as large and remunerative fields for the employment of such vessels
as the coasts, rivers, and lakes of North America. To this branch
of commerce I shall hereafter refer. In the meantime I must ask my
readers to accompany me in an attempt to trace the means of more rapid
communication between Great Britain and her vast dominions in the
East, with some notice of the persons to whom we are indebted for the
advantages we have thus derived.
[Sidenote: Pioneers of overland route, viâ Egypt.]
As in other important changes and inventions, I find in my researches
many claimants for originality; and though it may appear scarcely
necessary to wade through the mass of papers[297] published by persons
claiming for themselves or their friends the merit of an overland
route which has existed since the dawn of history, I shall endeavour
to furnish within a brief space the leading facts relating to the
routes which, in our own time, have produced such marked changes in our
commercial intercourse with India.
[Sidenote: Sir Miles Nightingall, in 1819, and Mount-Stuart
Elphinstone, in 1823, return home by this route.]
Though not so much frequented as that by the Euphrates route,
travellers have found their way from time immemorial between Europe and
India through Egypt, availing themselves of native vessels for the Red
Sea or along its coasts to the once far-famed lands of Yemen and thence
to the ever coveted “Cathay” of the East. The first authentic record,
in recent times, however, of any journey from India to Great Britain
by the Isthmus of Suez, with the object of ascertaining whether that
route could be renewed as a pathway of commerce, or, if not, for the
transmission of despatches, was a passage made in 1819, by Sir Miles
Nightingall, then Commander-in-chief of the Bombay army (for whom,
however, no claim of originality has been made), who, on relinquishing
that command, returned to England viâ the Red Sea accompanied by Lady
Nightingall.[298] Sir Miles and his wife left Bombay in the East India
Company’s cruiser _Teignmouth_, and after many troubles reached Suez
and thence found their way home.
But the first distinct official proposal of this route as one
practicable for the regular conveyance of despatches and the mails
was made by the Hon. Mount-Stuart Elphinstone, who, when Governor of
Bombay in 1823, recommended steam communication between that place and
England, remarking that the passage “_might be done in thirty-four
days, all stoppages included_.” The Court of Directors, however,
paid no heed to this suggestion; and as these sagacious rulers of
our Eastern Empire paid quite as little attention to his further
communication to them on the same subject in 1826, he thought it
advisable to give them a practical illustration of the value of this
route by returning home, when he relinquished the Government of Bombay
in the following year, with his staff and other friends, by way of the
Red Sea and Mediterranean.[299]
His immediate successor in the Government of Bombay, Sir John Malcolm,
by returning home viâ Suez (to which reference shall hereafter be
made), followed up the good work of his predecessors; and was zealously
seconded by his brother, Sir Charles Malcolm, then superintendent of
the Indian Navy; while another brother, Sir Pulteney Malcolm, naval
commander-in-chief in the Mediterranean, also took an active part in
promoting the isthmus of Suez route.
The fact of such men having thus personally and practically directed
their attention to the subject, naturally led merchants and
others interested in the trade of India to direct their attention
with increased vigour to the best means of obtaining more rapid
communication with the East. In their researches they were materially
assisted by the report of Major C. F. Head,[300] who made the voyage
from India to England through the Red Sea early in the year 1829, as
again in 1830, being, at the same time, still further encouraged by
the successful performances of the _Enterprize_ and other steam-ships
by this time employed in India. Nor did they relax their efforts,
dragging with them the Court of Directors, until this great object was
accomplished by the establishment of a regular overland mail service.
[Sidenote: Mr. Thomas Waghorn visits England to promote the Cape route,
1829-30.]
[Sidenote: Returns to India by way of Trieste and the Red Sea.]
Among the most zealous supporters of steam communication with the East,
and subsequently one of the most arduous and conspicuous agitators of
the overland route, was Mr. Thomas Waghorn.[301] He had been a mate in
the Bengal pilot service, and, having piloted the _Enterprize_ on her
arrival at Calcutta, at once saw the advantages to be derived from the
extension of steam-ships to India. In 1827 he became associated with
the committee which had been formed in Calcutta for the prosecution
of steam communication with England, and in the following year was
accredited by that association to persons in authority at Madras,
Ceylon, the Mauritius, the Cape, St. Helena, and London. Failing,
however, to obtain sufficient patronage for a regular service by
way of the Cape of Good Hope, he resolved to return to India by the
Isthmus of Suez, as he had heard that the _Enterprize_ was to be
despatched up the Red Sea. With that object in view, he waited upon
Lord Ellenborough, then President of the Board of Control, and also
upon Mr. Lock, at that time Chairman of the Court of Directors of the
East India Company, and offered to act as a courier to the East. His
services having been accepted,[302] he left London on the evening of
the 28th of October, 1829, crossed the continent of Europe to Trieste,
and arrived at Alexandria on the 27th of November, at 8 A.M., passing
through five kingdoms of Europe in nine and a half days; three days
and seventeen hours of this arduous journey having been spent in
stoppages. His orders were to meet the _Enterprize_ at Suez, and to
convey in her despatches for Sir John Malcolm, then governor of Bombay,
but, this steamer having broken down on the passage, did not reach her
destination.
Though much disconcerted by this misfortune, Mr. Waghorn at once hired
an open native boat, and, without chart or compasses, sailed down the
Red Sea to Jiddah, a distance of 628 miles, in six days, and, passing
on thence, arrived at Bombay, March 21st, 1830, in the East India
Company’s sloop _Thetis_, which had been sent to meet him.[303]
[Sidenote: Still advocates Cape Route, 1830.]
Though Waghorn was probably convinced in his own mind by the experience
thus obtained of the superior advantages of the Red Sea route so far
as regarded speed, he continued to advocate the establishment of a
line of steam-vessels by the Cape in preference to any other,[304] no
doubt feeling that, in supporting the views of the people of Calcutta,
he was honestly performing his duties to those persons by whom he was
employed. But whatever may have been the cause, he did not publicly
support the overland route until some time afterwards. However, when
free to act as he pleased, he took up the cause of the Red Sea route
with his usual warmth and energy, and advocated it with more vigour
and, certainly, with greater success than he had done that by the Cape
of Good Hope.
[Sidenote: Mr. Taylor’s proposal.]
In the meantime other persons were steadily pursuing their endeavours
to induce the East India Company to adopt the overland route, and
among these may be mentioned Mr. J. R. Taylor,[305] who had long
been as zealously labouring to form a company in London for the
establishment of a regular communication by means of steam-vessels on
the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. “The experience,” he remarked,[306]
“afforded by passages made by steam-vessels in certain parts of the
route selected, justifies the expectation that intercourse between
the two countries may thus be effected in from fifty-four to sixty
days;” and, in his letter forwarding a copy of his prospectus to
Sir John Malcolm, he adds, “I beg leave respectfully to inform
your Excellency, that the requisite number of steam-vessels being
already built and equipped, a commencement may be made on the line of
communication within three months from the period, when the assent of
your Excellency’s Government to my proposition may be made known to
me. If, then, I should be honoured by such assent, it is my intention,
within the period already specified, to be the means of introducing
into British India such a number of first-rate steam-vessels,
unexceptionable in point of size and equipment, as will enable me
to propose myself to become a general carrier to all the Indian
Governments, both for England and in India, and will admit of those
Governments maintaining a constant and regular communication with Great
Britain, and all principal parts of British India, on the first and
fifteenth of every month.”[307]
[Sidenote: Reply of Bombay Government,]
The result of this and other communications addressed by Mr. Taylor
to the Government of Bombay, was an official letter from them to
the Court of Directors stating that while they considered the Court
alone “competent to pass a decision on his proposals,” they strongly
commended the project he was endeavouring to accomplish. “We beg to
add our opinion that no doubt can exist of the practicability as well
as the utility of extending steam navigation to Egypt from Bombay;
and that we should consider it a most fortunate circumstance if our
attempts to promote this desirable object shall, by indicating such
to be the case, induce men of enterprise and capital to embark in an
undertaking of the nature proposed by Mr. Taylor.”
[Sidenote: and discussion of the question.]
“The plan proposed by Mr. Taylor,” they continued, “evidently requires
great and combined means to give it even a prospect of success; we
are of opinion that his calculations are far too sanguine and that
his plan is on too large a scale. These are, however, objections to
his scheme which may be easily obviated. In the first instance, we
must give our opinion as relates to India that the undertaking may
and should be conducted on a more limited scale, and subsequently
extended according to circumstances. In transmitting these proposals
for your consideration, we cannot avoid expressing our decided opinion
that almost incalculable advantages may be anticipated from a well
established steam communication by the Red Sea, and our earnest hope
that, unless other proposals from individuals have been entertained
and their plans put in progress, and in case Mr. Taylor’s schemes are
viewed as either inexpedient or impracticable, that every support
will be afforded by your Honourable Court to maintain this desirable
communication by vessels in the public service.”[308]
[Sidenote: Supineness of Court of Directors.]
But the temper of the Court of Directors was still strikingly in
contrast with the earnestness of the Bombay Government. They do not
seem to have cared much about the development of the commercial
resources of their empire, and so the recommendations of the Governor
and Council at Bombay were laid aside for future consideration; indeed,
it was not until, after nearly two years, that they even acknowledged
the letters they had received. The expense, they averred, exceeded the
amount they cared to risk; while, in the proposed undertaking, they
had evidently little confidence, as they urged that “the loss from
defective vessels and engines is as likely to occur as ever.” They,
nevertheless, at last affirmed that they were not insensible to the
advantages of rapid communication with India nor of the importance of
steam for that purpose.
[Sidenote: Their views.]
“We are also disposed to believe,” they added, “that a steam
communication by the Red Sea, and still more, if it should be found
practicable, by the Persian Gulf and the River Euphrates, would open
the way to other improvements, and would ultimately redound to the
benefit of this country as well as of India; and, if our finances were
in a flourishing state (they were always poor, though ever rolling in
wealth), we might probably feel it a duty to incur even the enormous
outlay which we have specified (100,000_l._). In the present condition
of our resources, we cannot, however, think the probable difference of
time in the mere transmission of letters a sufficient justification
for the expense. We cannot anticipate that the return in postage and
passengers would pay more than a very small portion of the charge.” But
happily, after other observations, they concluded by saying that, “at
the same time we deem the subject too important to be lost sight of or
hastily dismissed.”[309]
[Sidenote: Official report of the first voyages of the _Hugh Lindsay_,
1830.]
In the meantime the _Hugh Lindsay_ (a war steam-vessel, built of teak
at Bombay in 1829 for the service of the East India Company), had
fortunately been despatched[310] by the Bombay Government under command
of Captain J. H. Wilson, from Bombay to Suez and back—a voyage, I may
add, which was twice repeated before the Court of Directors gave any
instructions on the subject, though one, too, materially tending to
solve some at least of the difficulties they had contemplated. It was
on the second of these occasions that Sir John Malcolm and his suite
made the overland passage to England.
“When it was determined,” remarks Captain Wilson, “that the _Hugh
Lindsay_ should attempt the voyage to Suez, it became necessary to
put on board double the quantity of coal the vessel was built to
carry, to do which, a great part of the space originally intended for
accommodation was appropriated to the stowage of coal; water also
was necessary, sufficient for use until the vessel should reach land
in the event of a break-down between Bombay and the first depôt; as
also stores and provisions for the whole voyage to and from the Red
Sea.”[311]
Captain Wilson, however, accomplished the passage from Bombay to Aden,
a distance of 1641 miles, in ten days nineteen hours, though only six
hours’ coals remained on board when he arrived at that port. At Aden
the _Hugh Lindsay_ obtained a fresh supply, coal depôts having been
established in anticipation of her arrival at that place, as well as
at Jiddah, Cossier, and Suez. Other difficulties, however, had to be
overcome, as scarcely a day passed without it being necessary to stop
the engines to put the paddle-wheels in order, the boards of which were
constantly getting loose. At Aden, Captain Wilson was detained five
days and twenty hours in receiving the necessary supply of coal, owing
to the want of means at the place for shipping it and other obstacles.
The passage from Aden to Mocha roads, where he had despatches to land,
was accomplished in twelve hours, and thence to Jiddah, a distance of
557 miles, in four days twelve hours. Here his vessel was detained
four days and a half in obtaining a supply of coals; in five days
more he reached Suez, having performed the voyage from Bombay to Suez
in twenty-one days six hours’ steaming, or, including stoppages, in
thirty-two days sixteen hours.
Had a steamer been ready at Alexandria the mails (consisting of 306
letters, the postage on which amounted to 1176 rupees), which could
have been conveyed thence in three days, would in twenty-five more days
have reached England. Thus, in spite of the delays at the depôts, the
communication between India and England could have been accomplished
in sixty-one days. The return passage of the _Hugh Lindsay_ to Bombay
occupied thirty-three days, including stoppages of nineteen days,
or fourteen days’ steaming; and, under all the circumstances, the
whole voyage was considered far from unsatisfactory;[312] one of the
subsequent voyages, to Cossier[313] (300 miles below the Isthmus), was
accomplished in twenty-two days, including five days’ detention at the
coaling stations.
Yet, though the practicability of the Red Sea voyage during the
north-east monsoon was now demonstrated, it was not certain that the
passage could be made irrespectively of the seasons; nor could any
argument be drawn from the performances of this pioneer ship, as
her construction and power were not suited to contend against the
south-west monsoon between Ceylon or Bombay and the Arabian Gulf.
[Sidenote: Report of Committee of 1834.]
Again, as a large number of persons connected with the East India
Company, and various merchants interested in trade with the East,
many of whom had advocated the Cape route, were now in favour of
the Euphrates route, though the public in general preferred the
establishment of a mail service by way of Egypt, the discussions,
ultimately arising, led to the appointment of the Parliamentary
Committee of 1834, the resolution of the House simply requiring its
members “to inquire into the means of promoting communication with
India by steam.”
But the report of the Committee, after a very full inquiry, was not
definite on the point of the really best route. It was, however,
resolved, and the Committee could hardly have done otherwise,
notwithstanding the lukewarmness of the Court of Directors, that
a regular and expeditious communication with India by means of
steam-vessels was an object of great importance both to Great Britain
and to India; that the practicability of steam navigation between
Bombay and Suez _during the north-east monsoon_ had been established
by the _Hugh Lindsay_; but that further experiments were necessary to
establish the practicability of the Red Sea route at all seasons of the
year. They further recommended that a grant of 20,000_l._ should be
made “with the least possible delay,” to examine and test the (steam
capabilities of the Euphrates route; the line contemplated being that
from Scanderoon on the coast of Syria to Aleppo, and thence to Bir on
the Euphrates, the distance between these towns (170 miles) being not
greater than that across Egypt.
From the evidence adduced and from the correspondence in the public
journals of the period,[314] it is, however, evident that political
rather than commercial reasons favoured the Euphrates route. It was
then thought, looking to the probability of the opening up of the
Indus, to the state of our relations with Persia, and to the necessity
of maintaining a squadron, as we then did, to protect our interests in
the Persian Gulf, that this line could, while increasing the safety of
our East Indian possessions, be maintained at less cost than the Red
Sea one.[315]
[Sidenote: Decision of House of Commons Committee influenced by
political considerations.]
The other reasons assigned in favour of the Euphrates route were the
comparative cheapness with which this object could be accomplished, the
channel of the Persian Gulf and the River Euphrates being preferable
to that of the Red Sea for steam communication between Bombay and the
Mediterranean; moreover, in the then existing state of things it was
thought that the route by Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia would be
safer than by way of the Red Sea and Egypt. In reference to the dangers
which might be encountered from the wandering tribes of Arabs who had
so long infested a large portion of the Euphrates route, it was stated
that arrangements could easily be made by negotiations with the Porte,
Mohammed Ali, or the chiefs of the tribes, who, at a small annual
cost, would insure the necessary protection, while it was held that
an armed mail-steamer with only letters and ordinary stores on board,
would offer no attraction to marauders, as it was not then contemplated
to carry either treasures or valuable merchandise by the overland
route.[316]
As the Committee of the House of Commons had recommended immediate
action for the establishment of a regular overland mail service,
the Court of Directors were compelled to take the matter into their
serious consideration; but they had determined to leave for future
consideration the important question whether the communication should
be, in the first instance, from Bombay or from Calcutta, or according
to the combined plan suggested by the Bengal Steam Committee, in which
case the net charge should be divided equally between the Government
and the East India Company, so as to include the expense of the land
conveyance from the Euphrates and the Red Sea respectively to the
Mediterranean. After reviewing the relative advantages on the one hand
and the physical difficulties on the other of the two routes, with
the view of securing a regular communication throughout the year, the
Committee suggested an extension of the line of Malta packets to such
ports in Egypt and in Syria as would enable the communication between
England and India to be tested experimentally by both routes.
[Sidenote: Admiralty packets extended from Malta to Alexandria.]
In accordance with these recommendations the Admiralty extended,
in February 1835, the service of their mail-packets from Malta to
Alexandria; while the Court of Directors sent out instructions to the
Governor-General of India to forward the _Hugh Lindsay_ at appointed
periods to Suez. The character of the Euphrates route was also still
further explored by Colonel Chesney,[317] under the direction of the
East India Board, to whom this work had been entrusted, and, not long
afterwards, the home authorities established a dromedary post from
Baghdad to Damascus and Beyrout for the transmission of such mails as
might be sent by that route.
The beneficial effects of these arrangements were soon felt in India,
as would appear by a despatch from the Bombay Government to the Court
of Directors (September 1836), wherein it is stated “that the three
last overland mails have brought despatches from London to Bombay in
thirty-eight, forty-five, and sixty-four days, and those intended for
Calcutta have been forwarded in ten days more.” But as the despatch of
the 16th of September, which conveyed this information by way of Egypt,
did not reach England till the beginning of the following year, owing
to various delays between Bombay and Suez, it was resolved to place
larger and more powerful steamers on the Red Sea route—chiefly, as it
would seem, because neither the _Hugh Lindsay_ nor the _Enterprize_
could perform the passage against the south-west monsoon.
[Sidenote: Steamers of the Indian Navy.]
The result was that the Court of Directors placed on this station (that
by the Euphrates presenting greater difficulties) two vessels of much
superior power, the _Berenice_ and _Atalanta_, which had been laid down
in 1835 for their naval service. The particulars of these vessels and
of their cost, as well as those of the steamers on the Red Sea service
which followed, will be found in the Indian navy list supplied by the
East India House to Lord Jocelyn’s Committee of 1851, from which see
extract.[318]
A regular steam service having now been established between England and
her Eastern empire by ships of the East Indian navy on the one side of
the Isthmus of Suez, and by the Admiralty packets on the other, I shall
glance at the various means of transit across this neck of land, before
describing the great mercantile steam lines which now maintain the
communication throughout.
[Sidenote: Modes of transport across the Isthmus of Suez.]
[Sidenote: Great exertions of Waghorn in the establishment of this
route.]
At the outset they were of the most original and multifarious
description, and the few passengers who then made the overland passage
found their way as best they could on camels, dromedaries, or donkeys.
Towards the improvement in all its stages of this rude mode of
transport there was no one more conspicuous than Thomas Waghorn. He was
the moving genius of the whole undertaking, and its most zealous and
successful agitator. Whatever may be said of his prudence, or however
much we may lament his failings, his industry was unwearied and his
zeal unbounded. It may be that he was only a convert to a scheme long
contemplated by others; but, when once undertaken, his efforts never
ceased until the object he had in view was accomplished. Though the
first resting-places across the desert were constructed at the expense
of the Bombay Steam-fund Committee by Hill and Raven,[319] under the
orders of Colonel Barr,[320] the route itself was organized by Waghorn,
and he was the first _who undertook and carried on by a regular
system for three years the conveyance of the mails across the Isthmus
of Suez_.[321] Sir Gardner Wilkinson (‘Modern Egypt,’ pp. 306-7)
and various other competent witnesses bear ample testimony to this
important fact, and it is one which must ever hold a prominent place in
the records of the origin of the modern overland route to India.
Though camels are capable of carrying a weight of from 9 to 10 cwt.
each at a rate of 2½ miles an hour[322] for twelve or sixteen consecutive
hours, it became necessary to adopt other modes of transit as the
traffic increased. Two-wheeled vans drawn by four horses, and fitted
to carry eight persons, were therefore introduced to transport the
passengers from Suez to Cairo, whence they were embarked in sailing
boats on the Nile to Alexandria; Mr. Waghorn subsequently organizing,
in connection with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation
Company, a line of small steamers which took the place of these boats.
In course of time caravansaries and hotels were substituted for the
original stations and resting-places on the route. These were completed
in February 1843, and received the passengers from the _Hindostan_
steamer on her first trip in the regular mail service from Calcutta,
Madras, and Galle to Suez, by which time this branch of the business
had been undertaken by the Egyptian Transit Company. But, in the
organization of all these important works, Mr. Waghorn took the leading
part, and their completion, under many difficulties, was in a great
measure due to his indefatigable exertions.
So early as 1834, Muhammed Ali, seeing the advantages to be obtained
by a railway between Cairo and Suez, instructed Mr. Thomas Galloway to
make arrangements for its construction, and, with this object in view,
the rails, locomotives, and plant, were ordered from England;[323]
but, owing to the opposition of France, the formation of this line was
continually postponed,[324] and subsequently abandoned. A railway
was, however, commenced in 1852 by Robert Stephenson from Alexandria
to Cairo, and completed in 1857. Subsequently, it was continued from
that city to Suez, branching off at Benha to Zaga-Zig, and following
the course of the old canal to Suez, by which a considerable saving of
distance was effected over the Cairo route as originally proposed. The
line throughout was completed and opened for traffic in 1870.
[Sidenote: Suez Canal.]
But the grand work, the greatest and grandest connected with maritime
commerce, either in ancient or modern times, was the cutting of the
Suez Canal, between the town so named at the head of the Red Sea and
the shores of the Mediterranean at a place in the Bay of Pelusium,
now known as Port Said: this gigantic undertaking is about 100 miles
in length, and runs in nearly a straight line almost due north from
Suez, passing through various lakes, marshes, or swamps, the principal
of which are called Birket Menzaleh, Birket-el-Timsah, and the Bitter
Lakes.
[Illustration: MAP SHOWING SUEZ CANAL, WITH SURROUNDING COUNTRY AND THE
POSITION OF THE OLD CANALS.]
Previously to the commencement of this great work, at least two
erroneous impressions had prevailed: of these the first, that the
Mediterranean was from 25 to 30 feet below the level of the Red Sea
at Suez,[325] has been exploded by the completion of the canal;
but, as the second (reflecting on the originality of M. de Lesseps’
undertaking), though a much less important one, seems still to exist, I
may state that the course of his canal is quite different from that of
the fresh-water one said to have been navigable in the reign of the
Pharaohs (its course is still traceable here and there), which ran from
a point on the Nile a little below Cairo in a north-easterly direction,
towards Lake Timseh, and, thence, almost due south by the west side
of the Bitter Lakes to Suez. This canal had no connection, or rather
water communication, with the Mediterranean except by the easternmost
branches of the Nile below Cairo, and, though the Nile at that city
is ten feet above the Red Sea at Suez, it may be doubted whether this
ancient canal was ever used except during the rainy season, though
Herodotus states there was width on it for two triremes to row abreast.
Certainly, no mention, direct or indirect, records the passage of any
craft worthy of the name of a ship between the Mediterranean and Red
Sea.[326] The great ship-canal (see map, p. 364), now in use, does not
go near Cairo or the Nile, but cuts through the narrowest part of the
isthmus at a point about 100 miles east of Alexandria.
[Sidenote: Popular errors on this subject.]
[Sidenote: M. de Lesseps.]
A popular error also prevails that this vast undertaking was only
contemplated a few years ago. Nor do these popular errors here end, for
everybody supposes that M. Ferdinand de Lesseps, to whose genius and
energy the world is indebted for this great work, was an _engineer_,
whereas he was really a _diplomatist_,[327] and was obliged to make
himself master of the art of engineering to be in some measure able
to cope with the host of engineers, professional and theoretical, who
opposed his marvellous scheme.
The idea of a canal across the Isthmus of Suez by the route adopted by
M. de Lesseps is a very old one. So far back as A.D. 638-40, Amrou,
soon after the conquest of Egypt,[328] wrote to his master the Khalif
Omar recommending the establishment of a communication between the two
seas, the intervening country being, as he describes it, “an undulating
green meadow with ploughed fields—such is the delta of the Nile; a
dusty desert, a liquid and clayey plain, a black slush—such is the
isthmus to cut through.” But the Khalif objected to the piercing of
the isthmus, “fearing it would open out the country to the influence
of foreigners,” a fear that prevailed also with one or two leading
statesmen of our own country and in our own time.
Though the project had been occasionally mentioned, the work itself
was never seriously contemplated except in one instance [329] until
M. de Lesseps, about the year 1840, conceived a definite plan for
carrying it out. Scientific men, indeed, in most parts of the world,
considered the undertaking altogether impracticable. They alleged that
the difficulties of the desert could never be surmounted, and that
nothing stable could be erected on treacherous sands doomed by nature
to sterility and desolation.[330] Indeed, Sir Daniel Lange,[330] the
oldest and most earnest friend and colleague of M. de Lesseps in this
country, and, from its commencement until now, the representative of
the Suez Canal in England, remarks that so general was this opinion,
that the captains of the small craft who first received orders to
proceed to Pelusium with materials for the prosecution of the work,
smiled with incredulity, but resigned themselves to what they thought a
fool’s errand.
[Sidenote: His great scheme.]
[Sidenote: Not fairly considered in England.]
Nor were these doubts surprising, for the site of ancient Pelusium
is upon a low flat shelving sandy coast where sea and land seem to
blend with each other, and where the long roll of the surf over a flat
beach forbids even the approach of a boat. No wonder therefore that
the indefatigable M. de Lesseps was unable for years to induce either
governments or individuals to provide the requisite means; indeed, his
own countrymen, when he issued the prospectus in 1857, were nearly if
not quite as lukewarm about it as foreigners, while in England on the
other hand, a great outcry was created, mainly by Lord Palmerston,
against the project on political grounds. It is not, however, my
province to enter upon these; but, surely, England, with her vast
possessions in the East and with the command of the sea, was far more
interested than any other nation in removing Egypt from the envy it had
long been of powerful European nations, and, in cutting a ship canal—a
great highway—through it, which would be open to the vessels of all
nations like the Sound or the Dardanelles. Indeed, every increased
facility for reaching our Indian possessions must be a far greater gain
to us than to any other nation.
But strange to say the political opposition raised by England[332]
proved the chief means of enabling M. de Lesseps to raise the requisite
capital, and secured him support he would otherwise not probably
have obtained. Foreign capitalists, especially in France, now came
forward to subscribe, not that they had much faith in the commercial
success of the canal, but because they felt grieved or annoyed that
an undertaking, which could not fail to benefit mankind, even if it
did not pay the original subscribers, should be opposed on narrow and
jealous grounds by one of the most conspicuous, if not in all matters
the most enlightened, of English statesmen.
[Sidenote: Commencement of M. de Lesseps’ works, 1857.]
But, even with the requisite capital at command, M. de Lesseps had a
most arduous and herculean task to perform. It was necessary, remarks
Sir Daniel Lange, previously to entering on a work of such magnitude,
to prepare dwellings, storehouses, factories, forges, and a lighthouse;
indeed, all the accessories indispensable for putting in motion the
huge mechanical appliances intended to be used. All this was done in
the newly erected “Town of Port Said.” But before this place could be
formed, the marshes had to be raised 10 feet above the sea-level, so
as to form an area of sixty-seven acres of solid land; and from this
basis piers had to be carried out into the open sea, the western one
for a distance of one and three-quarter miles, and the eastern a mile
and one-third in length, composed of not less than 250,000 blocks
of concrete, weighing about thirty tons each. Between these piers a
harbour was formed with a surface of 132 acres, the excavations from it
amounting to 4,669,943 cubic mètres.[333]
[Sidenote: General details.]
But among the many obstacles encountered, none were half so formidable
as the formation of the channel through Lake Menzaleh, which extended
21 miles from Port Said to Kantara. The sands and other insurmountable
obstacles which had been prophesied were as nothing to this work,
arising from the fact that the mud and slush had actually to be thrown
up by the hands alone (just as children in their amusements make
mud-heaps) of the thousands of natives employed to form a dyke;[334]
indeed, had it not been for the powerful Egyptian sun, which dried
up the mud so exposed in a few hours, the task would have been
impracticable, as ordinary mechanical appliances must have failed to
overcome such an obstacle.
When something like an opening had been made through many miles
of “black slush,” and clear water began to flow in, rafts were
constructed, and on these the men slept under tents made of mats. In
this work, about fifteen thousand fishermen from the neighbourhood
were employed, a class of men who, from time immemorial, had been
accustomed, in their ordinary avocations, to spend a large portion of
their time half immersed in the water.
When a passage of sufficient dimensions had been scooped out with their
hands, dredging-machines were introduced. By degrees this trench was
widened until it reached the dimensions of 330 feet wide, and 26 feet
deep; the sides, from the rapid drying of the mud, soon becoming almost
as solid as walls of masonry and quite as durable.
It was between these new banks that floating dredging-machines of a
novel construction, with shoots 220 feet in length, were placed, thus
enabling M. de Lesseps to dispense with the previously expensive mode
of conveying the silt raised by the dredgers in hopper-barges to sea;
the new machines discharged the stuff excavated from the channel over
the embankments on to the low and marshy land on either side:[335] by
these means two good results were attained; the channel of the canal
was economically cleared, and the mud thus excavated employed in
greatly strengthening its banks on each side.
The cutting of the channel through Birket-el-Ballah, which was more of
a swamp than a lake, for a distance of twelve miles, though in itself a
very difficult work, was comparatively easy to the excavation of Lake
Menzaleh, nor were there any serious obstacles to encounter except in
clearing a passage through various mounds of earth extending for a
distance of 6 miles, all of which had to be removed or pierced. This
difficulty, however, was overcome, after a passage had been cut, by the
aid of an ingenious machine called an elevator, which lifted the soil
to a height of 56 feet, and carried it along a kind of railed bridge to
the places of deposit on either side of the excavated mounds. Eighteen
of these elevators, with 700 boxes, were employed on that portion of
the works where the banks of the canal were too high to allow the earth
cut from the channel to be otherwise disposed of. One of these mounds,
that of El Guisr, 61 feet in height, presented a most formidable
rampart, which had to be removed in order to allow the waters of the
Mediterranean to flow into the vast local depression immediately beyond
it known as Lake Timsah, by Ismailia, the interior port of the canal,
so named in honour of the Khedive. Here a flourishing new town has been
built, surrounded by gardens growing in a fruitful soil, on a site for
many centuries a bleak and sterile desert.
In the work of removing these mounds, or cutting through them, so as to
form the channel of this great maritime highway, where ships of 4000
tons now safely navigate, every conceivable description of machinery
suitable for the purpose had to be prepared beforehand, together with
not less than 20,000 workmen, including a perfect army of Fellaheen,
the usual designation of the rural population which the Government of
Egypt had agreed to supply, and various tribes of Arabs and Bedouins
from the countries bordering the Syrian deserts. These men were
divided into gangs, and their work apportioned with great order and
regularity; in each division a notice in Arabic was posted indicating
the quantity of earth to be dug, and the wages paid per cubic mètre
for its completion. Nor were the wants and social comforts of these
men overlooked. Large encampments were provided, and arrangements
made for an abundant supply of provisions and fresh water, the latter
alone during some portions of the work having to be brought twenty
miles, thus affording constant employment to 2000 camels, each of which
carried about 50 gallons or about 500 pounds weight of fresh water.
From Timsah to the Bitter Lakes the excavations through the district
called Serapeum, were hardly less formidable. “Historians,” remarks Sir
Daniel Lange,[336] “tell us that these lakes were in ancient times, the
limit of the Gulf of Suez. One thing is certain, that the shells and
fossils found here are of the same species as those in the Red Sea.
The conjecture the least contradicted is, that an earthquake caused the
upheaving of these parts and the sea to recede to Suez, leaving the
lakes and interior basin which in process of time have evaporated.”
[Sidenote: Partial opening of Canal April 18th, 1869.]
These lakes are 16 and 9 miles in length, respectively: the first
descending from the heights of Serapeum, being 34 feet below sea-level,
and the second 24 feet. In both, isolated water lines of high and low
tides are easily discerned, with remains of gravel, and of a horizontal
bank of agglomerated fossil shells about 7 feet thick. M. de Lesseps
found them completely dried up, with the exception of the lowest
portion, which still retained enough humidity to make the earth moist
and in some parts swampy. To fill these deep basins, water was drawn,
by means of sluices from the Red Sea and from the Mediterranean; and,
on the 18th of April, 1869, when these were opened in the presence of
the Khedive of Egypt, the waters of the two seas, for the first time
embraced each other, though it was not till the 15th of August that the
great maritime canal was open throughout. The inauguration of their
complete union was celebrated at Suez, and, on the 28th September,
M. de Lesseps steamed from sea to sea in fifteen hours, having
accomplished by his genius and unwearied industry one of the greatest
engineering works the world has ever seen, and given to posterity, as a
great benefactor of the human race, another imperishable name.
[Sidenote: Finally opened by Empress Eugénie, November 17th, 1869.]
On the 17th of November, this important maritime canal was formally
opened for ships of all nations with much state by the Empress Eugénie
of France, in the presence of numerous distinguished men from all
countries.
The cost complete, was somewhat about 20,000,000_l._ sterling,
consisting of 8,000,000_l._ subscribed capital, 4,000,000_l._ debenture
stock, and 8,000,000_l._, in further loans and indemnities paid by the
Khedive for retrocession of lands, &c.
To the traffic now engaged upon it I shall hereafter refer. In the
meantime, I must trace the rise and progress of the first mercantile
steam-ship company which developed the trade of England with her Indian
possessions by way of the Isthmus of Suez.
FOOTNOTES:
[293] Various plans for reaching India by means of railway
communication throughout have been proposed. So early as 1850, Sir R.
Macdonald Stephenson brought this matter fully under the notice of
the Government. In the _Calcutta Review_ for March 1856 his views are
given at length; and his article therein, “The World’s Highway,” was
republished in the same year by Weale. In 1859, the same publisher
brought out a pamphlet by Sir Macdonald, entitled “Railways in Turkey,
&c.,” with beautifully executed plans (the most complete yet in
existence) showing the course of these lines from Constantinople to
Aleppo, Baghdad and Bussorah, thence along the shores of the Persian
Gulf to Bunder Abbas, and thence to Kurachi, Hydrabad, in Scinde
and Bombay. Sir R. Stephenson estimated the distance from London to
Bombay viâ Paris, Vienna, and Constantinople at somewhere about 5200
miles. He bestowed many years’ labour on this important subject; and
had hoped to make it a great international highway, constructed under
the supervision of the different states interested. Though unable to
overcome the difficulties such a combination would entail, the works he
proposed, or others somewhat similar, are being rapidly carried into
execution by different persons who have obtained concessions from the
respective Governments; more than 2000 miles of the World’s Highway
is already made, and when complete the journey from London to Bombay
by rail would, at the rate of 30 miles an hour, be accomplished in
less than seven and a half days. See also plan of route by Mr. R. H.
Galloway, published by Wyld, 1875, in which the distances are given.
[294] Full details of this meeting will be found in the _Bengal
Hurkara_, December 19th, 1823.
[295] The dimensions of the _Enterprize_ were 122 feet length of
keel and 27 feet breadth of beam; her paddle-wheels were 15 feet in
diameter. She was 479 tons register, 120 horse-power. She was supplied
with a _copper_ boiler in one piece, weighing 32 tons and costing
7000_l._ Her total cost was no less than 43,000_l._!
[296] The greatest run the _Enterprize_ made by sail in twenty-four
hours, was 211 miles, the least 39 miles; the greatest by steam
assisted by sail, 225 miles, the least 80 miles; the greatest heat
in the engine-room during the voyage, was 105 degrees, that of the
air at the same time being 84 degrees and a half; the total distance
was 13,700 miles, and the consumption 580 chaldron of coals, being 9
chaldrons per day for 64 days, the rest being under sail; “the speed
of the engines, in calm weather, was 8 knots an hour, the log giving
9 from the wash of the paddles.” Evidence, Mr. T. L. Peacock, Select
Committee on Steam Navigation to India, 1834.
[297] Despatches of Sir Miles Nightingall, 1819; Mount-Stuart
Elphinstone, 1823-26; Lord William Bentinck, 1828 to 1835; “Annual
Register;” Colonel Chesney’s Report, 1832; Proceedings of the Royal
Asiatic Society; Captain F. Head’s “Eastern and Egyptian Scenery,”
1833; J. A. St. John, “Egypt and Muhammed Ali,” 1833; Report of the
Committee of the House of Commons “On Steam Navigation to India,” 1834;
“Egypt in 1837,” by T. Waghorn; Ibid. 1838; Waghorn and Co., “Overland
Route to India,” 1844 and 1846; “On Steam Navigation to India,” by
Captain Grindlay, 1837; Report of the Committee of House of Commons “On
Steam Navigation to India,” 1837; Mr. W. D. Holmes’ plan in connection
with the Bengal Steam Committee, 1839; “Modern Egyptians,” by Sir
Gardner Wilkinson, 1843; “Facts connected with the Origin and Progress
of Steam Communication between India and England,” by J. H. Wilson,
Commander, Indian Navy, London, 1850; Letter from Mr. R. W. Crawford,
M.P. for London, to the _Times_, November 22nd, 1869; and from Mr. R.
H. Galloway to the _Illustrated London News_, 23rd October, 1872, as
well as other communications on the same subject to various journals
and periodicals.
[298] See “Facts connected with the Origin and Progress of Steam
Communication between India and England,” by J. H. Wilson, Commander
Indian Navy, London, 1850.
[299] Captain Wilson says (page 7), writing of this journey, “He (Mr.
Mount-Stuart Elphinstone) started from Bombay on the 15th November,
1827, in the Honourable Company’s brig _Palinurus_, and was accompanied
by Mr. C. Lushington, secretary to the Government of Bengal, Mrs.
Lushington, Mr. Steele of the Bombay Civil Service, and Messrs. Wallace
and Gordon of the Bombay Medical Service. Mrs. Lushington published
an interesting account of the journey, thus creating a considerable,
though limited, public interest in the route.”
[300] See his evidence before Committee of the House of Commons, 1834,
on steam navigation to India; and his book, “Eastern and Egyptian
Scenery, &c.,” with notes, maps, and plans, &c., intended to show the
practicability of steam navigation from England to India.
[301] Mr. Waghorn, born at Chatham in the year 1800, was brought up
in the Royal Navy, where he served four years. He was afterwards,
for twelve years a pilot in Bengal in the service of the East
India Company, somewhat later rejoining the Royal Navy, wherein he
remained till he passed as Lieutenant. Mr. Waghorn had piloted the
_Enterprize_ soon after her arrival in India, and from that time
devoted his especial attention to steam-vessels. In his evidence
before the Select Committee of the House of Commons in 1834 (page
209), he says with regard to himself, “I was selected in 1827 by
the Indian Government (Calcutta Steam Committee) for the purpose of
establishing steam navigation between England and India.... My first
object was the Cape of Good Hope.... I went to London, Liverpool, and
to Manchester; I stated my plans in various parts of the kingdom, and
all the success I received after three years’ toil, was the _loan_ of
two fifty horse-power engines from the East India Company.” In 1842
he recommended the European route now in use by way of the Adriatic,
dying, at length at Pentonville, January 7th, 1850, utterly broken
down, and leaving his widow without any means beyond a small pension
allowed to her by Government and the East India Company.
[302] See “Annual Register,” October 1829.
[303] Mr. Waghorn, in his evidence before the Committee of 1834, says
that, had he met the _Enterprize_ at Suez as he expected, he would have
conveyed his despatches from London to Bombay in fifty-three days.
[304] In the _Bombay Courier_ of the 10th April, 1830, there will be
found the following _notice_ from Mr. Waghorn: “The undersigned feels
it his duty to state, for the information of the public throughout
the Presidencies of Bombay, Madras, and Bengal, that he is not in any
way connected with any scheme for steam-packet navigation with India,
except that which he had the pleasure to lay before the Madras and
Calcutta Committees in the year 1828, and that any use of his name in
reference to it in any prospectus, &c., is perfectly unauthorized by
him.
“His motive in wishing this to be generally known is that it may not be
supposed by those, on whom he depends for encouragement and support,
that he has in any degree departed from his former engagements.”
(Signed) “Thomas Waghorn.”
See also _Bombay Gazette_, 21st April, 1830, where there will be found
the report of a public meeting held on the 17th of that month, where
Mr. Waghorn advocated the Cape route in preference to that viâ Red Sea.
[305] Mr. Taylor was one of the earliest proposers and founders of
the Red Sea route, and had, in 1823, been associated with Lieutenant
Johnston, who subsequently commanded the _Enterprize_, and with
the Calcutta Steam Committee, from whom he seceded because they
relinquished the Red Sea route for that of the Cape of Good Hope.
Indeed, he was the first to adventure capital on this route, and is
said to have lost not less than 12,000_l._ in an endeavour to combine
steam-tugs and sailing-vessels.
[306] Prospectus of an establishment of steam-vessels, dated 1st
December, 1829.
[307] Letter from Mr. J. W. Taylor, to Sir John Malcolm, Governor of
Bombay, 1st December, 1829.
[308] Letter from the Bombay Government (the Marine Department) to the
Court of Directors, dated 18th April, 1830.
[309] Letter from the Court of Directors to the Governor in Council
at Bombay, Public Department, 14th March, 1832. To this opinion of
the Court I may add that Mr. Peacock, the “senior assistant examiner
in the East India House,” in his evidence before the Committee of
1834 (pp. 3 and 4) when asked, if he thought any returns might be
anticipated for postages and passengers to justify an expenditure of
100,000_l._ per annum in establishing and maintaining a quarterly steam
service overland by way of Suez between England and India, would pay,
replied: “_I think nothing to pay the expense; something certainly,
but not above one-fourth of the amount_.” The gross earnings of the
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company alone between 1856 and
1874, inclusive of the amount received for the conveyance of mails,
passengers, and cargo, amounted to 41,546,818_l._
[310] The _Hugh Lindsay_ sailed _for_ Suez on her first experimental
voyage on the 20th of March, 1830, the day before Mr. Waghorn arrived
at Bombay in the _Thetis_; and she continued in that service under
command of Captain Wilson, making one voyage annually, during the
north-east monsoons till April 1836, when Captain Wilson was appointed
Controller of the dock-yards at Bombay as an acknowledgment of his
services, for it is unquestionable that he did much to “educate” the
Governments of England and India on the importance of the overland
route, as appears by the official correspondence of the period.
[311] See note (310), p. 352.
[312] For an account of the voyages of this ship in detail see Report
of the Committee of the House of Commons, 1834.
[313] Cossier, which is about 100 miles from the Nile, was one of the
ports of departure for the vessels of ancient times engaged in trade
with the East.
[314] The reasons for preferring the Euphrates route, are given at
great length in the _Bombay Gazette_, 7th August, 1833.
[315] To question 64, p. 6 (Committee, 1834) “Would there be any
_political_ or other advantages in our opening the line of the
Euphrates?” Mr. Peacock replies: “I think it would be highly
serviceable, if possible, to prevent Russia pre-occupying it and
excluding us; it would be exceedingly easy for Russia to follow the
steps of Trajan and Julian, construct fleets in Armenia, and float them
to Bussorah; they have the possession, at least the command, of the
Armenian part of the Euphrates now.”
“Would there not (question 65) be more danger to be apprehended from
the Russians from their making use of the Oxus and Caspian, than by
making use of Bussorah, where they would be met by the nation which
happens to have the pre-eminence at sea?”—“But the pre-eminence at
sea,” Mr. Peacock replies, “is not a talisman; it is to be kept up by
constant watchfulness, and the exertion of adequate force. I know there
is danger by the Oxus, but there is also danger by the Euphrates, and I
would stop both doors, if I could.” In reply to further questions (66)
he says: “The first thing the Russians do, when they get possession
of, or connection with, any country, is to exclude all other countries
from navigating its waters;” and in reply (question 67) to “How the
establishment of steam along the Euphrates would serve in any respect
to counteract Russia?” he says, “It would give us a vested interest
and a right to interfere;” adding “they (the Russians) have been long
supposed to have designs on Baghdad; they have had emissaries there a
good while; the Pashalic of Baghdad is a very valuable possession, and
would pay for protecting it, either to them or to us.”
Mr. William J. Bankes (and others) entertained similar opinions.
In reply to (question 2626) “What is your opinion of the political
advantages between the one and the other?” he says, “It is _very_
much in favour of the Euphrates.” “Will you state in what respect?”
(question 2627) “I think by anticipating the Russian, you will exclude
him; I think he will afterwards, perhaps, do that by force which you
could now, perhaps, do by treaty.”
[316] For Colonel Chesney’s elaborate report on the advantages of the
Euphrates route, I must refer my readers to the Appendix of the Report
of the Committee of 1834.
[317] In furtherance of these instructions Colonel Chesney made a most
elaborate survey, and wrote a voluminous book with maps, for which he,
some time afterwards, was compensated by a grant of 4000_l._
[318] Return of the number, cost, ages, power, tonnage, and speed of
steam vessels forming the Indian Navy, distinguishing the vessels
employed on the Bombay mail line, so far as the same can be made out.
(They were all built of wood, and propelled by paddle-wheels):
---------------+-------------+----------+------+--------+-----+--------------
Names of | Cost. | Ages. |Horse |Tonnage.|Speed| ——
Vessels. | | |Power.| | |
---------------+-------------+----------+------+--------+-----+--------------
| | | | |Knots|
| | | | | per |
| | | | |Hour.|
| £ s. d.| | | | |
_Acbar_ |76,373 9 8 |built 1841| 350 | 1,143 | 8½ | } Employed on
_Ajdaha_ |80,515 16 5 |built 1847| 500 | 1,440 | 8 | } the Bombay
_Atalanta_ |36,651 17 10 |built 1835| 210 | 616 | 7¼ | } Mail Line.
_Auckland_ |43,052 3 2 |built 1840| 220 | 946 | .. | } General
| | | | | | } Service.
_Berenice_ |40,123 11 6 |built 1835| 230 | 664 | .. | {
| | | | | | { Employed on
_Feerooz_ |67,219 0 0 |built 1846| 500 | 1,440 | 8⅔ | { the Bombay
| | | | | | { Line.
_Medusa_ (iron)| 9,972 18 1 |built 1840| 70 | 432 | .. | }
_Moozuffer_ |81,576 9 6 |built 1846| 500 | 1,440 | .. | } General
_Queen_ |44,409 17 11 |built 1839| 220 | 760 | .. | } Service.
_Semiramis_ |43,447 12 8 |built 1840| 300 | 1,000 | .. | }
_Sesostris_ |52,388 8 2 |built 1839| 220 | 876 | .. | }
| | | | | | { Employed on
_Victoria_ |39,820 15 6 |built 1839| 230 | 714 | 6⅝ | { the Bombay
| | | | | | { Mail Line.
---------------+-------------+----------+------+--------+-----+--------------
[319] Hill was an engineer, and Raven a wheelwright in the service
originally of Galloway Bey, and, subsequently, in that of the Pasha of
Egypt, Muhammed Ali, who, when they were in difficulties to carry on
their work, rendered them pecuniary assistance.
[320] Mr. Waghorn, in his evidence before the House of Commons
Committee of 1837, says (question 53), “I can send Mr. Hill and other
men of the service at an hour’s notice from Cairo,” &c., by which it
appears they were then, at least, under his orders.
[321] In a note I received from Sir Daniel Lange (12th March, 1875),
he remarks: “M. de Lesseps often told me how he met Waghorn struggling
with man and beast in the desert to carry his mails across, and that it
served as an example to him in after-life with the Suez Canal.”
[322] See evidence before Committee of 1834 by Mr. Peacock, pp. 2 and 3.
[323] Messrs. Galloway Brothers (see evidence before Committee of
1837) had established at Boolak (a suburb of Cairo) an extensive iron
manufactory, and were in a position to carry out the Pasha’s railway,
for which they had imported plant by his orders to the value of
200,000_l._ Whether any portion of this was used by Mr. Stephenson, who
subsequently constructed the railway, does not appear.
[324] Pamphlet by Mr. R. H. Galloway (pp. 15 and 17), published by
Willis, Sotheran, and Co., London, 1871.
[325] Evidence of Major Head, Mr. T. T. Peacock, and others, before the
Select Committee of 1834.
[326] The truth about these ancient canals seems to be as follows:
1. According to Herodotus, Pharaoh Necho commenced one from the Nile
to the Red Sea (ii. 158) which he says was completed by Darius the son
of Hystaspes (iv. 39). This canal, we may fairly presume, was open
when Herodotus was in Egypt, as he states it was four days’ journey
in length, and wide enough for two small triremes to row abreast; it
is doubtless the one attributed by Aristotle, Strabo, and Pliny to
Sesostris—an identification confirmed by the fact that, in recent
times, tablets bearing the name of Rameses (Sesostris) have been
found on the site of its present dried up bed. As far as can be now
ascertained, it would seem that this canal left the Nile at or near
the city of Bubastis (now Tel Basta). The discovery of a Cuneiform
inscription of Darius near Suez, gives colour also to the traditional
story which refers to him. Diodorus, notices the proverbial opinion of
the height of the waters of the Red Sea (i. 33) and adds, that this
canal was completed by Ptolemy when he built Arsinoe.
2. There is no doubt that this canal continued in some use under the
Roman Emperors, as Trajan formed a new connection for it by a cutting
at Babylon (Old Cairo) (Ptol. Geogr. iv. s. 54), and, further, Sir
Gardner Wilkinson has shown that the whole line from the Nile to the
Gulf was restored by the Khalif Omar, and was in use for a century and
a half after his time. The work of Necho appears also to have included
a canal from the head of the gulf to the Pelusiac mouth of the Nile, as
of this considerable remains still exist.
3. It may be further remarked, that the bed of the Bitter Lakes was,
even in the time of Strabo (xvii. p. 804), filled with Nile water, as
the same fish were noticed in both. At the same time, we may be sure
that nothing like a ship (in our sense of the word) ever passed through
the isthmus until M. de Lesseps completed his great work.
[327] Ferdinand de Lesseps in his youth was attached to the Consulate
at Lisbon, and then, in 1828, to the Consulate-General at Tunis. In
the following year he was appointed Vice-Consul at Alexandria, and
in 1832 he was advanced to be Consul at Cairo, where he remained for
seven years. In 1842, he received the appointment of Consul-General
at Barcelona; in 1848 he went to Madrid as French Minister
Plenipotentiary; and later on, to an important mission in Rome, after
which he retired to Berri (France) to mature his plans for the Suez
Canal, which had been the almost constant subject of his thoughts since
his residence in Cairo.
[328] See a very interesting paper read by Mr. (now Sir Daniel) Lange
before the Society of Arts, London, April 27th, 1870.
[329] It is fair to recollect that my old friend and colleague on the
Harbour of Refuge Commission, Captain Vetch, R.N., more than thirty
years ago (and therefore before M. de Lesseps) proposed a ship canal
from Suez to Tineh, on the Mediterranean, a distance of about 75
miles, to be carried out by British capital. At that time the idea
of the height of the water at Suez above that of the Mediterranean
prevailed. Captain Vetch therefore calculated that, with a canal 180
feet wide at the top, 96 feet at the bottom, and 21 feet in the depth,
the steady descent of the water along this gradient would produce
scourage sufficient to clear away the sand and mud accumulated at the
Mediterranean end. No doubt Captain Vetch’s observations and details
tended to satisfy M. de Lesseps of the feasibility of some such canal.
[330] Some preparatory steps had also been taken which, by getting rid
of unscientific hypotheses, facilitated in some degree M. de Lesseps’
views. Thus, at the suggestion of the Viceroy, the English, French, and
Austrian Governments had sent in 1847 a joint commission of scientific
men to take the various levels on the isthmus of Suez, especially as
regarded the relative heights of the water in the two seas. Mr. Robert
Stephenson represented England; M. Talabot, France; M. Negretti,
Austria; and Linant Bey, the Pasha. Stephenson watched the rise and
fall of the tide at Suez and Negretti at Tineh, the result being the
demonstration that the two seas have exactly the same level within a
few inches. A full account of the plan developed by M. Talabot from
the observations of this commission will be found in the “Révue des
Deux Mondes,” and there seems little doubt that, but for the determined
opposition of Mr. Robert Stephenson, whose imagination (to the day of
his death) was perpetually haunted with ideas of the sand, silt, and
mud with which he maintained _any_ canal must be filled up, the great
work, which was the glory of M. de Lesseps, would have been carried out
by English enterprise some years earlier than 1869.
[331] Sir Daniel Lange was knighted after the opening of the Suez
Canal. He is a native of London, and the holder of various foreign
honours. He unsuccessfully contested Midhurst in 1868.
[332] Not however by all her statesmen, for Mr. Gladstone, Lord
Russell, Sidney Herbert, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, Mr. Milner Gibson, and
others strenuously objected to any hostile interference on the part of
Government with the project.
[333] My readers will find an excellent account of the early works of
the Suez Canal, in a little book published by Mr. A. K. Lynch, entitled
“A Visit to the Suez Canal,” Lond. 8vo. 1866, with several excellent
lithograph drawings of Port Said, Ismailia, and other places on it. A
French mètre is 39 English inches or 1-19th more than an English yard.
[334] Herodotus (132) speaks of the vast amount of forced labour
employed in the construction of the great Pyramids; hence various
writers, recalling the hardships these “slaves” had to endure,
protested against the employment of “similar bodies of men” in the
construction of the Suez Canal, commenting on the scandalous treatment
to which they were subjected. But I have enquired minutely into this
question, and I cannot find any just grounds for these complaints. On
the contrary, the men employed appear to have been free labourers,
fairly remunerated according to the work they performed, and, on the
whole, kindly treated.
[335] Besides the dredging-machines and men employed, there were at
work upon the canal during the last six months of 1864, 42,929 camels,
9350 horses, 2489 mules, and 2835 donkeys.
[336] Paper read to Society of Arts, p. 7.
CHAPTER X.
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company—Its founders and
origin—Messrs. Willcox and Anderson—Mr. James Allan—How the
Peninsular mails were originally conveyed—Proposal of Peninsular
Company for their conveyance—Contract concluded August 29th,
1837—Conveyance of mails to India previously to 1839—Government
applies to the Peninsular Company and accepts their proposals,
though reluctantly—Proposed direct line from Falmouth to
Calcutta—First vessels hence, on Indian postal service to
Alexandria—Original postal service from Suez to Bombay—Contract
for mails between Suez and Calcutta, September 1842—Further
proposals made by the East India Company and Government, but
finally rejected by the East India Company—Further contracts
for mail service to China and Singapore—Peninsular and Oriental
Company undertake the line between Bombay and Suez, 1854—House of
Commons Committee on Australian mail service, 1849—Eastern Steam
Navigation Company and Peninsular and Oriental Company tender
for it, but the Peninsular and Oriental succeed—The _Himalaya_
built—New contract with Peninsular and Oriental Company, January
1853—Failure of service during the Crimean War—Proposals for
an independent Australian mail service—Tender of European and
Australian Company accepted—Their entire failure—Speech of
Lord Overstone, March 24th, 1859—Royal Mail Company undertakes
the Australian service and fails—New tenders invited—That of
Peninsular and Oriental Company accepted, 1859—Consolidation
of services in the Peninsular and Oriental Company—Its present
condition and fleet of ships—Terms of the contract now in
force—Revenue and expenditure—Coals required—Descriptions
of vessels—Screw steamer _Khedive_—Particulars of this
ship—Uniform and regulations of the company.
[Sidenote: Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company.]
The career of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company,
the first commercial undertaking which conveyed the mails overland
to the East is interesting and instructive. It is the more so, as the
impression that this company owed its origin to Government grants, and
that it has been entirely maintained by subsidies for the conveyance
of the mails, is not supported by facts. Indeed, during the earlier
portion of its career, the company, by agreeing to carry the Peninsular
mails, shortly after it had been started, for a sum considerably less
than the cost of maintaining the Admiralty packets then employed, with
a speed, too, and regularity previously unknown, conferred an undoubted
boon on the public.
Whether the company would have continued to maintain its career of
prosperity without Government subsidies is a problem too speculative
for me to solve; but it may well be questioned whether the grants of
public money subsequently voted to it year by year, in so far as they
prevented wholesome competition, and tended to damp the individual
energy which brought it into existence, have been of much service
towards its success. During one portion of the company’s career, when
the advantages of the overland route had been fully established,
it might, and I think it would, have been to its advantage to have
been relieved from every incumbrance as to time and speed. Free from
these, and the many other conditions required by Government, the
company would probably have done better for its shareholders had it
been, also, at liberty to build and sail its ships as it pleased,
despatching them on such voyages and at such rates of speed as paid it
best; and, in support of this opinion, I may remark that various other
shipping companies with no assistance whatever from Government have
yielded far larger dividends than the Peninsular and Oriental, and,
further, that private shipowners, who never had a mail bag in their
steamers, have realized large fortunes. With these remarks, I shall
now endeavour to furnish a brief history of this important undertaking
from its commencement, and to show that its rise was by slow degrees,
and altogether unlike that of the Royal West India Mail Steam Packet
Company, with which it has been frequently compared.
[Sidenote: Its founders and origin.]
[Sidenote: Messrs. Willcox and Anderson.]
In the year 1815, Mr. Brodie McGhee Willcox,[337] then a young man
with no influence and but limited pecuniary means, opened an office
in Lime Street, London, and commenced business on his own account as
a shipbroker and commission agent. To assist him in his business he
shortly afterwards engaged as clerk a youth from the Orkney Islands,
Arthur Anderson,[338] subsequently his partner, whose only capital was
a plain but sound education, good moral and Christian training, a clear
head and great industry. In 1825, the firm adopted the title of Willcox
and Anderson, and removed their offices to 5 St. Mary Axe, where they
carried on their business till it was absorbed into that of the great
company whose progress I am about to describe. Originally, it was
simply a small shipping commission business, with the addition of the
part-ownership of a few vessels chiefly trading with the Peninsula,
with which they in time opened up, first a regular sailing, and then a
steam line of communication, this service having been started solely
by Mr. Willcox. At first, Messrs. Willcox and Anderson had a good
deal of up-hill work, but they were plodding and industrious, and,
consequently, overcame every difficulty, soon insuring that success
which industry, honesty, and economy must ever command.
[Sidenote: Mr. James Allan.]
In 1834, the Dublin and London Steam Packet Company, one of the early
undertakings of that description, of which Messrs. Bourne of Dublin,
the well-known stage-coach contractors for the conveyance of the
mails in Ireland, were the chief proprietors, chartered one of their
vessels, the _Royal Tar_ (see illustration, p. 380), to Don Pedro, and
subsequently for the Queen Regent of Spain, through Messrs. Willcox
and Anderson as brokers. Soon afterwards, M. Mendizabal, at that time
Spanish Minister in London, induced Messrs. Bourne to put on a line of
steamers between London and the Peninsula, for which Messrs. Willcox
and Anderson were appointed agents. A small company having been thus
formed to carry out this undertaking, Mr. James Allan,[339] a native
of Aberdeen, then a clerk in the office of the Dublin and London
Steam Packet Company, was sent to London to assist Messrs. Willcox
and Anderson in the management of the ships. He afterwards became
secretary, and when the company had materially extended its operations,
Mr. Allan, on the death of Mr. Carleton in 1848, was appointed a
managing director in conjunction with Messrs. Willcox and Anderson.
[Illustration: THE “ROYAL TAR.”]
[Sidenote: How the Peninsular mails were originally conveyed.]
Previously to September 1837, the Peninsular mails were conveyed by
sailing post-office packets which left Falmouth for Lisbon every week,
“wind and weather permitting.” Their departures and arrivals, as must
ever be the case with sailing-vessels, were very irregular, and it was
no unfrequent occurrence for the mail from Lisbon to be three weeks
old on its arrival at Falmouth. The mail communication with Cadiz and
Gibraltar was, however, carried on by a Government steam-packet, and,
though of course with greater regularity than the service performed by
the sailing-packets, was, nevertheless, much slower than any of the
steamers under the management of Messrs. Willcox and Anderson, who,
feeling themselves in a position to effect considerable improvements
in the transmission of the mails, submitted an offer to Government for
a more regular transport of letters. But this proposal was coldly
received, and their suggestions at first disregarded. Vested interests
here, as in so many other cases, for a time prevented any improvement.
The Peninsular Company, however, continued to prosecute their
undertaking with vigour, the speed and regularity with which their
steamers performed their passages soon attracting public attention.
Loud complaints of the inefficiency of the transmission of the mails
by sailing-packets at length arose, and, indeed, were so earnest and
persistent on the part of the merchants engaged in the trade, that
Government at last considered it expedient to inquire officially of the
managers of the Peninsular steamers if they had any plan or proposals
to submit for an improvement of the mail service, as, if they had,
their views would now receive favourable consideration.
[Sidenote: Proposal of Peninsular Company for their conveyance.]
A fresh proposal was, consequently, made for a weekly mail between
Falmouth, Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon, Cadiz, and Gibraltar, for which purpose
efficient steam-vessels were to be supplied, to perform the service,
monthly, between these ports, and at a lower rate than half the cost to
the country of the steam and sailing-packets of the Admiralty.
Though Government now received the proposals of the company with favour
and were prepared to act on the plan submitted for consideration,
the company was informed that the service, nevertheless, must be put
up to public competition. An advertisement was, accordingly, soon
afterwards issued, inviting tenders from owners of steam-vessels for
the conveyance of the mails between Falmouth and the Peninsula, in
conformity with the plan submitted by the Peninsular Company; so that
the managers of this struggling undertaking had to compete against
others for the due performance of this service, though on plans
drawn up by themselves at the request and with the entire approval
of Government. But though another company, which had a short time
previously started under the name of the British and Foreign Steam
Navigation Company, tendered for the conveyance of the mails, it was
soon found that they were not able to carry out the service either
within the time or on the conditions required. Time was, however,
allowed them to perfect their arrangements, and, a month afterwards,
fresh advertisements were issued by the Admiralty for the conveyance of
these mails.
[Sidenote: Contract concluded, Aug. 29th, 1837.]
The British and Foreign Steam Navigation Company, however, having
again failed to show that they had adequate means for the efficient
performance of this service, Government entered into private
negotiations with the Peninsular Company with the view of reducing the
amount required by them, and, on the 29th of August, 1837, a contract
was concluded by which this company agreed to convey, monthly, the
whole of the Peninsular mails for 29,600_l._, a sum subsequently
reduced to 20,500_l._ per annum. The service was performed with much
regularity, and it may be considered to have been the nucleus of the
great company which now conveys the mails to all parts of the Eastern
world. The _Iberia_, built by Messrs. Curling and Young, was the first
steamer despatched with the Peninsular mails. She sailed in September
1837, the benefits thus conferred on those who were engaged in the
trade becoming at once apparent. Another step in advance soon followed.
[Sidenote: Conveyance of mails to India previously to 1839.]
The mode in which the mails were conveyed to and from India up to
September 1840, was by means of steamers plying monthly between
Bombay and Suez, and thence by Government steamers from Alexandria
to Gibraltar, where they met the mails brought out by the Peninsular
Company from England. As the steamers of this company had to call
at Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon, and Cadiz in their passages to and from
Gibraltar, and as the Government packets employed between that
port, Malta, and Alexandria were of inferior power and speed, the
transmission of mails by this route was necessarily slow, and
generally occupied from three weeks to a month between England and
Alexandria.[340]
But, however imperfect this mode of transmission, it would probably
have continued for many years longer had not circumstances occurred
rendering an alteration imperative. In 1839, the British Government
having entered into a convention with the French Government for
the sending of letters to and from India through France by way of
Marseilles, an Admiralty packet was stationed to ply between that
port and Malta. Thence, these letters, together with the larger and
heavier mails forwarded by the Peninsular and the Admiralty packets viâ
Gibraltar, were conveyed from Malta to Alexandria by another of Her
Majesty’s ships.
That portion of the mails forwarded through France was despatched
from the post-office on the fourth of every month, while the heavier
portion continued to be sent from Falmouth every fourth Saturday by the
Peninsular packets. As might have been expected, this plan was soon
found to work awkwardly, inasmuch as the mail sent viâ Gibraltar every
four weeks was in advance of that viâ Marseilles each calendar month,
and had, therefore, to await at Malta the arrival of the Marseilles
packet.
Irregularities such as these, increased as they were by each successive
mail, together with the fact that the British despatches then ran
some risk of loss in their transit through France, led Government
to consider the advisability of establishing some quicker means of
conveyance, viâ Gibraltar, for the main portion of the mails.
[Sidenote: Government applies to the Peninsular Company,]
The managers of the Peninsular Company having been again applied to,
submitted for the approval of Government a proposal to establish a
line of superior steamers to run direct from England to Alexandria,
and _vice versâ_, touching only at Gibraltar and Malta; the steamers
to be of sufficient power to perform this voyage in not more than
three days beyond the time then occupied in the conveyance of the
mails viâ France, and at a cost not exceeding what was required for
the maintenance of the small and inefficient Admiralty packets then
similarly employed.
[Sidenote: and accept their proposals, though reluctantly.]
Their plan having met the approval of Government, public advertisements
were again issued for tenders to carry it into effect, and no less
than four competitors tendered for the contract at sums ranging from
34,200_l._ to 51,000_l._ per annum. As the tender of the Peninsular
Company was not only the lowest, but contained, also, an offer to
convey at a reduced rate all officers travelling on the public service,
and _bonâ fide_ Admiralty packages gratuitously, it was accepted by the
Government.
[Sidenote: Proposed direct line from Falmouth to Calcutta.]
The tender, however, was accepted with reluctance, various people of
influence having, strange to say, almost convinced Government of the
desirability of subsidizing a line of steam-vessels between Falmouth
and Calcutta _viâ_ the Cape of Good Hope, which was intended not merely
to supersede to a great extent the sailing-vessels then employed, but
to convey the Indian mails: indeed, it will be found by reference to
the public journals of the period, that a steamer of then unusual
size had been constructed specially for the purpose.[341] It was,
however, wisely decided that no dependence could be placed on the due
performance of the service within the “thirty days” stipulated; nor
am I aware that the passage by the Cape of Good Hope, has yet been
performed by vessels of any description in a space of time so limited.
[Sidenote: First vessels hence on Indian postal service to Alexandria.]
The vessels offered by Messrs. Willcox and Anderson and approved by
the Admiralty, were the _Oriental_ of 1600 tons and 450 horse-power,
as also the _Great Liverpool_ of 1540 tons and 464 horse-power, which,
originally intended for the Transatlantic service, was now despatched
with the mails from England to Alexandria, thus combining the two
mail services, and constituting the Peninsular and _Oriental_ Steam
Navigation Company.
To complete the service, the directors were requested to provide a
subsidiary vessel of not less than 250 horse-power, and another of 140
horse-power, for the Malta and Corfu branches, which they did at a cost
of 10,712_l._ per annum less than the charge to the country for the
Admiralty packets previously employed.[342]
[Sidenote: Original postal service from Suez to Bombay.]
Up to this period, as we have seen, the mails between Bombay and Suez
were conveyed by steamers belonging to the East India Company. It soon,
however, became apparent that these vessels were as unsuited to the
Indian portion of the service, as those of the Admiralty had proved
to be for that between Alexandria and England. But so reluctant were
the Directors of the East India Company, to allow “interlopers” into
their service, that some years still elapsed before their vessels were
superseded by others of greater speed, and in all other respects more
adapted to the increasing wants of the public.
[Sidenote: Contract for mails between Suez and Calcutta, September
1842.]
Although the Home Government was so strongly impressed with the
necessity of establishing a line of steamers between Calcutta and
Suez, as well as from Bombay, it was only after considerable pressure
had been brought to bear on the Court that the East India Company
reluctantly consented to a contract with the Peninsular Company for
this special service; and, on the 24th September, 1842, its new
ship _Hindostan_, of 1800 tons and 520 horse-power, was sent from
Southampton to open a line between Calcutta, Madras, Ceylon, and Suez.
It may be desirable to state here that this originally small concern
had, two years previously, been formed into a joint stock company with
a charter of incorporation from the Crown, which enabled the directors
to obtain the additional capital required for the Indian services; and,
as they had now received the co-operation of most of those parties who,
under the designation of the East India Steam Navigation Company, had
been endeavouring to effect the same objects, they proceeded with all
possible speed to fulfil the conditions and carry out the objects of
their charter of incorporation.
[Sidenote: Further proposals made by the East India Company and
Government,]
[Sidenote: but finally rejected by the East India Company.]
[Sidenote: Further contracts for mail service to China and Singapore.]
Though the _Hindostan_ proved vastly superior to the vessels of only
250 horse-power employed by the East India Company in the mail service
between Bombay and Suez, which cost no less than 105,200_l._ per annum
to maintain, the Court of Directors declined to listen to the further
suggestions of the Home Government to transfer this branch of the
postal service into the hands of any private undertaking and, indeed,
retained it until 1854. In the meantime Government entered into another
contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Company for a monthly service
from Ceylon to Penang, Singapore, and Hong Kong. For the service
between Suez, Ceylon, Madras, and Calcutta, the company received
115,000_l._ per annum or at the rate of 20_s._ per mile, and, for the
latter, 45,000_l._ per annum or about 12_s._ per mile.
When it became known that the Peninsular and Oriental Company had
engaged to perform a service to India and the leading ports of China
at the average rate of 17_s._ per mile in vessels of 500 horse-power,
while the service between Suez and Bombay was costing upwards of 30_s._
per mile in vessels of not half that power, and, at the same time, of
greatly inferior speed and accommodation, the public naturally demanded
that the Bombay branch of the service should be placed in the hands of
persons competent to carry it out more efficiently and economically
than had been done by the East India Company.
[Sidenote: Peninsular and Oriental Company undertake the line between
Bombay and Suez, 1854.]
But the Court of Directors successfully resisted all such demands until
the Parliamentary Committee of 1851 reported that this service—in
point of economy, the comfort of the passengers, and the requirements
of trade—could be performed to greater advantage by private enterprise
than by the vessels of the Indian navy. It is, however, questionable
if the Directors would even then have given up the service had not the
Bombay mails been, soon afterwards, lost in a native sailing-craft into
which they had been transferred at Aden, the East India Company having
no steamer ready to convey them thence to Suez. The Peninsular and
Oriental Company having been applied to, then found that, by means of
the arrangements they had entered into for the performance of the other
services, they could undertake this particular branch for the sum of
24,700_l._ per annum, or at the rate of 6_s._ 2_d._ per mile, thereby
effecting a saving of about 80,000_l._ as compared with the expense
incurred in the far less efficient service of the Indian navy.
In the meantime Government had, on the 6th January, 1848, given
notice to the company to terminate their contract between Southampton
and Alexandria on the 18th January of the following year, and, soon
afterwards, advertised for tenders for the execution of this service.
But, the other tenders being less advantageous to the public than the
terms on which the Peninsular and Oriental Company was willing to
continue the service, a new contract was entered into, for three years,
at 24,000_l._ per annum or at the rate of 6_s._ 9_d._ per mile.
[Sidenote: House of Commons Committee on Australian mail service, 1849.]
[Sidenote: Eastern Steam Navigation Company and Peninsular and Oriental
Company tender for it, but the Peninsular and Oriental succeed.]
Meantime also, the increasing trade with Australia created demands for
greater facilities of intercourse with the mother-country and more
regularity in conveyance of the mails, so that the Committee of the
House of Commons, appointed in 1849 to inquire and report on the then
existing system of mail communication with the East, was instructed
also to consider the best mode of conveying the mails between India
and our Australian colonies. In this Report, dated July 1851, these
different services were divided into five distinct heads,[343] one of
which, recommended the establishment of a line between Singapore and
Sydney. In reply to the advertisements issued on the recommendation
of the Committee, two tenders were delivered on the 26th February,
1852, one by the Peninsular and Oriental Company for the whole of the
services (their contracts of 1844 and 1849 being about to expire)
with the addition of a branch line between Bombay and Point de Galle,
not named in the conditions, for the annual sum of 199,600_l._, to be
reduced by 20,000_l._ per annum six months after the completion of
the railway across the Isthmus of Suez; and the other, by the Eastern
Steam Navigation Company, for a line once a month between England,
Calcutta, and Hong Kong for the annual sum of 110,000_l._, or for
100,000_l._ should Trieste be substituted for Marseilles as the port of
embarkation, and a further contract for the service between Singapore
and Sydney on an annual subsidy of 166,000_l._ (which, however, was not
mentioned in their tender), being 276,000_l._ for both services.
Although the tender of the Peninsular and Oriental Company was
evidently much more favourable to the public interest than that of the
Eastern Steam Navigation Company, the latter, nevertheless, petitioned
Parliament to appoint another Committee to inquire into the whole
subject, to which, however, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer
declined to accede, at the same time furnishing (as appears from the
Parliamentary debates) valid reasons for the course he considered it
his duty to adopt.[344]
[Sidenote: The _Himalaya_ built.]
Though a good deal of complaint was about this time raised against
Government with regard to favours said to be conceded to the Peninsular
and Oriental Company, yet they seem to have hitherto fought their way,
step by step, against much opposition, and to have redeemed their
character for speed, [which was somewhat overshadowed by the superior
performances of the Cunard and Collins line of steamers, then in the
midst of their great Transatlantic race], by the construction of the
_Himalaya_,[345] a steamer of larger dimensions than any other then
afloat, and of extraordinary speed.
Nor did the Company receive any favour at the hands of Government when,
about this period, they were seriously embarrassed for the want of a
sufficient supply of coal[346] at their Eastern stations, and an appeal
was made for a temporary relaxation of some portion of the service.
Indeed, when the Company, on that account, found it impossible to carry
on a portion of the second monthly service between India and China,
the Government threatened to inflict the penalty of 35,000_l._ for its
non-performance, and would have enforced the strict fulfilment of the
conditions of the contract in all its details, had other arrangements
not been made to meet the emergency.
[Sidenote: New contract with Peninsular and Oriental Company, January
1853.]
On the 1st January, 1853, the company entered into a fresh contract
with Government, whereby they undertook to carry mails twice each way
in every month between England and Alexandria, and twice each way in
every month between Suez, Calcutta, and Hong Kong. Two vessels were
also to be furnished to run between Marseilles and Malta, twice each
way, in each month. The company further engaged to carry mails between
Singapore and Sydney, once each way each alternate month. Tables of
routes were attached and formed part of the contract. There were also
certain stipulations as to proper machinery; a medical officer was to
be placed on board each vessel, and provision was made for carrying
pivot and broadside guns.
The vessels on the main line were required to attain a speed on trial
of 12 knots an hour, the others 10½ without the aid of sails, or they
were not eligible for employment. The average speed of each vessel
throughout the voyage was required to be not less than 10 knots an
hour, excepting in the case of those between Singapore and Sydney,
which were to make the passage at a rate not less than 8½ knots. If
the company failed to provide vessels ready to put to sea from any of
the ports, viz., Southampton, Alexandria, Suez, Calcutta, Hong Kong,
Singapore, and Sydney, at the time appointed, the forfeit in each case
was stipulated to be 500_l._, and a further sum of 500_l._ for every
successive day up to the fourteenth day inclusive which might elapse
before the vessel actually put to sea. And, if any vessel, in breach
of the contract, delayed starting or put back or deviated, except from
stress of weather, without the sanction of Government, the company was
to forfeit 200_l._ and a further 200_l._ for every day’s delay, unless
from circumstances not under its control.
The Admiralty agent had power to survey the vessels, and the Admiralty
itself, to compel such alterations as might be needed so as to keep
pace with the advancement of science; while there were various
provisions for the conveyance of naval, military, or civil officers,
baggage, and victualing, as in other contracts.
In the event of accidents occurring to any of the vessels, the mails
were to be conveyed by Her Majesty’s or by the East India Company’s
ships: and an abatement made from the contract service money, at
the rate of 6_s._ 2_d._ per nautical mile. For a consideration, the
Admiralty reserved the privilege of changing the port in the channel,
with the right also of purchasing the vessels at a valuation; or
of chartering them at a rate to be mutually agreed on or settled by
arbitration. Any submission to be made a rule of court. In the possible
case of an entire stoppage of the route through Egypt, the Admiralty
were to act as the case might require; the whole postage remaining at
the disposal of the Postmaster-General.
[Sidenote: Failure of service during the Crimean War.]
But these mail services were soon seriously disturbed. The urgent
requirements of Government for the means of conveying troops to the
Black Sea and the Baltic on the outbreak of the Crimean War, obliged
the company towards the close of 1854 to discontinue the branch line
to Australia, and to reduce the Bombay and China service to a monthly
instead of a fortnightly line.[347]
The withdrawal of the company’s steamers from the mail service between
Singapore and Sydney, which had so recently been established, again
created a large amount of discontent amongst the merchants in England
connected with the trade and still more with the Colonists. The company
was charged with selfish motives, and though obliged to relinquish the
annual subsidy of 17,475_l._ for the performance of their service, it
was alleged that the profits of the company, by the employment of its
ships in the war, much more than compensated it for the reduction of
the mail revenue. Thus considerable prejudice was raised against the
company, and, in the discussion of the plans for the renewal of the
service after the war, it became clear that the colonists were anxious
to have, if possible, a mail service of their own and altogether
independent of the Peninsular and Oriental Company; hence, when the
company offered to enter into a contract for the monthly conveyance of
the mails between Ceylon and Sydney by steamers of an average speed of
10 knots an hour, touching at King George’s Sound and Melbourne, at
an annual subsidy of 84,000_l._, the offer was peremptorily declined,
though a greatly enhanced subsidy was subsequently paid, for the worst
performed mail service that was ever undertaken.
[Sidenote: Proposals for an independent Australian mail service.]
In the meantime liberal grants of money having been voted by the
legislative assemblies of the different colonies towards the
maintenance of a postal communication with the mother-country,
advertisements were issued by the Admiralty, in May 1856, inviting
tenders for a “monthly direct and _independent_ service” between Suez
and Australia.
The conditions of tender contained many clauses of a novel character.
The ships to be employed were to be full power screw steam-vessels
of not less than 2200 tons each; the tenders were to specify the
maximum number of days to be consumed on the passages; and a “penalty
of 100_l._ to be incurred when the contractors failed in providing
a vessel, in accordance with agreement, ready to put to sea at the
appointed hour; and also the sum of 100_l._ for every successive day
which should elapse until such steam-vessel should actually proceed to
sea; _and also_ (_from whatever cause arising_) 50_l._ for the first
day, and a sum increasing by 50_l._ per day for every succeeding day,
that is to say, 50_l._ for the first day, 100_l._ for the second day,
150_l._ for the third day, and so on.”
Four tenders were lodged in reply to this advertisement, but only
two, that of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and that of a new
undertaking, the European and Australian Steam Navigation Company,
were considered by the Government: the former offering to perform
the service, provided the new and very onerous penalty clause was
omitted, for 140,000_l._; and the latter accepting all the clauses,
but requiring 185,000_l._ per annum for the work to be performed, and
stating that, should their tender be accepted, it was intended to lay
on an independent line of steamers between England and Alexandria, and
to perform the service between Suez and Melbourne in thirty-nine days
outwards and thirty-five days homewards.
[Sidenote: Tender of European and Australian Company accepted.]
As the Peninsular and Oriental Company “declined to be held responsible
in penalties for failure as to the length of a voyage arising from
causes _beyond their control_,” and submitted that such penalties were
unnecessary as the vessels they offered “had already been surveyed,
and tested for an average speed of ten knots an hour at sea,” the
Government accepted the tender of the European and Australian
Company.[348]
So very large a concession as 185,000_l._ per annum for the work to
be performed created at the time considerable surprise, and led to a
good deal of discussion in the public press as well as in Parliament.
With such an enormous subsidy the directors of the new undertaking
would have had no difficulty in raising the requisite amount of capital
in the open market for a service apparently so tempting, but they
considered the margin for profit so ample that, instead of offering
their shares to the public, they raised among themselves and their
friends all the money that was considered necessary, anticipating no
doubt a very handsome return upon the outlay.
[Sidenote: Their entire failure.]
But the whole undertaking proved one of the most ruinous of its kind
on record, the Galway steam navigation scheme not excepted. A volume
might be written, and to advantage, on the mistakes committed by the
directors, all of whom were business men of wealth and position,
though few of them were conversant with maritime affairs, or with the
difficulties they had to encounter at every stage, and with the causes
which ultimately led to the loss of some of their ships. Suffice it to
say that, when the company had to commence operations in March 1857,
its ships were not ready, and the directors were obliged to enter into
arrangements with the Royal Mail (West India) Steam Packet Company and
other companies for the performance of the service; and indeed, when
their own ships were ready, they either broke down or were found unfit
to perform, within the specified time, the work they had undertaken.
In less than two years the whole capital of this new company was
lost, but as the result has been fully described by Lord Overstone
in a speech he delivered in the House of Lords on the 24th of March,
1859,[349] I prefer reproducing his statement, especially as it remains
unquestioned, to offering any remarks of my own.
[Sidenote: Speech of Lord Overstone, March 24th, 1859.]
“This company,” his Lordship remarked, “originated very much through
the success of some influential parties in Glasgow, who realized
a large sum by chartering two screw steamers to Government during
the Crimean War. These vessels were named the _European_ and the
_Columbian_, and the company was named the ‘European and Columbian
Company.’ Soon after the close of the Russian War, Government
advertised for tenders for the Australian mail service. One given in by
the European and Columbian Company was preferred to a cheaper one by
the Peninsular and Oriental Company, the annual subsidy for carrying
the mails being 185,000_l._ with monthly services, the contract to
endure for five years. The penalty for the non-fulfilment of the
contract was heavy, increasing prodigiously with each day’s delay.
In consequence of this great undertaking it was necessary to enlarge
the company, and greatly to increase the number of its vessels; and,
accordingly, a new company was formed on the limited principle, under
the name of the ‘European and Australian Royal Mail Company (Limited)’
whom Government accepted for the contract. The nominal capital was
500,000_l._, but I believe not more than 420,000_l._ were subscribed,
the balance being purposely reserved, as the promoters expected it to
command a large premium. The list of proprietors is one of the best I
have seen of any company, all the shareholders, eighty-four in number,
being selected men, residing chiefly in Glasgow and neighbourhood,
London, Liverpool, and Manchester. 400,000_l._ were ultimately paid
up. The first meeting of the new company was held on the 3rd of
September, 1856; but it was, of course, some months before their plans
got developed, and time was lost in negotiation with other companies
to sell their contract for a bonus, or to get some other advantage.
As this was not arranged, the _European_ and _Columbian_ were taken
over from the old company; other vessels were chartered for immediate
requirements; a vessel called the _Oneida_, by which 60,000_l._ were
ultimately lost, was purchased; and two other vessels contracted for
at 100,000_l._ and 120,000_l._ It was soon apparent that the company
had started with too small a capital, and that there was a total want
of experience in the management.... After borrowing considerable
sums upon the security of their vessels and otherwise, the directors
found that it was necessary to make arrangements with another company
to work the service, which they ultimately did with the ‘Royal Mail
(West India) Company.’ An arrangement for an amalgamation of the two
concerns was also very nearly completed, when the shareholders of the
latter company refused to confirm the bargain made by the directors.
This and the events of last autumn (1857) brought matters to a crisis,
so that almost within a twelvemonth of the formation of the company,
it was known that they were practically insolvent, and they have since
placed themselves under the Act, and gone into voluntary liquidation.
Besides the loss of 400,000_l._ of capital, the debts, including
mortgages, appear to be about 270,000_l._, against which they have the
steamers, subject to some disputed claims of the Royal Mail Company,
in whose hands some of them are. There is some hope that the steamers
may realise sufficiently to pay the debts, but, in the present state
of shipping and aspect of the questions with the Royal Mail Company,
this seems to be doubtful. The following appear to be the heavier items
of expense and loss: Abandoning steamers, 25,000_l._; placing steamers
on stations, 37,000_l._; loss on voyages, 70,000_l._; interest,
management, and depreciation, 77,000_l._; loss on _Oneida_ and expense
of bringing home, 61,000_l._: total 270,000_l._; but there will be a
further heavy loss in realising the four steamers still belonging to
the company, and the plant they have at Sydney, King George’s Sound,
Aden, and Point de Galle. These stand in the books at about 370,000_l._”
[Sidenote: Royal Mail Company undertakes the Australian service and
fails.]
When, in February 1858, the shareholders of this unfortunate
undertaking were obliged to seek the protection of the Limited
Liability Act under which it had been formed, the Royal Mail (West
India) Company entered into arrangements with Government to carry
out the service on the terms of the contract, provided it was
guaranteed against loss to an extent not exceeding 6000_l._ per month.
Differences, however, soon arose between this company and the Admiralty
which resulted in a lawsuit, whereby it appeared that the West India
Company had sustained a loss far in excess of 6000_l._ per month, and
that the service had altogether cost the country close upon 260,000_l._
per annum during its brief existence.[350]
[Sidenote: New tenders invited.]
[Sidenote: That of Peninsular and Oriental Company accepted, 1859.]
In September 1858, Government again advertised for tenders “for
the monthly conveyance of the mails between Great Britain and the
Australian Colonies, with a branch between Marseilles and Malta.”
Two offers were made, one by the Royal Mail (West India) Company for
250,000_l._ per annum, and the other by the Peninsular and Oriental
Company for 180,000_l._ The latter was accepted, and the new service
commenced in February 1859.
[Sidenote: Consolidation of services in the Peninsular and Oriental
Company.]
It may be desirable here to explain that this company had previously
undertaken a monthly service between Mauritius and Aden for a subsidy
of 24,000_l._ per annum, and, an arrangement having been made that
the route for the Australian mails should be _viâ_ Mauritius, the
performance of the mail service to both places was included in the
180,000_l._ But that route was soon afterwards abandoned, and a fresh
agreement entered into between Government and the Peninsular and
Oriental Company for a monthly line between Galle and Sydney, which,
in conjunction with the Calcutta, Suez, and China lines, brought the
Australian Colonies into direct communication not only with England,
but also with India and China, and in fact with all the chief ports
of the Indian seas. The subsidy for this service was 134,672_l._ per
annum, the contract remaining in force until February 1866.
When fresh tenders were invited, the Peninsular and Oriental Company,
having in this instance no competitor (though tenders were publicly
invited), became again the contractors, agreeing to perform a monthly
service for 120,000_l._ or a semi-monthly service for 170,000_l._ per
annum, with boats which should attain a speed of 12 knots per hour on a
measured mile, as a guarantee for an average speed of 10 knots per hour
from port to port.
As there was a good deal of controversy about this time as to the
average rate of speed of the vessels belonging to the principal mail
companies, the table in the footnote[351] of the passages of steamers,
for some years just previously to that period, belonging to the
largest subsidized lines may be interesting and instructive.
[Sidenote: Its present condition and fleet of ships.]
From the thirty-fourth annual report of the Peninsular and Oriental
Company, ending 30th of September, 1874, we learn that the paid-up
capital amounted to 2,700,000_l._ and 800,000_l._ of debenture stock,
also that it was the intention of the directors to call up in the
course of the following year 10_l._ per share of their new stock,
thus increasing the paid-up capital to 2,900,000_l._ apart from the
debenture stock, so that the whole capital of the company would be
4,300,000_l._, of which 600,000_l._ would remain unpaid. This large
amount of capital is distributed over more than 2000 shareholders,
resident in almost every part of the world, and of whom more than
one-third are ladies. Of this capital 3,757,000_l._ consists of stock
in ships; 221,000_l._ of freehold and leasehold property in England,
and docks and premises at Calcutta, Bombay, Singapore, Hong Kong,
and other stations; and 413,000_l._ in stock of coals and naval and
victualing stores. Its fleet consists of fifty sea-going steamers,
measuring 122,000 tons, and of 22,000 horse-power.[352] Of these
steamers thirty-four are employed in the Mediterranean, Adriatic,
India, and China services; four in the Australian service between
Ceylon, Melbourne, and Sydney; five in the China and Japan local
services; two are used solely as cargo vessels; and five are either
under repair or alterations, being reserved to supply the place of
others in case of accidents. The company also possess twelve steam-tugs
of from 31 tons and 15 horse-power to 271 tons and 120 horse-power,
stationed for its use in Egypt, Aden, Bombay, Hong Kong, Shanghai,
and Yokohama; and three cargo and coalhulks of 4417 tons, while it
gives also permanent employment to 12,600 persons, exclusive of coal
labourers and coolies on shore.
If my readers will cast their eyes on the map they will, by noting the
ports at which these steamers call, form some idea of the extent and
value of the services performed by this company. From England, crossing
the Bay of Biscay along the shores of the Peninsula, to Gibraltar—the
extreme limit of the original undertaking—its steamers now traverse
the Mediterranean to Egypt, with a branch from Venice and Brindisi, and
through the Canal to Suez, whence the most important line of steamers
leave weekly for Bombay, with a further line from Bombay to Galle, and
another direct from Suez to Galle, at which station the different lines
diverge, one proceeding to Madras and Calcutta; another stretching far
away across the Indian Ocean to King George’s Sound, Melbourne, and
Sydney; and a third crossing the Bay of Bengal and through the Straits
of Malacca, calling at Singapore, and traversing the China seas to
Hong Kong, and, thence, to Swatow, Amoy, Foo-chow-foo, and Shanghai,
stretching onwards to Yokohama, where the steamers of this line meet
those of the Western world.
[Sidenote: Terms of the contract now in force.]
The principal conditions of the company’s present mail contract,
as compared with that of 1870, are as follows:—The company is now
required to despatch steamers weekly to convey the mails from and to
Southampton and the various ports in the East by way of the Suez Canal;
the Brindisi, or accelerated mail, to be conveyed as heretofore to and
from Alexandria and by railway across Egypt; the company to have the
option of substituting either Liverpool or Plymouth for Southampton
as their mail port; the arrival of the outward mails at Eastern ports
to be accelerated by twenty-four hours, and the penalties for late
deliveries at terminal points to be quadrupled and made absolute,
except in case of shipwreck or damage to machinery. The subsidy payable
for the performance of these and other services is to be reduced from
450,000_l._, the sum agreed by the contract of 1870, to 430,000_l._ per
annum, such sum to include the whole of the mail services rendered by
the company.[353]
It is not my province to inquire whether these services could not be
performed for a smaller grant of public money than that now paid.
Opinions differ widely on such matters, and, as the steamers now
traversing every sea increase in numbers, the feeling becomes more
general, that a considerable saving might be effected in the conveyance
of all the ocean mails. But the vast establishment this company is
obliged to maintain, and the all-important and onerous duties it has
to perform, at stations far apart and many thousand miles distant
from headquarters, involves an outlay so great and embraces a risk so
hazardous, that such a company may, on the other hand, well consider if
the grant it receives, however large, is more than an equivalent for
the services performed, especially, too, when we consider the stringent
conditions of its contract.
[Sidenote: Revenue and expenditure.]
From whatever cause it may have arisen, the fact is apparent, that
though the annual gross receipts of the company are enormous, its
expenditure[354] is so great that less balance is left for the
shareholders than is usually divided among those of undertakings of a
similar character, which receive no assistance from Government, but are
free to employ their ships in whatever branch of commerce they can be
most profitably engaged.
[Sidenote: Coals required.]
Coal, as may be supposed, is one of the company’s heaviest items of
expenditure, and one, also, that has greatly increased during the last
few years; but when the price was comparatively moderate, the accounts
of this company, from 1856 to 1865 inclusive, showed an expenditure for
coal alone of no less than 5,250,000_l._ sterling, or, on the average,
525,000_l._ per annum: moreover, a large stock must be constantly
kept[356] to meet the demands of the steamers employed on their various
lines of communication; to maintain this stock, the company employ
170 sailing-ships annually, a trade which, in itself, would have been
considered of no mean importance in the days of our forefathers.
[Sidenote: Description of vessels.]
It has not been the least interesting portion of my labours, to
describe the different modes of commercial intercourse with India from
the dawn of history, and, from the scanty fragments of very ancient
records, to attempt to afford information, however imperfect, of the
ships of the first traders by sea to the far East, their dimensions,
the routes they followed, the length of their voyages, and something
about their crews and internal economy. I have also traced their
progress, as best I could, through the period of the Roman Empire to
the Middle Ages, when the vessels of the proud Italian republics, in
connection with the Muhammedans, retained for centuries in their hands
that rich and ever envied commerce, thence onward to the period when
the Portuguese and the Dutch were masters of the Indian seas, and,
still further, to our own days, when a company of traders ruled alike
the land and ocean of these vast and much prized territories; and I
have, at the same time, given minute details of the ships and maritime
services of this once all-powerful company.
[Sidenote: Screw steamer _Khedive_.]
I now supply the following illustration of one of the most modern
vessels, belonging to the Peninsular and Oriental Company, engaged in
that trade (she was built for the new line of commerce through the Suez
Canal, by Messrs. Caird and Company, of Greenock, by whom her engines
were also constructed); so that my readers may see the progress made
in the mode of conducting maritime intercourse with India from the
earliest period to our own time.
The _Khedive_ is built of iron and propelled by the screw, combining
all the qualities which modern science can suggest to secure with
safety the greatest speed and capacity with the smallest current
expenses.[357]
[Illustration: THE PENINSULAR AND ORIENTAL COMPANY’S STEAMER
“KHEDIVE.”]
It would weary my readers were I to furnish a specification of the
hull and outfit of the _Khedive_, more especially as somewhat similar
specifications are to be found in numerous treatises on modern
shipbuilding, with which I do not profess to deal, and as it would,
in itself, occupy forty or fifty pages of this volume. It may be
sufficient to state, in the concluding words of the contract, “that
the whole of the materials and workmanship are to be of the best
quality, and the vessel, with the exception of bed and sofa mattresses,
curtains, plate, cutlery, glass, china, linen, and bedding, to be
entirely fitted and ready for sea at the cost of the contractors;” the
contract price for the ship thus fitted complete for sea, including
her machinery, was 110,000_l._, or a little more than 33_l._ per ton
builders’ measurement.
Of course the price of all ships, as previously stated, depends on
their class, power, and equipment, so that the cost of one vessel
ready for sea may be very different from that of another ship. For
instance, sailing-ships, when new, range from 8_l._ to 22_l._ per ton,
and steamers from 15_l._ to as high as 40_l._ or even 45_l._ per ton
if the engines be very powerful, highly finished, and mounted, and if
the passenger accommodation be of an unusually superior and extravagant
description.
In comparing this ship with the illustrations I have given of vessels
of even comparatively modern times, my readers will be struck with the
difference. Instead of the great hull towering high out of the water,
with poops and top-gallant forecastles resembling the towers or castles
on shore from which they derive their name, we have the long, low,
yacht-looking craft offering the least possible resistance to the winds
and waves against which she has to contend, yet affording more safety,
as experience has shown, and far more comfort, with vastly increased
capacity, in proportion to her register, for cargo and passengers, than
the ships of any nation of any previous age.
[Sidenote: Particulars of this ship.]
In other respects it would be useless to attempt a comparison. We have
nothing in ancient times to compare with the steam-ship, unless it
be the row-galley, and to propel a vessel of the size and weight of
the _Khedive_ at the rate of four miles an hour through the smoothest
water would require at least 2000 rowers. I may however state, for the
information of my readers, that the _Khedive_ will perform the voyage
from Southampton to Bombay in thirty days (an abstract from her log
will be found, Appendix No. 22, pp. 637-8), or in one-third of the time
which Dr. Vincent, when he wrote at the commencement of this century
on the commerce of the East, considered extraordinarily short between
Bombay and England; indeed, is short, too, for a sailing-vessel of
even our own times. A list of her crew, arranged according to their
different departments, is furnished herewith.[358]
[Sidenote: Uniform and regulations of the company.]
Following the example of the old East India Company, the directors of
the Peninsular and Oriental Company, as well as of many other similar
undertakings, require their officers to wear uniform. They also issue
regulations for the guidance of the engineers and for the general
management of their ships (especially with reference to safety and
economy). These regulations are similar in many respects to those of
other companies, though not so complete as those of the Cunard, nor, we
fear, from various accidents which have occurred, so rigidly enforced.
Upon this all-important point—the _safety of the ship_—it would be
impossible to impress too strongly upon shipowners the duty they owe
to the public, since, by the vigorous enforcement of such regulations,
numerous valuable lives might be saved and many terrible calamities
prevented. To uniforms I have no objection, but such matters are of
very secondary consideration to the safety of the vessel, and while
holding the opinion that polite and well-dressed officers are an
acquisition, especially to a passenger ship, their acts of courtesy
must never be permitted to interfere in the slightest degree with their
paramount duties as seamen, which require them, considering the varied
and increasing dangers to which steam navigation is exposed, _to be
ever on the alert_.
I have ventured to offer these few concluding remarks because some of
the losses of the vessels of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, which
occurred in fine weather and in smooth water, might have been avoided.
The directors have, however, since then issued (March 14th, 1874) to
the commanders of their ships more stringent instructions, and have
intimated that any neglect of duty, especially as regards “lookouts,”
will be “severely visited.”[359]
FOOTNOTES:
[337] Mr. Willcox was born at Ostend, but of English and Scotch
parentage, his second Christian name, McGhee, being that of
his maternal grandfather. He, however, spent his boyhood at
Newcastle-on-Tyne, where he received the chief portion of his
education. He represented the borough of Southampton for some years in
Parliament, and died, 1862, at the age of 79.
[338] Mr. Anderson became member for his native borough, which he
represented from 1846 to 1852. He took a great interest in developing
the northern fisheries, and especially in forming a Shetland fishery
Company, and in improving the condition of the people there. He died in
1868 at the age of 77.
[339] When I commenced business in London, Mr. Allan was one of my
earliest friends, and our friendship remained unbroken until his death
in September 1874. I can therefore, of my own knowledge, speak of
the difficulties he had to encounter, and of the numerous obstacles
to be overcome in establishing the vast business with which he was
so long and so intimately associated. To establish agencies at the
leading ports of India and China, open depôts for coals, erect docks
and factories for the repairs of their ships, to bring the whole
into systematic and harmonious working order, and, above all, to
keep agencies remote from each other and far from home, under proper
control, required a master mind of no common order, the more so that
the system he organized was then entirely new. Mr. Allan was, however,
in every way equal to this arduous duty; his industry was unwearied,
his love for truth ever conspicuous, and, with these he combined the
most unassuming and pleasing manners. His only failing consisted in
believing all other men to be as upright as himself.
[340] The mean rate of the sailing-packets on the average for a
considerable number of voyages to the Mediterranean had been 2·7
miles per hour, the average length of the voyage from Falmouth to
Malta, Corfu, and back to Falmouth being three months. The first of
the Admiralty _steam_-packets, the _Meteor_, left Falmouth on this
service 5th February, 1830, and she performed the round in about half
the time of the sailing-packets. The _African_, _Carron_, _Columbia_,
_Confiance_, _Echo_, _Firebrand_, _Hermes_, and _Messenger_ followed
and were regularly employed in this Mediterranean mail service. The
average length of the voyages of steamers during a period of two and a
half years to Corfu and back to Falmouth, was about forty-seven days
including all stoppages—twice at Cadiz, Gibraltar, and Malta—which
consumed about thirteen out of the forty-seven days engaged on the
voyage.
[341] “Scarcely has the wonder created in the world by the appearance
of the _Great Western_ and _British Queen_, begun to subside, when we
are called upon to admire the rapid strides of enterprise by the notice
of an iron steam-ship, the first of a line of steamers to ply between
England and Calcutta, to be called _The Queen of the East_, 2618 tons,
and 600 horse-power. This magnificent vessel is designed by Mr. W. D.
Holmes, engineer to the Bengal Steam Committee, for a communication
between England and India. Great praise is due to Captain Barber, late
of the Honourable East India Company’s Service, the agent in London for
the Steam Committee in Bengal, who has afforded every encouragement
to Mr. Holmes in carrying forward his splendid undertaking. When
these vessels are ready we understand the voyage between Falmouth and
Calcutta will be made in thirty days.”—_Times_, 11th November, 1838.
[342] See Evidence, Committee of House of Commons, 1840, question 1411.
[343] 1st Line.—A line from England to Alexandria and back monthly,
leaving England in the beginning of every month, and calling at
Gibraltar and Malta, with a branch from Marseilles to Malta and back,
conveying between those two ports the mails which are carried across
France.
2nd Line.—A similar line from England to Alexandria and back monthly,
leaving England in the middle of every month, with a similar branch
between Marseilles and Malta.
3rd Line.—A line from Suez to Calcutta and Hong Kong and back monthly.
This line will take the mails which have left England in the beginning
of each month, and will touch at Aden and Point de Galle, whence one
steamer will proceed by Madras to Calcutta, and another by Penang to
Singapore and Hong Kong.
4th Line.—A similar line from Suez to Calcutta and Hong Kong and back
monthly, conveying the mails which have left England in the middle of
the month, and proceeding in like manner to Point de Galle, and thence
by Madras to Calcutta, and by Penang to Singapore and Hong Kong.
5th Line.—A line from Singapore to Sydney and back. Every alternate
month a steamer to leave Singapore on the arrival of the outward packet
at that port with the mails which have left England in the middle of
every alternate month, and to leave Sydney so as to meet at Singapore
the homeward packet, which will arrive there from China after the
lapse of two months. These steamers are to touch both ways at Batavia,
Swan River (or King George’s Sound, as may hereafter be determined),
Adelaide, and Port Phillip.
[344] See “Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates,” May 28th, 1852.
[345] The _Himalaya_ was 340 feet in length, 44½ feet width of beam,
and her engines were 2050 indicated horse-power. She was 3540 tons
O.M., and cost 132,000_l._ complete for sea. The company at the same
time built the _Candia_, of 1898 tons, at a cost of 69,200_l._ and
the _Nubia_, _Pera_, and _Colombo_, each of 1840 tons O.M.; also the
_Simla_ and _Bengal_, of 2417 tons and 2232 tons respectively, as well
as the _Valetta_ and _Victis_. The whole cost of these vessels, added
to their existing fleet, and destined to carry out the double service
of a semi-monthly communication with the East, involved an outlay of
650,000_l._
[346] Shipping was so scarce that the average price of coal delivered
at the different stations of the company rose from 36_s._ 8_d._ to
60_s._ 3_d._ per ton, and was with great difficulty obtained at even
these exorbitant rates.
[347] During the Crimean War this company had eleven of their steamers,
measuring 18,000 tons, engaged in the transport service, which conveyed
during the continuation of hostilities, 1800 officers, 60,000 men, and
15,000 horses.
[348] About this time, the unfortunate mutiny in India naturally
creating great anxiety that every possible means should be used to
increase our communication with that country, combined with the rapidly
increasing commercial intercourse, led to a modification and at the
same time to the increase of the existing services. Hence, in November
1857, arrangements under the contract of 1854 were made to extend the
line between Bombay and Aden to Suez and to establish, in connection
with it, a fortnightly service between Marseilles and Alexandria; the
arrivals and departures of the Bombay mails being made to alternate
with those of the Calcutta line, instead of being coincident with them
as had previously been the case, so as to afford a weekly communication
with India which has ever since been kept up. It was at the same time
considered desirable to increase the voyages of the Marseilles packets,
which were now running with the Calcutta and China mails, from Malta to
Alexandria as their port of destination, for transit to Suez by means
of the railway, which had by this time been opened across the isthmus.
[349] See “Hansard” for March, 1859, and the _Times_ of the 25th of
that month.
[350] See report of proceedings, Court of Queen’s Bench.
[351] In the case of the Cunard line the average has been calculated
upon a parliamentary return extending from January 1862 to April 1866,
as is also the return of the average speed of the vessels of the
Peninsular and Oriental Company during the same period.
CUNARD COMPANY.
_Liverpool and Boston Line._
Knots. Fath.
109 voyages outwards, average speed 9 2
112 voyages homewards, average speed 10 2
_Liverpool and New York Line._
109 voyages outwards, average speed 11 1
113 voyages homewards, average speed 11 7
PENINSULAR AND ORIENTAL STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY.
Knots. Fath.
On the Australian Line 9 7
On the Calcutta and Suez Line 9 7
On the Bombay and Suez Line 9 2
On the Southampton and Alexandria and Marseilles
and Alexandria Lines 10 0
The following averages are taken respectively from the reports
published in 1865 of the British Royal Mail (West India) Company, and
of the French Messageries Maritimes Company:
Knots. Fath.
Between Southampton and West Indies 10 5
Between Southampton and Brazils 9 5
The French Company give an average speed on their line to India of 9
knots 4 fathoms per hour for the years 1863 and 1864, but add “it is,
for a general average, rather high.”
[352] See Appendix No. 23, p. 639.
[353] The details of the different rates per mile which have hitherto
been paid to the Peninsular and Oriental Company were as follows:—
_s._ _d._
The first India and China contract (1844 to 1853)
was paid for at 17 1 per mile.
The second (1853 to 1866) was first taken at 6 2 per mile.
and was afterwards reduced to 5 5 per mile.
The first portion of the Bombay service, namely,
between Bombay and Aden, distance 79,872
miles per annum, was taken in 1854, at 6 2 per mile.
The extension of this service to Suez increased
the distance to 142,656 miles per annum, and
reduced the rate to 4 2 per mile.
And the subsequent arrangements in the Mediterranean
brought the payment for the complete
fortnightly line, now existing, down to the
average of 2 7 per mile.
The Australian service between Ceylon and Sydney
was paid for, from 1861 to 1865, at 21 5 per mile.
The same service was taken in 1865, at 19 0 per mile.
And the directors offered to double it for a sum
that would reduce the rate to 13 6 per mile.
India, China and Japan contract 6 7 per mile.
Australian, Ceylon to Melbourne 14 4 per mile.
[354] The following return gives the annual receipts and expenditure
of the Company from 1856 to 1874 inclusive, by which it will be seen
that, while the revenue was less in 1874 than in 1860, the expenditure
had increased, and that there was a deficiency in 1867 of no less than
177,047_l._
-----+------------+--------------+-----------
| Revenue. | Expenditure. | Balance.
-----+------------+--------------+-----------
| £ | £ | £
1856 | 1,691,589 | 1,494,435 | 197,153
1857 | 1,877,420 | 1,645,748 | 231,772
1858 | 1,884,493 | 1,714,374 | 170,119
1859 | 2,176,590 | 2,006,363 | 170,227
1860 | 2,350,361 | 2,247,328 | 103,033
1861 | 2,288,289 | 2,131,432 | 156,857
1862 | 2,223,969 | 2,064,865 | 159,104
1863 | 2,296,305 | 2,060,849 | 235,454
1864 | 2,346,203 | 2,120,554 | 225,649
1865 | 2,136,076 | 1,976,999 | 159,077
1866 | 2,243,076 | 2,094,493 | 148,583
1867 | 2,084,393 | 2,261,440 | 177,047[355]
1868 | 2,485,965 | 2,313,817 | 172,148
1869 | 2,559,627 | 2,390,518 | 169,109
1870 | 2,317,016 | 2,174,672 | 142,344
1871 | 2,092,656 | 1,923,881 | 168,775
1872 | 2,122,756 | 1,953,551 | 169,205
1873 | 2,173,371 | 2,007,761 | 165,610
1874 | 2,186,663 | 2,047,899 | 138,764
+------------+--------------+
| 41,546,818 | 38,630,909 |
-----+------------+--------------+-----------
[355] Deficiency.
[356] About 90,000 tons of coal are usually kept in stock at their
different coaling stations, distributed somewhat in the following
proportions:
Tons.
Southampton 2,000
Malta 5,000
Alexandria and Suez 6,000
Aden 20,900
Bombay 8,000
Point de Galle 12,000
Madras 500
Calcutta 4,000
Singapore 8,000
Hong-Kong 10,000
Shanghai 6,000
Yokohama 2,200
King George’s Sound 4,000
Sydney 1,200
[357] The dimensions of the _Khedive_ are as follows:—Length, 380
feet; breadth, 42 feet; depth, 36 feet. Her builders’ measurement is
3329 tons; her gross register, 3742 tons; and her net register, 2092
tons. So far as regards capacity, she is fitted so as to accommodate
with the space and style now required for Eastern travel (how different
to the space allotted to passengers in the ships of Nearchus!) 164
first-class and 53 second-class passengers. Besides this, she has
store-rooms of various kinds to hold 380 tons, rooms for mails and
baggage to contain 142 tons; bunkers to hold 846 tons of coals
calculated at 45 cubic feet per ton, and holds which can receive 2003
tons of cargo of 50 feet to the ton.
Her _average_ speed is 10 knots per hour on a consumption of 32 tons
of coal per diem, but “she can be driven at a much higher speed with a
proportionate increase of expenditure of fuel.” The contract specifies
a speed to be guaranteed on trial of not less than 13 ½ knots an hour
on the measured mile, with dead weight on board of coals or cargo to
the extent of 1500 tons.
Her engines are compound, “vertical direct acting,” of 600 nominal
horse-power, with 4 feet 6 inches length of stroke. The diameter of
her cylinders is 69 and 96 inches respectively, and that of her screw,
which consists of four blades, 17 feet 6 inches; its pitch being 22
feet 6 inches and 24 feet. She has 4 boilers and 16 furnaces. The
fire-bar surface is 320 square feet, and the heating and condensing
surface 11,720, and 6059 square feet respectively. The loaded pressure
is 55 pounds on her boilers.
[358]
Europeans. Natives.
{ Commander 1
{ Officers 5
Navigating { Surgeon 1
{ Carpenter 1
{ Boatswain 1
{ Quartermasters 3
{ Carpenter’s mate (Chinese) 1
{ Gig’s crew (do.) 6
{ Seamen (Lascars) 43
{ Assistants of different sorts 6
Engines { Engineers 6
{ Coal trimmers, &c. 49
{ Purser 1
{ Clerk, Head Steward, Cook, Baker, }
{ Butcher, Pantryman, Storekeeper, } 8
Cabins { and Barman }
{ Stewards 22
{ Stewardesses 2
{ Purser’s department 21
-- --
Total Europeans 51 Natives 126
[359] For fleet of Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company,
Jan. 1875, see Appendix No. 23, pp. 639-40.
CHAPTER XI.
Changes produced by the opening of the Suez Canal—Sailing
fruit-clippers—Introduction of steamers into the Mediterranean
trade, 1840—Establishment of various steam lines, 1850—That of
Messrs. Frederick Leyland and Co., &c.—Their fleets—Messageries
Maritimes Company—Its origin and management—First
contract for the conveyance of the oversea French mails,
1851—Extension of contracts, 1854-56—Brazil line, 1857—Vast
extent of its fleet—Largest vessels—Trade viâ the Suez
Canal—Presumed advantage of auxiliary engines—Not borne out
by the results—Conveyance of the Australian mails—Peculiar
conditions of contracts—Failure of the service—Stringent
penalties—Australian steam services—Mr. Alfred Holt’s line
of steamers to China—Its success—Messrs. Gellatly, Hankey,
and Company—Messrs. Green and Company—Messrs. Rathbone
Brothers—Messrs. George Smith and Sons—Letter from Mr. George
Smith—Messrs. Smiths’ ships and their voyages to and from
India—Changes in the mode of conducting commerce with India and
China—Number of vessels through Suez Canal since its opening, and
their nationality.
[Sidenote: Changes produced by the opening of the Suez Canal.]
Not the least interesting of the many changes in maritime commerce
brought about by the opening of the Suez Canal, has been the
restoration, though as yet to a limited extent, of the earliest
commercial intercourse recorded in history between the Mediterranean
and the once far East, and of the trade the merchants of the Levant and
the Adriatic carried on with India by the agency of the Muhammedans in
Egypt during the Middle Ages.
Directed to a different route by the re-discovery of the passage to
the Eastern world by way of the Cape of Good Hope, this ever envied
trade has, since the close of the fifteenth century, been conducted
as we have seen from the Atlantic and northern ports of Europe, and
during more recent years, from those of Great Britain. Consequently,
the vessels belonging to the Mediterranean ports have been obliged to
seek other and much less remunerative employment, which, since the
decline of the great Italian Republics, has dwindled into comparative
insignificance. Nor has the Mediterranean trade itself occupied a
position of any importance during the last three centuries, indeed
it has only revived since steam-vessels have given new life to those
inland seas, which, throughout all time, have been so familiar to
the mariner. It has been, hence, confined chiefly to that carried on
between the inhabitants of the different countries bordering on the
shores of the Mediterranean and Black Seas, who, having little or no
encouragement to export their surplus produce to other nations, never
thought of employing vessels of a superior class to those which for
ages had sufficed for their coasting trades.
[Sidenote: Sailing fruit-clippers.]
The first measure, which gave renewed existence to the maritime
commerce of these peoples, was the repeal of the British corn laws,
encouraging, as this did to an extent hitherto unknown, the importation
of wheat from the ever luxuriant lands of Egypt, and from the numerous
corn-growing countries bordering the shores of the Black Sea, the
Marmora, and the steppes of Russia. Soon afterwards, the repeal of
the duties on the fruits grown in such rich abundance in the islands
of the Levant and along the coasts of the Mediterranean, gave new
life to another branch of trade which had long lain dormant, and,
while the former afforded greatly increased employment to the ships
of all nations, the latter encouraged the production of vessels so
superior to those previously in use, as, in speed, to outrival the once
celebrated Baltimore clippers.
[Sidenote: Introduction of steamers into the Mediterranean trade, 1840.]
Curiously enough, however, the introduction of these fast fruit
schooners, seldom exceeding in size 200 tons register, retarded the
introduction of steamers to the trade of the Mediterranean till a much
later period than would otherwise have been the case, considering
their early and rapid extension in all other branches of commerce.
Growers and merchants engaged in the fruit trade, as was the case with
the shippers of tea from China at a still later period, were under
the impression that steam would injure the flavour of their fruits;
hence, for a time, declined to ship their produce in vessels propelled
otherwise than by sails. They likewise preferred to export their
raisins, figs, and currants in small quantities, convinced that they
would thus obtain higher prices and a readier market, and consequently
engaged vessels of 80 and 100 tons rather than those of greater
dimensions. Many of my readers cannot fail to recollect the fleets
of beautiful small Mediterranean clippers which were wont to crowd
our docks at certain seasons of the year. Moreover, as these vessels
made their voyages with extraordinary rapidity and regularity, the
inducements to employ vessels propelled by steam were less urgent than
in most other branches of trade.
[Sidenote: Establishment of various steam lines, 1850.]
Although steamers occasionally visited the Mediterranean, it was not
till 1840 that any attempt was made to establish a line or succession
of voyages in the trade with Great Britain, much less among the islands
of the Levant, and along the shores of the Black Sea and the Adriatic.
Among the earliest attempts may be mentioned that of the _Rattler_, of
350 tons and 50 horse-power, despatched by Messrs. Vivian, Jones, and
Chapple, of Liverpool. About 1840 the Peninsular Company also extended
the operations of their steamers to Malta and Alexandria, and soon
afterwards to Corfu, the Levant, and Constantinople. In 1845 Mr. A.
Mongredian, of Liverpool, attempted to establish a regular line between
that port and the Levant with the steamers _Osmanli_ and _Levantine_,
but being unsuccessful, they were transferred in 1849 to Messrs.
McKean, McLarty, and Lamont, who employed them between Liverpool,
Marseilles, Genoa, Leghorn, Naples, Messina, Palermo, and the Adriatic,
where they appear to have yielded more remunerative returns.
[Sidenote: That of Messrs. Frederick Leyland and Co., &c.]
From about this period, steam in those trades, as it has done
everywhere else, made its way when fairly established; and, afterwards,
increased with extraordinary rapidity, affording greatly improved
facilities for the development of ancient branches of maritime
commerce, which had long lain dormant, as well as for the creation
of others hitherto unknown. Various associations and companies were
now formed to carry on the trade of those inland seas by means of
steam-vessels from both London and Liverpool. Among the most important
belonging to Great Britain, were the lines of steamers sent forth
by Messrs. Bibby, Sons, and Company, now Messrs. Frederick Leyland
and Company, and by Messrs. Burns and McIver; while the Austrian
Lloyd’s Steam Navigation Company trading from Trieste, and the
French Messageries Maritimes from Marseilles, were the chief foreign
undertakings established to carry on the coasting trade in which the
protective character of the Austrian and French navigation laws
conferred on them exclusive privileges.
[Illustration: S. S. “BAVARIAN.”]
[Sidenote: Their fleets.]
In the trade from Liverpool, including the Peninsular service,
Messrs. Frederick Leyland and Company alone now employ no less
than twenty-three large iron steamers, seventeen of them varying
in size from 1500 to 3000 tons gross register, bound direct to the
Mediterranean ports. These are all propelled by the screw, and are
surprising specimens of purely cargo steamers. In this respect,
considering their capacity in proportion to their admeasurement,
tonnage, and small current expenses, these vessels are, perhaps,
unsurpassed by any steam-ships afloat. For instance, the _Bavarian_,
of which an illustration may be seen on the previous page, takes 4800
tons of cargo exclusive of her coal bunkers, though of only 3052 tons
gross register, and is navigated by the comparatively small number of
forty-eight persons all told.[360] The steamers of this firm and of
Messrs. Burns and McIver, as well as those of various other companies,
now run in regular lines from London, Liverpool, and elsewhere, to the
numerous ports of the Mediterranean, Levant, Adriatic, and Black Sea.
Gibbon, in his brilliant description of the Decline and Fall of the
Roman Empire, speaks of the terror of its Senators lest the supply of
corn should fail in meeting the requirements of the once all-powerful
capital, and create, as usual, violent tumults among the people; but,
with the fleet alone of Messrs. Leyland and Company at their command,
all apprehension on this score would have vanished, as either of the
three vessels I have mentioned could, with the present appliances for
loading and discharge, have transported from Egypt to Rome in the
course of twelve months, no less than 500,000 quarters, or 4,000,000
bushels, while the whole fleet could have taken 10,000,000 quarters,
had Egypt been able to produce within the year that quantity of grain.
Such are a few of the changes the application of the motive power of
steam has produced within our own time.
[Sidenote: Messageries Maritimes Company.]
But much the largest maritime undertaking engaged in the trade of the
Mediterranean and elsewhere, is that of the Messageries Maritimes,
recently the Messageries Imperiales, monopolizing, as this does,
nearly the whole of the steam tonnage of France. Indeed, apart from
the vessels owned by this association, and one or two other highly
subsidized shipping companies in that country, the French may be said
to have no steamers.[361] Their protective policy, combined with the
depressing influence which large grants of public money to special
undertakings must ever exercise on individual energy, has effectually
overpowered all private enterprise of this description. It may be true,
as has been frequently alleged, that the French people have no natural
aptitude for maritime pursuits, and that their children, who are not
employed in their vineyards, or in the manufacture of those special
articles for which they have long been celebrated, take naturally
to the fife and the drum with somewhat of the same avidity that the
boys of England seek enjoyment in navigation; but, certain it is
that, owing to restrictive laws and enormous subsidies to favoured
individuals, the French people, generally, have never yet been allowed
the opportunity of showing what they could do in the peaceful paths of
maritime commerce.
[Sidenote: Its origin and management.]
The Messageries Maritimes, their greatest shipping undertaking,
though exceedingly well managed, is after all, a pure creation of the
Government—one, too, nursed with the greatest care from its infancy,
and maintained throughout by large grants from the public purse, which
were materially increased on the accession of the third Napoleon to the
Throne of France, who, throughout the whole of his reign, displayed
a marked anxiety to promote and encourage maritime undertakings.
Previously, indeed, to 1851, the company had been chiefly engaged as
carriers by land, and was under contract for the conveyance of the
mails throughout a considerable portion of France.
[Sidenote: First contract for the conveyance of the oversea French
mails, 1851.]
In July of that year this company entered upon its first oversea
contract with Government for the conveyance of the French Mails to
Italy, the Levant, Greece, Egypt, and Syria, and in 1852 spontaneously
added to their services the principal ports of Greece and Salonica.[362]
[Sidenote: Extension of contracts, 1854-56.]
In 1854, the managers of the Messageries Company concluded arrangements
with the Minister of War for the transport of all troops and military
stores between France and Algeria, besides the conveyance of the
mails, and, having very materially increased their fleet owing to the
requirements of the Crimean campaign, they were, in 1855, enabled to
open between Marseilles, Civita Vecchia, and Naples, a direct weekly
line of steamers, independently of the postal service, principally
intended to meet the requirements necessary to be maintained between
the War Department and the army of occupation at Rome.
[Sidenote: Brazil line, 1857.]
When the Crimean War happily came to a close, and the military lines
of steamers to the Black Sea were no longer necessary, the directors,
in 1856, employed their disposable vessels in increasing the frequency
of services to Algeria, and in establishing a postal service between
Marseilles and the ports of the Danube and along the east coast of
the Black Sea, for which they obtained a contract from Government in
1857. In that year they, likewise, entered into arrangements for the
conveyance of the French mails between Bordeaux, the Brazils, and La
Plata.
[Sidenote: Vast extent of its fleet.]
The fleet of the Messageries Company had now reached fifty-four
ships of 80,875 tons, and 15,240 horse-power, afloat or in course of
construction, evidently more than they could profitably employ: they,
therefore, applied for and obtained from their Government, in 1861, a
contract for the conveyance of the French mails to India and China,
requiring for this purpose only an additional steamer. But the increase
of trade to the East, brought about in no small degree by the increased
facilities and by an anxious desire on the part of the company to
meet the wants of the travellers of all nations, very soon enabled
the directors to double the services of their steamers to the East.
In 1871 their fleet measuring 137,334 tons, of 20,885 horse-power,
performed services on the India and China routes of 230,135 French
leagues; on the Mediterranean and Black Sea, 153,478; and, on the
Brazilian, 50,004: in all, 423,607 leagues annually, independently of
various extra services. Since then their Brazilian and La Plata lines
have been doubled, and now (1875) the company employs 175,000 tons of
steam-ships, besides chartering numerous sailing-vessels.[363]
When first the Messageries Company became carriers by sea, they had
nearly all their vessels built in England, but they now possess large
establishments of their own, where they construct screw-steamers of
iron, rivalling in most respects, and very much resembling those of,
the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, of which I have
furnished an illustration.
[Sidenote: Largest vessels.]
Their two largest ships employed in the trade with India and China are
the _Anadyr_ and the _Irawaddy_, of 3671 and 3471 tons gross register
respectively, and each of 600 nominal horse-power. The other sixteen
vessels in that service range from 3017 tons and 500 horse-power, down
to 1035 tons and 280 horse-power. Their six steamers employed on the
Brazilian and River Plate line are from 3417 tons and 600 horse-power,
to 2115 tons and 400 horse-power, while the thirty-five engaged in
the Mediterranean and Black Sea services range from 2524 tons and 500
horse-power to 430 tons and 160 horse-power. They have also three
steamers of 1500 tons and 250 horse-power engines on the compound
principle trading between London and Marseilles, and four magnificent
screw-steamers in course of construction, each of 4000 tons and 600
horse-power.
The trade of this large Company now embraces all the chief ports of
the Mediterranean and Black Sea, and those of India, China, Java, and
Japan, as well as of Algeria and the Brazils; and the excellent manner
in which the different lines are conducted and navigated by Frenchmen
is the best answer that can be given to the old saying that the French
never were and never will be a maritime people. That they do not equal
the English on the ocean is likely enough, nevertheless that they
would become much greater as shipowners than they now are there can
be little doubt, were they governed by wise laws and left to depend
upon their own energy and resources rather than on government grants.
Throughout all time “protective” laws seem to have retarded the natural
development of commerce, as they have been too frequently the ruin of
nations as well as of individuals.
[Sidenote: Trade viâ the Suez Canal.]
The ships of the Messageries Maritimes Company, like those of their
great competitors for the trade of the East, the Peninsular and
Oriental Company, now pass through the Suez Canal. But, besides these
two companies, the former of which receives nearly double the amount
of subsidy of the other,[364] there are now numerous other steam lines
following the same route, all bidding for the ever envied trade of the
once mysterious Cathay; and these have increased enormously since the
waters of the Red Sea, passing through the desert, mingled with those
of the Mediterranean.
Hitherto steam to India by the way of the Cape of Good Hope has proved
an unprofitable undertaking: nor, with all the improvements tending
towards increased economy on the one hand, and greater capacity for
cargo on the other, does it offer many more inducements now, than it
did when the _Enterprize_ first found her way to Calcutta.
Nor, indeed, has any better success attended steam navigation
undertakings to the distant colonies of Australia. From the time that
the trade with India was thrown open, sailing-ships thither, as well
as to Australia, have been the chief means of transport, and these
still carry by far the largest proportion of the goods traffic, though
first-class passengers prefer the more expeditious overland routes: but
steam-boats, even though largely subsidized, especially to India by
the way of the Cape, have found it impossible to compete successfully
with the sailing-ships of Messrs. Green of Blackwall, Messrs. T. and W.
Smith, and other private shipowners long engaged in the trade.
The two steam companies, formed nearly simultaneously about the year
1852 to run viâ the Cape of Good Hope: one, the General Screw Steam
Company to Calcutta and intermediate Indian ports; and the other, the
Australian Royal Mail Steam Company, though each received large grants
of public money, alike proved signal failures. Nor can the failure of
these undertakings be altogether attributed to mismanagement. A good
deal of it was, doubtless, due to the description of vessels employed,
and to their unsuitability for the services undertaken, but still
more to the fact that neither auxiliary steam-ships, nor full-powered
steamers, have hitherto been profitable on distant voyages.
[Sidenote: Presumed advantage of auxiliary engines.]
About that period many shipowners were under the impression that
full-rigged ships, such as the _Massachusetts_, with an auxiliary
steam-engine, to be used only in calms and light winds, would in
themselves combine all the best qualities of a sailing-ship and
steamer: nor was this surprising. On the voyage, for instance, from
England to India a sailing-vessel during the favourable trade winds and
monsoons, which can always be depended upon for a considerable part
of the voyage, would, under sail alone, make almost as much progress
as a steamer; while, in the calms, which are invariably met with for
from five to ten degrees on each side of the Equator, and, where
sailing-vessels frequently are long detained, the small steam-engine
could be applied to great advantage; as also on entering as well as
on leaving harbours. Indeed, so strongly impressed was I with the
value of auxiliary steam-vessels for distant voyages, that, in 1856, I
undertook, even after these failures, to convey in seven such steamers,
three-fourths of which belonged to myself, the monthly mails, within a
given time, between London, the Cape of Good Hope, Mauritius, Ceylon,
Madras, and Calcutta.
The vessels thus employed were built entirely of iron, and ship-rigged,
as may be seen by the following illustration of one of them; more
fully so, in proportion to their size, than those of the General Screw
Company, and, as their engines were only from 80 to 120 horse-power
nominal, on a tonnage of from 800 to 1500 tons gross, they were purely
auxiliary vessels. Under sail their speed was from 10 to 11 knots, with
a favourable wind, and, under steam alone, from 6 to 7 knots an hour in
light breezes or calms, but, in adverse winds, they made little or no
progress, a fact arising in great measure from their small steam-power
and from the resistance their heavy spars presented to the winds:
consequently, though they met with no accidents, and were more to be
depended upon, as to time, than ordinary sailing-vessels, they could
not maintain the regularity essential for the mail service; so, after
twelve months’ experience, I relinquished the undertaking.
[Illustration: AUXILIARY STEAMER TO CAPE AND INDIA.]
Since that time no mails have been carried in any description of
steam-vessels from England to ports eastward of the Cape of Good Hope
by the Atlantic sea route, except it may be to Natal, and occasionally
to the Mauritius, or to Zanzibar on the east coast of Africa.
[Sidenote: Not borne out by the results.]
In full powered steamers the space required for coals and machinery
on these distant oversea voyages, over and above their first cost and
current expenses, prevent them carrying cargo sufficient to afford
remunerative returns, and their owners are not recouped by the extra
rates of freight obtainable for the time saved on the voyages. In the
case of the auxiliary steamers the results are the same, arising in a
great measure from similar causes, for, though such vessels had greater
space for cargo, yet the advantage thus gained is counterbalanced by
the maintenance of a staff of engineers and firemen who, during the
greater portion of the voyage are unemployed, and by the fact already
stated that, though the auxiliary engine is valuable in calms, it has
not power enough to be of service against strong and adverse winds.
As a rule, therefore, it is in most cases more profitable to employ
either a steamer with only light spars and a few fore and aft sails, or
a full-rigged vessel which depends entirely upon her sails. Anything
between the two has not hitherto been found to answer so well, though
there may be exceptions depending on the trade in which such vessels
are employed.
[Sidenote: Conveyance of the Australian mails.]
From the time of the opening of the overland route, all the mails to
the East Indies have passed through Egypt, except those despatched by
the two lines of auxiliary steamers round the Cape of Good Hope, to
which I have just referred; and even by these vessels few or no letters
were sent except to the intermediate ports; but, for many years after
the overland route had been opened, the British mails to Australia and
New Zealand were conveyed almost entirely by sailing-vessels, except
during the two or three years the Australian Royal Mail Steam Packet
Company carried on its operations. When the steamers of that company
were unable any longer to continue the service, the Peninsular and
Oriental Company undertook, as we have seen, the conveyance of these,
the more important mails by way of Ceylon; but, when the service was
relinquished for a time, as some of their steamers were required as
transports for the Crimean War, the conveyance of the whole of the
Australian mails, greatly to the annoyance and discomfort of the
colonists, reverted again to sailing-vessels.
To obviate as far as practicable the delay and uncertainty in the time
of the delivery of the letters, Government, instead of contracting
for their conveyance by any one line of sailing-vessels, considered
it expedient to throw the contracts open to the competition of all
suitable vessels engaged in the trade with Australia. But this, too,
was merely an experiment, and one which proved alike unsatisfactory to
the public and Government. It was tried, however, for a year or more
and, as it so happened, the trial was made just between the time when
the steamers of the General Screw Company and those of the Australian
Royal Mail Company had ceased to run, and of my own experiment with the
Cape and Indian mail services.
[Sidenote: Peculiar conditions of contracts.]
To insure speed and, if possible, regularity, the Post Office
authorities stipulated that from the amount to be paid to each ship
thus employed, there should be deducted a penalty of 20_l._ for every
day’s delay in the delivery of the letters beyond the time specified in
the tender. Instead of leaving the sum, as had hitherto been and now
is the invariable practice, to be named by the person who tendered,
Government fixed it at 1000_l._ for the passage, accepting the offer
which contained the fewest number of days for the performance of the
service. Thus, a shipowner who could reckon with tolerable certainty,
that his vessel would make the voyage to Australia in 100 days, which
most first-class ships could do, might safely tender to do it in, say,
seventy-seven days, because after the deduction of the 20_l._ per day
for the twenty-three days in excess, he would have a balance of 540_l._
to receive (besides other advantages which “mail-packets” derived), and
as that sum would further cover an additional excess of twenty-seven
days, or say altogether fifty days beyond the time contracted for, the
speculation was an exceedingly safe one to a sailing-ship, even if the
tender were made for the shortest time in which the fastest steamer had
been known to accomplish the voyage. Hence this system of tender proved
altogether illusory as regarded the securing a rapid communication. The
very first ship, the _Stratford_, despatched under the new arrangement,
occupied on her outward passage a period of thirty-seven days in excess
of the time stipulated!
[Sidenote: Failure of the service.]
[Sidenote: Stringent penalties.]
If the colonists had been loud in their previous complaints they were
still more so now; but the Treasury and Post Office authorities,
considering that they had done their best to secure speed, were, for
a time, immovable and indisposed to make any further experiments.
Steamers and sailing-vessels on so distant a voyage having alike
failed, Government thought there was now a good answer to all
complaints, and, consequently, treated them with indifference. They
argued, referring to the then recent failure of the Australian Royal
Mail Packet Company, that, as the steam-vessels between England and
Sydney had varied from seventy-six to 120 days, while the length of
passage by fast sailing-ships between England and Port Phillip was
from eighty-two to 110 days, the difference was not really of any
serious disadvantage. Nevertheless, while Government refused increased
grants for the conveyance of the mails, it adopted and enforced much
more rigorous penalties[365] against owners of sailing-ships to ensure
a more speedy performance of the mail services. This fresh experiment,
however, from its extreme rigour also failed, and some time elapsed
before the colonists obtained what they had long demanded, a direct
and _independent_ line of steam-vessels by way of Suez and Ceylon;
and that, as we have seen, proved in the hands of the European and
Australian Steam Navigation Company the most signal failure of all the
experiments which had been made.
[Sidenote: Australian steam services. ]
Among the instances where anything like success has attended steam
voyages direct to Australia, may be mentioned the services performed by
Messrs. Gibbs, Bright, and Company, in their steamship _Great Britain_
from Liverpool, and in the steamers belonging to Messrs. Money Wigram
and Sons, of London, which now trade to these colonies. Occasionally
other steamers are despatched to Australia and also to New Zealand, and
recently a company was formed—the Australian Direct Steam Navigation
Company—with the intention of maintaining a regular monthly line from
London to Melbourne, calling at Falmouth, the projectors anticipating
the performances of the passage in “under forty-five days.” But though
this undertaking failed at the outset, and experience can alone test
the realization of the sanguine expectations of its promoters, it
may be said in favour of their views, that the difficulties previous
pioneers of steam-vessels on long oversea voyages have had to encounter
are being rapidly surmounted by the new compound engines, where the
consumption of coals required to attain a given speed is not one-half
of what it was twenty years ago.
[Sidenote: Mr. Alfred Holt’s line of steamers to China.]
So far as regards the trade with India and China by way of the Cape of
Good Hope, the steam-line started by Mr. Alfred Holt of Liverpool in
1865 is the only one within my recollection, which has hitherto proved
successful. Though the steamers of this line now proceed to China by
the Suez Canal, their performances were remarkable when engaged in
the former route. Starting from Liverpool they _never stopped till
they reached Mauritius, a distance of 8500 miles_, being under steam
the whole way, a feat hitherto considered impossible; thence they
proceeded to Penang, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Shanghai, and, though
unaided by any government grants, performed these distant voyages with
extraordinary regularity.
In forwarding the particulars of his first three vessels, Mr. Holt[366]
remarks: “Since the Suez Canal was opened I have found that the square
sails of the _Agamemnon_, _Ajax_, and _Achilles_[367] were of little
use, and, therefore, I have converted these three ships into what the
Americans call ‘barquentine rig’ (i.e. no square yards on mainmast),
and have constructed all my new ships with pole-masts only.”
[Sidenote: Its success.]
These three vessels are each 2270 tons gross or 1550 net register, with
engines of 300 nominal horse-power.[368] Messrs. Holt have also eleven
other steamers, similar in size and power, at present engaged in trade
with the East, and three more in course of construction, besides a
tug-steamer of 350 tons to attend on them in their passage through the
Suez Canal. They carry goods right through to Penang, Singapore, Hong
Kong, and Shanghai, calling at Galle and Amoy, or other ports in the
Eastern seas when required; and one is struck with the low rates at
which goods are now conveyed[369] to India and China compared with the
freights charged by the sailing-vessels of the old East India Company,
together with the wonderful regularity and expedition[370] with which
they are delivered.
Although the fleet of this spirited undertaking is known as the Ocean
Steam-ship Company, it is neither a public nor a limited company, the
vessels being owned in shares under the old law by a few individuals
(like many others of a similar description in this country), but
chiefly by the managing owners, Mr. Alfred and his brother Mr. Philip
H. Holt, whose thorough business habits have materially promoted the
success of the company.
[Sidenote: Messrs. Gellatly, Hankey, and Company.]
It would be impossible to notice within the limits of this work the
different lines of steam-ships now trading to the East by way of the
Suez Canal. Among the most conspicuous, however, may be mentioned
those of Messrs. Gellatly, Hankey, Sewell, and Company, London, which,
from the order and regularity of their despatch, bid fair to rival the
subsidized companies. Many of the vessels under their agency belong
to Messrs. Thomas Wilson, Sons, and Company, of Hull, long known as
large owners of vessels trading from that place to various ports in the
Baltic, but who, since the opening of the Suez Canal, have established
a line of very fine steam-ships from London to India.
Their _Hindoo_ for instance, of 3257 tons gross register, has capacity
for about 3500 tons weight, “including coals in bunkers, and from 80
to 120 passengers,” for whom accommodation is provided “amidships, a
method which has apparently given great satisfaction to those who have
been travellers by them.”
Another line of steamers under the management of the same firm run in
connection with the British India Steam Navigation Company, taking
passengers and mails to Columbia, Madras, and Calcutta, with branch
steamers from Aden to Zanzibar on the one hand, and to Karáchí and the
Persian Gulf on the other.
Foreign nations have likewise taken advantage of the opening of the
Suez Canal to run lines of steam-ships to the East; and, besides the
French Messageries Maritimes, there are the Austrian Lloyd’s Company of
Trieste, and the Rubbotino Company of Genoa, respectively supported by
the Austrian and Italian Governments, each running a fortnightly line
to Bombay during the four best passenger months of the year, namely,
from January to April, and despatching their ships every month during
the remaining portion of the year.
[Sidenote: Messrs. Green and Company.]
There is also the “Ducal” line from London, running in connection with
the old and celebrated sailing-vessels belonging to Messrs. Green,
of Blackwall, which is still maintained; and the “Queen” and “City”
lines of steamers direct to Calcutta,[371] as well as various other
similar private undertakings. Nor is Liverpool behind the capital in
its race by way of the Suez Canal, for that far-famed trade which the
Phœnicians, Romans, Venetians, Portuguese, Dutch, and English alike, in
turn, have envied and expended untold millions to maintain.
[Sidenote: Messrs. Rathbone Brothers.]
As a specimen of the ordinary first-class merchant steamers now trading
between Liverpool and Calcutta, I may instance one of the vessels
belonging to Messrs. Rathbone Brothers, of that place. She is of 2610
tons gross and 1682 tons net register, and has capacity for 2200 tons
of cargo, besides 450 tons of coal.[372] She is rigged merely with
poles (a mode of rig now becoming very general in all steam-vessels),
on which, with the exception of one fore-square sail, a few fore and
aft sails alone can be set. The owners remark the “best passages of our
ships as yet are as follows:—Liverpool to Calcutta (viâ Gibraltar)
to Saugar (near Calcutta), thirty-one days, including all stoppages;
Calcutta to London (viâ Galle and of course Suez Canal) to _Nore_
light-ship, thirty-four days thirteen hours, steaming time on the whole
voyage (exclusive of Suez Canal and stoppages) sixty-one days twelve
hours. The best homeward passage hitherto made by any of our ships,
landing cargo at Colombo and Port Said, occupied thirty-three days
seventeen hours, inclusive of all stoppages.”
From these and previous figures, my readers will more fully understand
the progress that has been made in our ordinary trading communications
with India and China, since the days of the East India Company, and
ascertain what has been gained, since then in the speed, capacity, and
current expenses of our merchant-ships.
[Sidenote: Messrs. George Smith and Sons.]
In further illustration of the progress made in our own time I cannot
do better than furnish my readers with a letter I received (January
1875) from Mr. George Smith, of Glasgow.
Indeed, this letter contains in itself a history of the rise of the
merchant-vessels of Great Britain during the period to which Mr. Smith
refers, and marks the different stages of progress and the means
whereby we have been enabled not merely to maintain, but to surpass,
in maritime supremacy, all nations. It, likewise, illustrates how
individuals (for the case of Messrs. George Smith and Sons is no
exception to the general rule, though their operations may be on a
more extensive scale than those of most other shipowners) have, since
they have been relieved from the trammels of protection and been left
to exercise as they deem best their own genius and industry, more
than kept pace with other branches of commerce by the improvement and
increase of their ships.
“Our first purchase,” Mr. Smith states in his letter, “was a small
colonial barque in 1840, which was followed shortly thereafter by the
purchase of a barque of 346 tons, in course of construction, and a ship
of 500 tons then nearly in frame, both being of the ten years class.
“The first ship which we contracted for and had built to our own
specification was the _Majestic_, launched in 1846. Our second, the
_City of Glasgow_, was built at Kelvinhaugh, and launched in 1848.
While she was on the stocks, the bounds of the municipality of Glasgow
as a city had been extended to the junction of the Kelvin and Clyde
westwards, and thus embraced the shipyard in which she was built. Our
late Mr. R. Smith was then a magistrate of the city of Glasgow, and
this being the first ship built in the extended royalty, we reckoned
no name could be more appropriate, and, as other ships came into
existence, we still kept the _City_,[373] and merely added a name in
future designations.
“When we commenced the trade, we employed the regular brokers for
loading outwards, and had every reason to be satisfied with the
attention paid to our interests by the gentleman who did our business,
but the practice, which then obtained here, of laying a ship on the
berth and allowing her to lie till nearly loaded before naming the
sailing date, and that date, when named, frequently not adhered to, we
felt very annoying, not only as keeping back shipments but as sending
goods to Liverpool which should have gone from this direct. Our rule
was to have our dates of sailing definitely fixed. Only one firm,
however, in the trade held the same view with ourselves, and feeling
the annoyance, they and we resolved on starting a monthly line to
Calcutta. Together we had not so many vessels as were required to keep
up the monthly conveyance, but we resolved to add to our tonnage and
make up for the then deficiency by chartering so far as necessary.
We had made a special stipulation that _our_ broker should still act
for _our_ ships, and also for those that it might fall to our lot to
charter. When this proposal was submitted to him we were surprised to
find that he declined very decidedly to have anything to do with the
arrangement—that his lengthened experience in the trade satisfied him
that it would prove a failure—and he was therefore not prepared to
allow his name to be associated with it; but he lived long enough to
find he had been mistaken.
[Sidenote: Messrs. Smiths’ ships, and their voyages to and from India.]
“Having experienced the difficulty arising from brokers acting to-day
for a party who adhered to their date, and to-morrow for another who
would not let their vessels go until filled, we at once decided on
taking charge of the loading ourselves, which we still continue.
After this we went on steadily increasing our fleet of sailing-ships
until those afloat numbered thirty-five. Our last contract for a
sailing-vessel was in September 1868.
“For several years, our operations were confined to Calcutta, but, in
1863, at the solicitation of several friends, we started a monthly
line to Bombay, having in the meantime increased our sailings very
materially to Calcutta as well. The following statement shows the
number of voyages completed to each port in 1871, and is a fair
estimate of the work of the previous eight years. We had, in fact, a
virtual monopoly of the trade, gained by strict punctuality—a high
class of ships and moderate charges, ever studying to arrange rates
that our friends could not go past us to do better.[374]
“Our first _iron_ ship was launched in 1856; our wooden ones were
disposed of as opportunity offered, and, in 1868, only one of these
remained, which we have since sold.
“We commenced steam in 1871, by contracting for four boats of 2250 tons
gross, and about 1700 tons register, having compound engines of 200
horse-power, working up to 1000. The boilers have been a serious source
of annoyance to us from the first. When all goes right, we get 9 to 9½
knots out of them, and make the passage (viâ Suez Canal) in thirty-nine
days including stoppages; but the irregularity attending their working
prevents us from giving you a list of their passages as desired;
latterly, we have added two of a larger class and more power. These
have been making the passages regularly in thirty-one to thirty-three
days, and we anticipate equal results from other four now in course of
construction.”
[Sidenote: Changes in the mode of conducting commerce with India and
China.]
In the brief account thus given we have a condensed history of the
changes and progress of the merchant ships of Great Britain during the
last thirty-five years, so far as regards our trade with India. Step by
step, they rise from wood to iron and increase in size from 350 to 1500
tons as sailing-ships, while these in turn are now being to a large
extent supplanted by iron screw-steamers of from 2000 to 3000 tons
and upwards. In most respects, the sailing-ships of Messrs. Smith and
Son very much resemble the finest of the modern free-trade Indiamen,
whereof a drawing has been furnished;[375] and their steam-ships are
not unlike the more recent vessels of which various illustrations
are given in these pages; their _City of Oxford_, for instance, of
2220 tons gross, carries 2500 tons of Calcutta cargo, besides 750
tons of coals in her bunkers; and she is navigated by forty-nine
persons, comprising commander, surgeon, two officers, twenty seamen,
seventeen men in the engineer’s department, and eight persons otherwise
employed.[376]
Such are the vessels now carrying on the more valuable portion of our
trade with India, through that great maritime highway, which the genius
and industry of De Lesseps has so recently opened to our vast commerce
with the far East, three-fourths of which, however, is still conducted
by the way of the Cape of Good Hope.[377]
[Sidenote: Number of vessels through Suez Canal since its opening, and
their nationality.]
In the Appendix to this volume[378] will be found an account of the
vessels which have annually passed through the Suez Canal since that
great undertaking was opened, specifying the different nations to which
they belong. Some interesting and instructive facts may be gathered
from these returns, especially with regard to the remarkably rapid
growth of the traffic, increasing as this has done from 486 ships of
435,908 tons in 1870, to 1264 ships of 2,423,672 tons in 1874. Nor is
it less worthy of notice that more than three-fourths of the whole of
this tonnage belongs to Great Britain.[379]
Figures such as these may in some measure set at rest the fear long
entertained that the opening of this canal would be prejudicial, in
any material extent, to the interests of England, by diverting the
course of commerce with India to its former European centres, and
restoring the commercial greatness of Constantinople, Venice, Leghorn,
Marseilles, Cadiz, and Lisbon. For, though these places cannot fail to
be benefited to a greater or less extent, and they have already been
so, by the re-opening of the ancient route, their superior position to
that of the ports of Great Britain will be of little avail, till they
adopt the policy pursued with so much success by this country. If they
desire to secure that share of the commerce of India, to which from
their natural position they may fairly consider themselves entitled,
they must open their ports to the ships of all nations, sweep away
their differential and protective duties, establish docks and bonding
warehouses, and offer to the traders of the world equal facilities for
obtaining whatever description of its assorted produce they may require
for their varied wants. The mere fact of being a few days nearer
Calcutta or Bombay will otherwise avail them little, distance in itself
being now of comparatively small importance to what it was before
steam-ships traversed the ocean.
FOOTNOTES:
[360] Besides the _Bavarian_, Messrs. Leyland employ in this trade the
_Bohemian_ and _Bulgarian_, similar in all respects, each of which is
400 feet in length, 37 feet wide, and 28 feet in depth, with engines of
350 nominal horse-power. They have also in the same trade other three
sister ships, the _Iberian_, _Illyrian_, and _Istrian_, each 2890 tons
gross register and carrying 4400 tons of cargo, dimensions 390 ⨉ 37 ⨉
29.
[361] The whole steam tonnage of France amounted in 1873 to 185,165
tons net register.
[362] The Greeks, strange to say, considering their shrewdness and keen
business habits, stopped the coasting trade of foreigners, thereby
doing incalculable injury to their own commerce, not having capital
themselves to supply the deficiency or perform adequately the service.
[363] My readers will perceive that this company apparently owns
within 10,000 tons of the whole of the steam-shipping of France, but
this arises from the gross tonnage being given in the former returns,
and only the net registered tons in the latter. Nevertheless, the
Messageries Maritimes is now the largest steam-ship company in the
world. A list of the steamers of this company, and how employed, will
be found in the Appendix No. 24, p. 641.
[364] The Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company for a
service of 1,171,092 miles, receives 430,000_l._, while the Messageries
Maritimes is paid at present (June 1875) 399,838_l._ for a service of
631,514 miles.
[365] An amusing incident occurred at this time to myself not
altogether unworthy of notice. When the discussions were going on
about the irregularity of the sailing-ship mails, the late Mr. James
Wilson, then Secretary to the Treasury, one day asked me how these
irregularities could best be remedied. “Oh,” I said, half in joke
and half in earnest, “adopt the horse-shoe nail mode of levying your
penalties: inflict, as you do now, 20_l._ for the first day’s delay,
but increase it to 40_l._ for the second, 80_l._ for the third, 160_l._
for the fourth, 320_l._ for the fifth, 640_l._ for the sixth, and no
pay at all for the conveyance of the mails if the ships are seven days
beyond the time stipulated in their contract, and you will be no longer
troubled with tenders professing to deliver your letters in less time
than the passage, under ordinary circumstances, can be accomplished.”
A scheme of penalties, somewhat after this fashion, was immediately
afterwards adopted; but I had unwittingly prepared a stick to break my
own back. The second contract for the Cape and India mails, to which
I have referred in the text, was one of the earliest to which this
new principle was applied, and I could not of course object to the
stringency of this new fashioned penalty clause, as it was of my own
creation. Nor did the Government hesitate to put it in force when my
ships were behind time, as also in the case of the unfortunate European
and Australian Steam Navigation Company. But though the new principle
promptly and effectually put a stop to all tenders of the class of
which Mr. Wilson complained, it was much too rigorous to be continued
and was abolished.
[366] Mr. Alfred Holt is the third son of my old friend, the late Mr.
George Holt of Liverpool. He is an engineer by profession, having
served his apprenticeship to Mr. Edward Woods, the engineer of the
Liverpool and Manchester Railway. Afterwards, he became the inspecting
engineer of my steamers and of those of others; and when he himself, in
time, became the owner of steam-ships, in partnership with his brother,
Mr. Philip H. Holt, he showed what knowledge, practically gained, could
achieve, and, thoroughly beating his old employers by the production
of the vessels to which I refer, he now ranks high, and deservedly
high, among the great shipowners of his native town. Though he has no
claim to be considered the inventor of the compound engine, for that is
almost as old, in one form or another, as the present century; he was
the first to apply the principle on _long oversea voyages_. The ships
of the Pacific Company had, it is true, that description of engine
in use before him, but only in those of their ships engaged in the
coasting trade of the Pacific. Mr. Holt’s steamers were consequently
the first to show the advantages to be derived from the compound
principle on such voyages as those from England to Mauritius, a
distance of 8500 miles without stopping, then a marvellous performance;
and it was, only, from the time he thus _practically_ demonstrated the
great value of such engines, that they have been generally adopted.
[367] The _Achilles_ left Foochow, July 16th, 1869, and arrived at
London round the Cape of Good Hope, September 16th, having been
fifty-eight days nine hours under steam—13,552 miles.
[368] Their dimensions are as follows: 309 feet in length, 38½ feet
beam, and 28½ depth of hold to upper or spar deck.
[369] Freight for ordinary packages of measurement goods:
To Suez, Penang, and Singapore, 50_s._ per ton, with 5 per cent.
primage.
To Hong Kong and Shanghai, 50_s._ per ton, with 5 per cent. primage.
Through bills of lading are signed for—
Yokohama, Foo-choo-Foo, and Amoy, @ 90_s._
Manilla, 90_s._, Batavia, 80_s._, Samarang, 84_s._, Sourabaya, 85_s._,
Padang and Macassar, 92_s._, Chinkiang, 77_s._ 6_d._, Kiukiang, 80_s._,
Hankow, 85_s._, Nagasaki, 75_s._, and Hiogo, 80_s._ per ton.
All without primage. No bill of lading signed for less than 2_l._ 2_s._
Freight payable on delivery of bills of lading.
[370] The _Agamemnon_ left Hankow, 604 miles above Shanghai, on May
25th, 1873, and arrived (by way of the Suez Canal and Gibraltar) at
London, July 12th. The mails, which left Shanghai June 1st, arrived in
London _viâ_ Brindisi, July 21st, and the passage of the _Agamemnon_ is
not an exceptional one.
[371] The _Queen Margaret_, 3138 tons register, belonging to the Queen
Steam Shipping Company (Limited), has just (Sept. 1875) made the
passage from London to Calcutta under 30 days, including 40 hours’
detention in the Suez Canal (or, 28 days and 8 hours), which, as yet,
is, I believe, the fastest passage on record.
[372] The dimensions of this vessel are 350 feet in length, 37 feet
in breadth, and 27 feet 5 inches extreme depth of hold. She has three
decks, her engines are 300 nominal horse-power, and her crew consists
of fifty persons all told.
[373] All the ships of Messrs. George Smith and Sons are named after
different cities.
[374]
CALCUTTA.
We despatched to Calcutta viâ the Cape of Good Hope, in 1871,
twenty-four sailing ships:
Shortest passage out 79 days.
Shortest passage home 93 days.
Shortest round voyage, Pilot to Pilot 6 months and 9 days.
Average passage out 95 days.
Average passage home 108 days.
Five of the voyages were completed under seven months. A few of these
vessels loaded out from London. The others were all from the Clyde.
BOMBAY.
We despatched to Bombay, in 1871, sixteen sailing-ships completing the
same number of voyages:
Shortest passage out 83 days.
Shortest passage home 95 days.
Average passage out 106 days.
Average passage home 117 days.
Shortest voyage 7 months and 18 days.
[375] See vol. ii. p. 493.
[376] The dimensions of this ship are 325 feet in length, 37 feet beam,
and 27½ feet extreme depth. The cylinders of her engines (compound) are
39 and 68 inches respectively in diameter and the length of stroke 42
inches.
[377] I may here state that the bulkiest articles of Indian produce,
consisting as they do of cotton, jute, rice, sugar, saltpetre, cutch,
and such like, as also woods of various kinds, cannot, as a rule,
afford to pay the rates necessary to remunerate a steam-ship for their
conveyance; hence, such articles will most likely continue to be sent
to Europe by the Cape route, except when in special demand. That such
will most probably continue to be the case is apparent from the fact
that, though, during the last two years, the competition between
the steamers passing through the Suez Canal has been so great as to
reduce their rates of freight almost to a level with those paid to
sailing-vessels, the latter still continue to secure full cargoes.
This may, in some measure, be accounted for by many, indeed, the bulk
of those cargoes being sold “to arrive:” hence, merchants frequently
prefer sailing-vessels, especially for the shipment of jute, rice,
and other articles of comparatively low value, as thus they have a
longer time at their disposal, and thus frequently avoid the expense of
warehousing, to which, in the case of goods by steamers, they are often
obliged to resort, from the short time allowed in all contracts, for
the discharge of such vessels.
[378] Appendix No. 25, p. 643.
[379] In calling attention to the results of the construction of the
Suez Canal, the _Friend of India_ says:—“No more striking illustration
could be adduced of the revolution effected by the Suez Canal than that
suggested by a comparison of the shipping advertisements of to-day with
those of twenty years ago. Then we hardly ever heard of steamers in
these regions, except in connection with the stately proceedings and
crushing fares of the Peninsular and Oriental Company. Then, it was a
splendid run to get home in one of Green or Smith’s clippers in ninety
days. Now, an ordinary cargo steamer, carrying a few passengers, lands
us comfortably at Liverpool on the thirtieth day. First we have the
time-honoured Peninsular and Oriental Company, next the Messageries
Maritimes de France, then the Italian Steam Navigation Company. Not
inferior to the last-mentioned is the Austro-Hungarian Lloyd’s Steam
Navigation Company, then comes the Anchor line, followed by the
Wilson line, the Star line, &c. Besides the regular steamers of these
and similar ‘lines,’ we have our choice of a large and constantly
increasing number of private vessels—less regular, perhaps, in their
departures and arrivals, but many of them not a whit inferior in size,
accommodation, speed, and careful management. Another note-worthy
feature in these noble steam fleets is the nature of the vessels
generally composing them. It will be found that nearly the whole of
the steamers are new, many of them having been built expressly for the
Indian passenger trade; and all are superbly fitted out with every
convenience and luxury. Twenty years ago, a vessel of 1500 tons ranked
as the largest of our Indian sailing-vessels. Now, 3000 tons is a very
common figure to see appended to the name of a passenger steamer, and
4000 tons not uncommon, while some are considerably above that tonnage.
In point of speed, several steam vessels owned by new companies are
equal, if not superior, to the Peninsular and Oriental. Recently we
read of a steamer leaving Suez two days after the Peninsular and
Oriental, and arriving at Bombay one day earlier. The lowering of fares
is another item worthy of consideration. A first-class passage can now
be obtained, exclusive of beer and wine, for 450 rupees. The result
of all this is a greatly increased and rapidly increasing flight to
England from India; and an annual accession of visitors and tourists
from England, the Continent, and America, to India. Even our hill
stations are losing their summer visitors—drained off by the absorbing
Suez Canal. And many parents, who formerly sent their children to
hill schools, are now taking advantage of cheap passages to give them
the benefit of home education. As fares are reduced still more this
homeward tendency will further increase. Why should not 30_l._ pay as
well for thirty days without beer and wines as 60_l._ used to pay for
ninety days with beer and wines? We believe that first-class passages
will eventually be procurable for 30_l._, and that now is the time for
shipping companies to look the future in the face.”
CHAPTER XII.
First application of steam-vessels on the rivers and coasts
of India, 1825—S.S. _Diana_—S.S. _Burhampooter_ and
_Hooghly_, 1828—Arrival in India of Lord William Bentinck as
Governor-General—His efforts to promote Steam Navigation—Voyages
of the S.S. _Hooghly_ up the Ganges 1828, 1829, and 1830—Other
vessels recommended to be built—Two of them of Iron—Steam
Companies formed, 1845—Steam Committee, 1857, and rapid
progress of steam-vessels from this date—Improved troop steamer
for the Lower Indus—Sea-going steamers of India—S.S. _John
Bright_—British India Steam Navigation Company established,
1857—Its fleet, and extent of its operations—Origin of this
company—Its early difficulties, and rapid extension—Number of
ships lost—Effect of the opening of the Suez Canal on the trade
of this Company—The _Holy Ship_, _note_—Netherlands Steam
Navigation Company, 1866—Its fleet, and how employed—Irrawaddy
Flotilla and Burmese Steam Navigation Company, 1865—Services
of this Company—Extent of inland trade—Fleet of the
Company—Interior trade of China—The Yang-tse-Kiang—Its source
and extent—Opened to trade, 1860—First steam-ship direct from
Hankow to England, 1863—Passage of the _Robert Lowe_ and her
cargo—Number of steamers employed on the Yang-tse 1864 and in
1875—S.S. _Hankow_—Her power and capacity, _note_—Chinese Steam
Navigation Company—Proposed Imperial fleet of steamers—Increase
of trade with China—The resources of the interior—Mode of
conducting business—“Hongs” or Guilds—Chinese Bankers—River and
coasting trade of China—Japanese line of steamers—How employed.
[Sidenote: First application of steam-vessels on the rivers and coasts
of India, 1825.]
[Sidenote: S.S. _Diana_.]
Encouraged by the success of the _Enterprize_, the Bengal Government
soon afterwards purchased another steamer, the _Diana_,[380] which
had been originally sent from England to China on speculation, and
despatched her to Amarapura, 500 miles up the River Irrawaddy, with
their then Resident in Burmah, Mr. Crawfurd, and his suite. As,
however, she sailed on her voyage in the month of September, when that
river is at its fullest, her progress not exceeding 30 miles each
day, caused considerable disappointment to the Indian Government. On
her return in the following month of December, she was again equally
unfortunate, for, by that time, the river had fallen so low, that,
partly owing to her draught of water, which was seldom less than 6
feet, and, partly, to the intricacy of a navigation, then imperfectly
known, her passage down the Irrawaddy was nearly as tedious.
[Sidenote: The S.S. _Burhampooter_ and _Hooghly_, 1828.]
As, however, this voyage was accomplished without accident, the value
of steamers for inland navigation was sufficiently shown to induce the
Indian Government to consider the desirability of constructing such
vessels for this special service; hence, an urgent application was soon
afterwards made to the Court of Directors for permission to build two
vessels, one for general service, and the other for the navigation of
the Burhampooter, on which, from the strength of the stream and the
prevalence of easterly winds, it was found that sailing-vessels could
not be depended on, for the supply of the large number of troops it was
necessary to maintain in the valley of Assam for some years after the
conquest of that country. So much delay, however, occurred before the
Court gave its consent, that these vessels were not ready for actual
service till the spring of 1828.[381]
[Sidenote: Arrival in India of Lord William Bentinck as
Governor-General.]
Lord William Bentinck, who arrived on July 3rd of that year at
Calcutta, as Governor-General of India, at once saw the immense
advantage to be derived from the employment of steam-vessels, and their
great value and economy in the rapid transport of troops and treasure,
as well into the interior as along the coasts of India.[382]
[Sidenote: His efforts to promote Steam Navigation.]
No arguments were required to convince him that the new steamer
despatched for service on the Burhampooter river, whence she had been
named, was of almost incalculable value, the troops in Assam being
not merely supplied more rapidly with the necessary stores, but their
number materially reduced, the use of steamers enabling the different
armies of India to be practically interchangeable with almost every
portion of the East. Consequently, Lord William Bentinck appointed a
committee to inquire into the description of steamers best suited for
the navigation of the rivers of India, and ordered the _Hooghly_, the
second vessel built, to explore the River Ganges as far as Allahabad, a
distance of 798 miles above Calcutta.
[Sidenote: Voyages of the S.S. _Hooghly_ up the Ganges, 1828, 1829, and
1830.]
The voyages of this vessel, under the command of Captain Johnston,
previously of the _Enterprize_, were perfectly successful, and clearly
showed that the Ganges could, for the whole of this distance, be
advantageously navigated by steamers. Although the _Hooghly_, from not
having the indispensable qualities of lightness of draught, capacity,
and speed, was not well adapted for so long and intricate a river
voyage, she made the passage to Allahabad at the average speed of
3½ miles an hour, against a current of from 3 to 4 miles, returning
thence at the rate of from 7 to even 12 miles an hour according to the
strength of the stream. Further experimental trips in the spring of
1829, and in January 1830, were equally successful.
[Sidenote: Other vessels recommended to be built.]
[Sidenote: Two of them of iron.]
In accordance with the recommendations of the Committee, two steamers
of about 270 tons burden, with engines of 70 to 80 horse-power,
were constructed as tug-boats for use on the river _Hooghly_; and
orders were sent to England for two others, better fitted than the
_Burhampooter_ and _Hooghly_, for the navigation of the Ganges or
other rivers. These vessels had, indeed, but partially met the wants of
the service, and, as it had been now discovered that vessels of less
draught could be made of iron, the Court of Directors were recommended
to order their construction of that material. They were to draw
not more than 2 feet of water; one to be a steam-tug, the other an
accommodation boat. Both were to be of the same dimensions, 120 feet
long, by 22 feet in width, and very flat-bottomed, which, indeed, was
absolutely necessary to secure the stipulated lightness of draught.
They were to have two engines of 30 horse-power each, with vibrating
cylinders, on account of their greater lightness. However, till the
result of the experiment made with these boats was known, the Directors
suspended their decision as to the building of more steam-vessels for
the navigation of the Upper Ganges and Burhampooter, as also for that
of the Indus and other rivers of the Punjâb.
In these early efforts, we have an approximation to what has since
been achieved on the rivers of India, presenting, as they did, a field
for inland navigation, realizable by steam-vessels with far more
advantageous results than could be obtained by the ordinary craft
of the country. The success of the first effort, in securing a high
power of engines as compared with the draught of water, led to the
construction, for similar purposes, of various other iron boats by Mr.
Laird, Messrs. Miller and Ravenshill, and Messrs. Forrester.
[Sidenote: Steam companies formed, 1845.]
[Sidenote: Steam committee of 1857, and rapid progress of steam vessels
from this date.]
Private enterprise, however, in this instance lagged behind
Government, as it was not till 1845 that any companies were formed
to conduct the trade of that country by means of steam-vessels. The
Tug Company of the Hooghly was among the first of these commercial
undertakings. The Bombay Steam Navigation Company followed, with four
paddle-wheel steamers, three of wood and one of iron, to trade between
Bombay and Ceylon on the one hand, and Karáchi on the other. But,
however great the advantages derivable from the use of steamers on the
rivers and coasts of India, their development, even then, was slow
compared with that of Great Britain or the United States. Although
starting early, and with energy, in the use of this new power, the
people and Government alike seem to have slumbered for nearly thirty
years, and to have been dreaming over its advantages: indeed, it was
not till 1857, when another committee had been appointed, and strongly
recommended the more extended use of steamers, that any very marked
progress was made. From that period, however, it has been very great,
I may say remarkable, more especially since the opening of the Suez
Canal. Since then, those ancient routes of maritime commerce which,
in the dawn of history, were first tracked by the Chaldeans and
Phœnicians, and, afterwards brought into a system by the greatest
and wisest of monarchs, have been, after the lapse of more than two
thousand years, re-opened by steam-ships, and this, too, almost along
the same course, which Solomon, in connection with Hiram, King of Tyre,
first established.
[Sidenote: Improved troop steamer for the Lower Indus.]
Among the finest vessels ordered by the Government of India after the
report of the committee had been considered, may be mentioned one
designed by Mr. T. B. Winter, C.E., for the navigation of the Lower
Indus. As she is very much the type of all the steamers now employed
for the conveyance of troops and passengers on the rivers of the East,
I may state that her design somewhat resembles (though with special
fittings adapted for the climate of India) the steamer, now employed
on the River Hudson, already described,[383] having accommodation for
800 soldiers and their officers in two tiers of cabins, one above the
other, built on the main-deck, and surrounded by verandahs and covered
with awnings as a protection from the scorching rays of the sun. The
sides of these deck-houses, consist almost entirely of Venetian blinds;
their frames and those of the berths being made of galvanized iron,
having between the frames sheets of perforated zinc so as to admit
a free circulation of air, while the whole range of these houses is
divided into five separate compartments so as to permit the separation
of the troops in case of sickness. By an ingenious contrivance an
abundant supply of fresh air is drawn from the paddle-boxes in order
that it may contain moisture, and is supplied to all the cabins by
means of fans, worked by the steam-engines of the ship in such a manner
that a sufficient quantity is provided to completely change, every
half-hour, the air in each troop-room. The draught of water of this
commodious and beautifully arranged vessel, aided by another ingenious
contrivance in connection with her rudder, does not exceed, when
laden, 2 feet, while her speed on her trial trip averaged close upon 12
statute miles the hour.[384]
[Sidenote: Sea-going steamers of India.]
[Sidenote: S.S. _John Bright_.]
Among the earliest commercial Ocean Steamers employed on the Eastern
seas, were, as noticed previously, those of the Peninsular and Oriental
Steam Navigation Company. For some years, at first, these vessels held
almost a monopoly of the passenger and of the most valuable portion of
the goods traffic. Competitors, however, soon arose, especially in the
opium trade, which had, hitherto, been conducted by sailing clippers
celebrated for their speed, many of which vessels, owned by English
merchants resident in Hong Kong, had proved a large source of profit to
their too enterprising owners. But, now, the whole of this trade, as
well as a considerable portion of the traffic between Calcutta, Bombay
and the Chinese ports, is carried on by very fast steamers, owned
partly by English and partly by native merchants. A few years ago, one
of the finest of these vessels was the property, entirely, of Parsees
resident at Bombay, and, as she bore the honoured name of the _John
Bright_,[385] it is to be hoped that opium constituted but a small
portion of her cargo. I mention her, however, as a fair specimen of the
steamers thus employed, both as regards speed and dimensions, and, for
the information of my readers, I may state that she was built of iron
by Messrs. C. J. Mare and Co., of Millwall, in 1862, and that she made
the voyage from Gravesend (calling at the Cape of Good Hope) to Bombay
in fifty-eight days, and thence to Hong Kong, with a full cargo, and
against the monsoons, in twenty-two days.[386]
[Sidenote: British India Steam Navigation Company established, 1857.]
[Sidenote: Its fleet and extent of its operations.]
Much the most important commercial maritime company, however, now
engaged in the coasting trade of the East, is the British India Steam
Navigation Company (Limited), which commenced business in 1857 under
the title of the Calcutta and Burmah Steam Navigation Company, with a
line of steamers between Calcutta, Akyab, Rangoon, and Moulmein. In
1862, the name of the company was changed to its present designation,
its operations having been extended along the coasts of India and
Persia, so as to embrace, at the present time, a continuous coasting
service between Singapore on the one hand, and the island of Zanzibar
on the other, with an extension from the latter port to the French
settlements of Mayotte, Nossi Bé, and Majunga. The fleet of this
company now consists of forty-two iron screw-steamers, varying in size
from 350 to 2600 tons gross register, their aggregate gross tonnage
being about 57,000, employed on thirteen different lines,[387] showing
the vast extent of commercial intercourse now maintained by the vessels
of this one undertaking alone.
One is amazed at the rapidity of the growth of steam-ship companies
throughout the world, within the last quarter of this century. It seems
only the other day when Mr. Mackinnon of Glasgow, a merchant engaged
in the trade with India and the founder and managing director, as well
as one of the chief owners of this large fleet of steamers, mentioned
to the author his intention of running a couple of small steam-vessels
between Calcutta and Burmah. Nor was he then very sanguine of success.
With the shrewdness, however, characteristic of his countrymen, he
saw, beyond the difficulties he would have to encounter (which men of
his determination and perseverance alone know how to overcome), an
important and valuable opening for the employment of steamers, and
having overcome every obstacle, his hopes have been more than realized;
indeed, much sooner and to a far larger extent, than he or any one else
could at the first have anticipated.
[Sidenote: Origin of this company.]
This now important undertaking had its origin in an advertisement by
the East India Company in 1855, for steam-vessels to convey the mails
between Calcutta and Burmah, a service hitherto conducted by their own
vessels, the _Enterprize_ being the first to do so. Mr. Mackinnon and
his partners, having agreed to accept the contract, despatched for its
fulfilment the _Baltic_ and _Cape of Good Hope_, but these vessels,
being unsuitable for the purpose, and having made long and expensive
passages to India, their enterprising owners would have suffered a
heavy loss by them, had they not, soon after their arrival, been
engaged for the transport of troops at the outbreak of the mutiny.
[Sidenote: Its early difficulties, and rapid extension.]
Nor was the new company more fortunate with the first vessels they
built on the Clyde for this trade. One of these, the _Calcutta_, of
900 tons, was totally wrecked off the coast of Wicklow soon after
she left Greenock, while another, the _Cape of Good Hope_, was sunk
in the Hooghly, having come into collision with one of the steamers
of the Peninsular and Oriental Company. The losses thus sustained
were, however, vigorously overcome; other new vessels were supplied
and, in 1862, a fresh contract was entered into with the Government
of India, including conditions for the transport of troops and stores
at a mileage rate, and for the conveyance of the mails, not merely
every fortnight, between Calcutta, Akyab, Rangoon, and Moulmein, but
also once a month, _viâ_ the two latter ports, to Singapore; a similar
service to Chittagong and Akyab; another to the Andaman Islands in the
Bay of Bengal; a fortnightly one between Bombay and Karáchí; another,
once a month, between Madras and Rangoon; and a further service, every
six weeks, to various ports in the Persian Gulf, along nearly the same
route Nearchus had followed three centuries before the Christian era.
Improving prospects now accompanied this spirited undertaking at every
stage of its rapid progress. Steam here, as it has done everywhere
else, opened up fresh branches of commerce, developed others, or gave
new life to occupations for ages dormant, conferring, by its civilizing
influence, immense benefits on the dense and often poverty-stricken and
oppressed inhabitants of lands at once envied and far-famed.
[Sidenote: Number of ships lost.]
As might have been anticipated, the British India Steam Navigation
Company met with various losses, in the development of so extensive
a range of services; but, though the wreck of their _Burmah_ on the
Madras coast, the loss of the _Bussorah_ on her voyage to India, the
stranding of the _Coringa_ in the harbour of Muskát, and the foundering
of the _Persia_ on her voyage from Rangoon to Calcutta, during one of
these fearful cyclones which, periodically, sweep the Indian Ocean,
crippled for a time the resources and retarded the operations of the
company, they did not quell the spirit or even damp the energies of
Mr. Mackinnon and his co-directors, who thus, at last, achieved that
success which industry and perseverance, in the right direction, must
ever command.
[Sidenote: Effect of the opening of the Suez Canal on the trade of this
company.]
The opening of the Suez Canal, in 1869, gave renewed vigour to the
company. While producing an entire revolution in the shipping trade
of India, it afforded facilities for its economical conduct, hitherto
unknown. Of these the directors at once took advantage, and their
steamer _India_, requiring new boilers, was the first vessel to arrive
in London with a cargo of Indian produce, through the new maritime
highway, which the genius and energy of Lesseps had constructed across
the barren isthmus of the land of the Pharaohs.
In 1873, the company entered into still more extended arrangements with
the Government of India, by doubling some of its existing lines, and,
in 1872, the directors arranged with the Home Government to organize a
mail service every four weeks, between Aden and Zanzibar, on the east
coast of Africa, so that the distance annually traversed under its
contracts, now exceeds 1,100,000 miles.
In tracing the different lines used by the vessels of this company, it
is interesting, as I have just mentioned, to note that their courses,
especially those along the Arabian shore of the Red Sea, the eastern
coast of Africa, the coasts of Hadramaut and Persia as far as Bussorah,
and by way of Beluchistan and the western shores of India as far as
Ceylon, are, as nearly as possible, the same as those which, from the
scanty records of the past, I have endeavoured to trace on a map, so as
to show the ancient routes of commerce pursued by native vessels long
before the Christian era.[388]
[Sidenote: Netherlands Steam Navigation Company, 1866.]
[Sidenote: Its fleet, and how employed.]
In 1863, the Dutch East India Government offered a liberal subsidy
for the conveyance of their mails in the East, but, as one of the
conditions of the contract required the steamers so engaged to be
under the Dutch flag, the requisite capital would not have been
raised had not the shareholders of the British India Steam Navigation
Company, individually, supplied the greater portion of it for this new
undertaking. In 1866, the Netherlands India Steam Navigation Company
commenced operations, having for its directors many of the members of
the board of the English Company, but, in all other respects, distinct.
These two companies, however, work together in perfect harmony, and
now carry on between them a large portion of the maritime commerce of
the East. The Netherlands Company owns twenty-three steamers of an
aggregate of 20,000 tons, interchanging their traffic at Singapore,
with the vessels of the British India Company, and extending their
operations from that place and Batavia to the principal ports in the
Dutch East Indies, and, again, thence, through Torres Straits to
Brisbane, Sydney, and Melbourne, thus affording another line of steam
communication to our Australian colonies, along the whole of the shores
of which regular steam communication is now maintained.
But perhaps the most extraordinary, and certainly not the least
interesting, inland route for steamers (the Ganges and the Indus not
excepted), is the navigation of the River Irrawaddy through Burmah
to the confines of China, a route greatly developed of recent years.
It was, as I have stated, on this river, that the second steamer, the
_Diana_, belonging to the East India Company, made her first voyage,
and, from that time until 1865, the Government of India maintained,
with more or less regularity, communication by their own steamers
between Calcutta, Rangoon, and Upper Burmah, as far as Mandalay, a city
said to contain at one time half a million of inhabitants, and situated
on the banks of the Irrawaddy, about 500 miles from the sea.
[Sidenote: Irrawaddy Flotilla and Burmese Steam Navigation Company,
1865.]
Finding, as Governments often do in such undertakings, that the
receipts from this line of communication fell very far short of the
disbursements, they, in 1865, made a contract with the Irrawaddy
Flotilla and Burmese Steam Navigation Company, constituted under the
Limited Liability Act “for the conveyance of H.M.’s troops, stores,
and mails to the different stations of British Burmah on the River
Irrawaddy, and for carrying on general traffic between the towns
and villages on that river from Rangoon to Mandalay, the capital of
Upper Burmah,”[389] at the same time making over to the company four
Government steamers and three flats previously engaged in the river
service. But these vessels, having been found altogether unsuited for
the successful carrying on of the company’s operations, were soon
replaced by other and new vessels, better fitted for the efficient and
economical performance of this service.
[Sidenote: Services of this Company.]
When the original contract with the Indian Government expired in 1868,
the company entered into a fresh agreement, whereby its services were
extended from Mandalay to Bhamo, 1000 miles by river from Rangoon,
and within 50 miles of the Chinese frontier. Bhamo, for centuries
celebrated among the inland commercial cities of the East, was, at one
time, the depôt of an enormous import and export trade to and from
western China, conveyed by trains of caravans between that city and
Yunnan, the south-western province of the Celestial Empire. But, though
long-continued rebellions and civil wars have almost extirpated this
important traffic, it has of recent years received a fresh impulse by
the introduction of improved steam communication on the Irrawaddy,
and by the efforts of English merchants, supported by Government,
to explore the country and to re-open vast fields of wealth long
comparatively unproductive.[390]
[Sidenote: Extent of inland trade.]
Previously to the establishment of steam communication, the trade of
the Irrawaddy, studded along its whole length with towns and villages,
with a dense, active, and industrious population, was conducted by
native craft of various kinds, whose number has been estimated at
25,000. But steam-vessels, by their speed, regularity, and safety, are
gradually superseding these native craft, which, in time, will become,
as they have done everywhere else, simply auxiliaries to that great
power which, in so large a measure, now regulates the commerce of the
world.
[Sidenote: Fleet of the company.]
The fleet of the Irrawaddy Company now consists (1st of January, 1875)
of fifteen steamers and twenty-five “flats,” the whole built expressly
for this trade. The steamers, resembling in many respects (though they
are inferior in size) those employed on the Ganges and the Indus, are
about 250 feet in length, with 32 feet beam, and only 8½ feet depth
of hold. They are built of iron, and their draught of water, with 100
tons of fuel on board, is 3 feet 9 inches. They do not take any cargo,
but only passengers, having accommodation for thirty first-class, and
from 250 to 300 steerage or native passengers; but each steamer tows a
couple of flats or barges fastened on either side. The steamers have
engines of 250 nominal horse-power, and can attain a speed of fourteen
knots an hour, in still water, and without anything in tow. Though
their hold is only 8½ feet in depth, the houses and awning-deck rise
to about 18 feet above their hull. The largest of the barges is 195
feet in length, with a beam of 25 feet, and can each carry 300 tons
measurement of cargo, weighing about 160 tons, with a draught of not
more than 3 feet of water.
There is now a weekly steam service between Rangoon and Mandalay, while
every month a steamer ascends to Bhamo, which, though now a wretched
place of not more than 75,000 inhabitants, may yet be restored by means
of steamers to something approaching its former importance. As the
delta of the Irrawaddy embraces an area of 94,000 square miles, with
an alluvial and fertile soil throughout, producing in great abundance
rice, cotton, cutch, teak, minerals, and mineral oils, and, as not
more than 3000 miles of this rich district of country is as yet under
cultivation, it presents an enormous field for the development of
maritime and other branches of commerce.
[Sidenote: Interior trade of China.]
But, as we proceed further to the East, we find still larger and richer
fields gradually being opened out by means of steamers. In China there
are vast regions with teeming millions of industrious people who could
never have been reached by the traders of Europe and America without
the intervention of steam; countries hitherto unknown, yet exhibiting
a high state of civilization. With all the necessaries and many of the
luxuries of life, their inhabitants have little or no knowledge of
any other country beyond their own: favoured by a superior soil and
excellent climate, they have, however, become rich by their own genius
and unwearied industry: not one out of every hundred thousand of those
in the interior having ever seen the ocean, and knowing as little about
England as the people of ancient India knew about Greece, Babylonia,
and Macedonia when Alexander made his celebrated march across the
Panjâb. Nor, indeed, are the descriptions of its civilization, wealth,
and refinement, as given to us by occasional travellers who have
penetrated the interior, wholly unlike those Arrian has handed down to
posterity, with reference to the great cities of ancient India.
[Sidenote: The Yang-tse-Kiang.]
If my readers will take the trouble to glance over a map of China
and trace the windings of the great Yang-tse-Kiang to its outlet near
Shanghai, they will see the extent of territory watered by this mighty
stream, together with its various navigable branches. Rising in the
southern slope of north-eastern Tibet, and, thence, flowing to the
south-east, the Yang-tse at first passes through a country of lofty
snow-covered mountains, the drainage of which in warm weather largely
increases the volume of its waters, and produces at the same time,
in great measure, the vast floods which, in the months of July and
August, inundate the widely extending valleys near Hankow and the lower
portions of the river.[391]
[Sidenote: Its source and extent.]
From these mountain ranges, the Yang-tse winds its way through
others of less magnitude and through fertile plains for 800 miles
to Chong-kin-foo, forming the northern boundary of the provinces of
Yunnan and Kweichow, and greatly increased in its volume by various
tributary streams, two of which are of considerable magnitude. Through
the province of Szchuen its course extends, for many hundred miles,
in a north and north-easterly direction. Thence, passing onwards
through numerous gorges and passes, at present altogether unnavigable,
it debouches on the plain of Hupeh, where it is about half a mile in
breadth; thence again, it proceeds for about 250 miles to Yo-choo-foo,
at the Lake Tongting, where the upper Yang-tse ends, and where the
lower or greater river of the same name, commencing its course, passes
the important city of Hankow, receiving near this city the waters of
the Han river, its greatest tributary, and the Chin-kiang: at this
place, it is a mile and a half wide, but, at its mouth, near Shanghai,
the Yang-tse extends to a width of 12 miles, its whole course being
upwards of 3000 miles in length.
This great river is subject periodically to floods, some of these, as
that of 1870, converting the country for miles on either bank into a
vast sea submerging many villages, whose position can only be traced by
the roofs of the houses, as the highways are by the tops of the willow
trees lining them.
[Sidenote: Opened to trade, 1860.]
[Sidenote: First steam-ship direct from Hankow to England, 1863.]
In February 1860, the Yang-tse was for the first time opened (by
treaty) to the ships of other nations; and one of my own, the
_Scotland_, an iron auxiliary screw steam-ship of about 1100 tons
gross register, commanded by Captain A. D. Dundas, R.N., was the first
foreign merchant-vessel[392] which loaded a cargo from Shanghai to
Hankow,[393] bringing back teas for transhipment to Europe and America;
but it was not until 1863 that any English vessel loaded a cargo direct
from Hankow for Great Britain. On the 8th May of that year, another of
my auxiliary steam-ships, the _Robert Lowe_, of 1250 tons, commanded
by William Congalton, left Shanghai for Hankow for the purpose of
loading a cargo of teas direct for London: two other English vessels
had, however, preceded her.
[Sidenote: Passage of the _Robert Lowe_ and her cargo.]
The navigation of this river was then very little known, and there were
many difficulties to encounter which have since been removed; under
these circumstances, and as the engines of the _Robert Lowe_ were only
80 nominal horse-power, her passage between Shanghai and Hankow, a
distance of 608 miles, occupied ten days: one day, however, was lost
in changing her propeller, while she had to anchor every night. The
current against her averaged three knots an hour, but in some parts ran
fully five knots. The least depth of water (the river being then at its
ordinary height) found by soundings was 4¾ fathoms on the bar of the
Longshan crossing: the average depth being from 8 to 9 fathoms, but, in
many places, Captain Congalton did not obtain soundings at a depth of
14 fathoms, and, in long reaches, where the waters were contracted, the
depths were from 20 to 30 fathoms.
At Hankow, where the _Robert Lowe_ anchored to receive her cargo (about
300 yards from the bank), the depth of water was 14 fathoms, with a
current running at the rate of 3½ knots an hour. The new teas generally
arrive in boats (chops) about the 10th of June, and, on the 23rd of
that month, she sailed with a full cargo[394] for Shanghai and London.
She was fifty-seven hours under weigh on her passage from Hankow to
Shanghai; the current, the river being then fuller, running at from
four to, in some places, seven knots an hour.
[Sidenote: Number of steamers employed on the Yang-tse, 1864, and in
1875.]
In 1863-4 there were nine steamers employed trading between Hankow
and Shanghai, five British and four American, some of these having a
capacity for 2000 tons of tea, and all of them vessels of great speed.
Sailing all night as well as during the day, they, in fine weather,
made the passage to Hankow in four days, returning under favourable
circumstances in less than half that time. Freights then ranged either
way, from 3_l._ to 4_l._ per ton, treble what they are now, but the
current expenses were very heavy, arising from the high price of coal,
an increased scale of wages, and exorbitant port charges. Since 1864,
the trade has greatly increased both in goods and passengers, large
numbers of emigrants are now conveyed in the steamers from the interior
to the coast, whence they embark for voyages, many of them so distant
as California, the Mauritius, and the West Indies.[395]
[Sidenote: S.S. _Hankow_.]
There are few finer steamers to be found in any part of the world
than the _Hankow_[396] (belonging to Messrs. Swire and Company),
now employed in the trade of the Yang-tse. (See illustration, page
471.) Steamers of her type now leave Hankow and Shanghai daily—one
despatched by Russell and Company, the other by Butterfield and Swire,
by whom the bulk of the carrying trade between these places is now
conducted in steamers.
[Illustration: S.S. “HANKOW” AND “PEKIN.”]
[Sidenote: Chinese Steam Navigation Company.]
But the most interesting fact connected with the maritime progress of
the Chinese has been the establishment of a line of steam-ships by
a company of Chinese merchants, and under their own flag. Although
shares are held by the Chinese in many of the other steamers, it is
worthy of note that the vessels of this company are owned almost, if
not exclusively, by them. But it is still more remarkable, that a
scheme for a Chinese naval reserve is now being arranged in connection
with the “China Merchants Steam Navigation Company.”[397] It is
proposed that each of the larger provinces shall furnish two steamers,
and the smaller provinces one, to be added to the fleet of that
company, and employed by it while the country is at peace, but to be
at the service of the Imperial Government in the event of war.[398]
This undertaking, which would appear to have received the approval of
the Emperor, will, when complete, consist of twenty-eight steamers,
one of which, it is said, has been already ordered in England. It will
be, indeed, an era in the history of China when an ancient nation,
so exclusive and conservative, substitutes for its junks[399] the
steam-ships of modern nations alike for war and commerce.
[Sidenote: Proposed imperial fleet of steamers.]
As there is perhaps no more interesting incident in the history of
merchant shipping, than the change now being made in the vessels of the
Chinese Empire the following drawing of one of their finest tea-boats
(“soma”)[400] may not be uninteresting to my readers; the more so, as
I have reason to believe that vessels almost as perfect and ornamental
as this one might have been found navigating the coasts and rivers of
China even before the dawn of history, and, that they have remained
almost unchanged till now, when they are about to be displaced by the
steam-ships of Europe, is an event of unusual significance in the
progress of ancient nations.
[Illustration: CHINESE TEA-BOAT.]
[Sidenote: Increase of trade with China.]
[Sidenote: The resources of the interior.]
Though our export trade with China has of late years materially
increased, a still greater increase may be anticipated if steamers
are placed on the upper waters of the Yang-tse, and still more so if
Europeans are allowed to trade direct with the dense population of
the interior. That such results may be hoped for is clear from the
fact that, wherever the merchants of Europe and America have settled,
Chinese merchants have been greatly enriched by this intercourse; they
have, in fact, found, as the Germans did when the Hanseatic League
commenced their exclusive commercial operations in Europe centuries
ago, that new traders brought with them new sources of wealth, and
developed channels of trade hitherto unknown or at least unrecognised;
a result naturally to be expected in a country, such as China,
producing within itself, and in extraordinary abundance, some of the
most valuable articles known to commerce, at a comparatively small
expenditure of either labour or capital. Thus, silk, in most of the
provinces of China, is produced by the labour of the women and children
alone, the trees occupying the place of no other crops. _Insect_
wax, another article of a high marketable value, is also produced at
a trifling expense; while the opium crops of the interior probably
cost less in labour than any other that has to be annually sown and
reaped.[401]
But beyond these, China produces in vast abundance numerous other
articles, necessaries as well as luxuries of life, in great demand in
every part of the world. Apart, for instance, from the staple article,
tea, which no civilized nation can now dispense with, and silk, which
increases in demand with the wealth of nations, and is even more sought
after now than it was when the Roman Empire had reached the plenitude
of its grandeur, the western provinces of this much more ancient
empire, especially that of Szchuen, produce rice and other grain crops
in astonishing natural luxuriance, and these would be cultivated to
a far greater extent than they now are, if increased facilities were
afforded for their export. Already tobacco, sugar, hemp, and tung oil,
are sent to the coast in large quantities from Szchuen, and form, even
without the means of interchange with foreign nations, a source of
ready-made wealth as the mere bounty of nature. Hence, the inhabitants
are generally rich, except in districts where the population is too
dense, or where they are exposed to undue extortion, owing to the
avarice of the authorities. In Szchuen, as also in Yunnan and in many
other provinces, the agricultural population is well off; the farms
are large; the heads of families being as well dressed as merchants in
great cities; the women too, as a rule, are “richly attired, and the
appearances of many of the rustic villages and large farms convey the
impression of a perpetual holiday.”[402]
“Coal is worked on the hills in the neighbourhood of Chungking, and
affords employment to the people of the villages, who make a kind of
patent fuel of it, for which they find a market at Ichang, as well
as in the smaller towns in the neighbourhood.”[403] Cotton is also
produced in abundance; and “among the agricultural population of
Szchuen, the women and children, as well as old men, employ themselves
in spinning and weaving it, not only for their own wants but also for
sale in the towns.”[404] “The people of Chungking,” the delegates
state,[405] “expressed great readiness to trade with us, and seemed
surprised that we did not bring goods for sale. Foreign merchants will
undoubtedly be well received whenever they may choose, or be permitted,
to go there.”
[Sidenote: Mode of conducting business.]
The native merchants of the interior of China appear to be keen
traders; but, probably, it would be necessary for foreigners, in
their first intercourse with them, to do their business through the
established _hongs_, who are united in powerful guilds, resembling
those so general in Europe, a few centuries ago, with a similar
reputation of tyranny over all smaller dealers, and a tenacity in
everything affecting their own privileges. Nearly all the important
branches of trade in the interior are now under the control of these
guilds, or associated _hongs_, who are responsible to the authorities
for the duties leviable, with a power of regulating particular trades
recognised by the Government.
[Sidenote: “Hongs” or guilds.]
[Sidenote: Chinese bankers.]
It is curious to find in distant parts of the world, so remote,
indeed, that the inhabitants know nothing of any portion of the globe
beyond the confines of China, nor, with rare exceptions, have ever
heard of any country but their own, the same rules for the regulation
of commerce as were general throughout Europe in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries;[406] even their banking system having much
resemblance to that of Europe. In China, the custom prevails of making
large deductions from the weight or nominal price of goods, for cash
payments; the ordinary credit, according to ancient habit, being from
six to twelve months, or even more. Negotiation of drafts is managed
by bankers, mostly by Shansi men, who profess relationship with every
important place in China, as the Lombards once did in Europe.
Prior to the Tae Ping rebellion, Hankow claimed to have a complete,
and, by all accounts, a wealthy banking system, the smallest of the
banks, called Yin-hongs, having subscribed capitals of many thousands,
while the Shansi exchange-houses (Piaw Hoo) counted their wealth by
hundreds of thousands. At that time, a great deal of the spare capital
of the north found its way to this city, where it was lent at rates not
greatly in excess of those now current in England; but, during the
rebellion, the Shansi exchange houses withdrew their capital, while the
mandarins made such heavy levies on the smaller banks, that most of
these establishments were closed, and “cash shops” were, for some time,
the only medium of banking operations. These, however, have now assumed
more important functions than that of mere exchange, and two of them
have become, though still retaining the name of cash shops, banking
establishments of considerable importance. These banks frequently make
the necessary advances to the growers of the teas produced in such
abundance in this district, though the bulk of the capital employed in
this now vast trade is provided by the English and American merchants,
many of whom have houses at Hankow.
[Sidenote: River and coasting trade of China.]
Though the most valuable portions of the trade between Hankow and
the sea-coast is now conducted by steamers, native sailing-craft of
various sorts are still the only means of water transport, on the
upper Yang-tse, which is navigable for vessels drawing not more than
eight feet of water as far as Ichang, 363 miles above Hankow. As many
as 800 of these vessels, averaging about 50 tons each,[407] have been
counted at one time in the harbour of Shansi alone. Their crews,
like the boatmen of the Nile, are a special class of men, trained
to the service, whose forefathers, through many generations, have
followed a similar calling. They are a hardy race, and manage their
rude craft with considerable adroitness. Besides these, lorchas, under
various foreign flags, running in competition with the steamers, find
profitable employment in the conveyance of bulky and low-priced produce
and merchandise between Shanghai and Hankow, while the river below the
latter place is still frequented by large fleets of native vessels,
independently of the crafts engaged in the salt trade, which make the
short voyage to places above Ching-Kiang; sea-going junks also find
their way up to Taiping and Woohoo.[408]
Soon after the opening of the trade to foreigners, the sea-going
junks employed in the trade of the coast were opposed by small
sailing-vessels from other nations, more especially from Germany and
the northern ports of Europe. Many brigs, schooners, and barques, of
from 150 to 400 tons, were also sent from England to engage in the
trade, but these, as well as the sea-going junks, are now in turn being
displaced by steamers which traverse almost every part of the Chinese
seas, as far as Japan, where some of them run in connection with the
great English and American lines, and ere long they will, no doubt,
cover the more remote inland waters of the Empire.
[Sidenote: Japanese line of steamers.]
But the Japanese, as well as the Chinese, have now various merchant
steamers under their own flag; they have, also, their iron-clads,
the first of which was built by Hall, of Aberdeen; and they own the
_Stonewall_ (originally built in England for the Confederate States),
which they used to advantage in their civil war of 1868-69. Their
first steamer of any kind was the _Emperor_ yacht, presented to them
by Lord Elgin on the occasion of making the commercial treaty in
1858-59. Unlike their great neighbours, the Chinese, who were slow to
adopt European customs, and who for ages preferred their clumsy junks
to the finest sailing-vessels of the East India Company, the Japanese
have, since 1859, become owners of steamers with astonishing rapidity;
a fact the more noteworthy, that, though their country presents many
inducements to maritime pursuits, their native population do not seem
at any period of their history to have been a maritime people. Indeed,
they were not encouraged by their laws to become so. On the contrary,
they were restricted to both form and size in the construction of their
junks, with the object, it is presumed, of preventing their leaving
Japan for foreign countries; hence these vessels are, as a rule, the
rudest of sea-going craft. Invariably rigged with a single mast, and
one great square sail which reefs down, curtailed, when required, by
the lowering of the yard; they are, however, sometimes to be found
encountering, in these unwieldy craft, heavy gales, and at unexpected
distances from home.[409]
[Sidenote: How employed.]
But the eyes of the Japanese have been recently opened to the
advantages of foreign trade,[410] and they are moving onwards in a
manner which could hardly have been anticipated from what is known of
their previous history; indeed, they have recently (February 1875)
announced the establishment of a regular line of steamers under the
Japanese flag. The shares of this undertaking, which they have named
the “Mitsu-Bishi Steam Navigation Company,” are held almost, if not
exclusively, by Japanese. This company already possesses four steamers,
the _Tokio-Murin_ (late _New York_), the _Kunayana-Murin_ (late
_Madras_), the _Takar-Murin_ (late _Acanthia_), and the _Zazon_, while
others are in course of construction in Great Britain, which are to
form a “weekly line” between China and their own ports of Nagasaki,
Hiogo, Imioseki, and Yokohama.
What an advance on the rude craft of which the following is an
illustration![411]
[Illustration]
When we consider the enterprising character of the Japanese, we cannot
but feel surprised that such vessels as this clumsy hulk, should, in
spite of their restrictive laws, have been found sufficient for all
their wants, and that through countless ages. But now the spirit of
progress in maritime affairs guides their councils, and though, at
present, their steamers are commanded by Europeans or Americans, and
have foreign engineers, in other respects they are manned by Japanese.
Ere long the junks, alike of China and Japan, will be things of the
past, strange toys to the children of these countries, as they have
long been to the children of Europe.
FOOTNOTES:
[380] The _Diana_ was sent out first in 1821 for Mr. Robarts,
with the view to employment in the Canton river. She had a pair
of 16 horse-power engines by Maudslay. At Calcutta she was nearly
reconstructed by Messrs. Kyd and Co., and launched again on July 12,
1823.
The first actual steam-boat of which we have any record, in connection
with India, was built at Batavia, shortly after the conclusion of
the Java war in 1810-11. She was called the _Van der Capellen_, and
was built at the expense of English merchants. She was engaged by
Government for two years at the cost of 10,000 dollars a month, which
well repaid the original outlay on her. She proved very effective for
the transport of troops, &c. After some years she came into the hands
of Major Schalch and was used by him, under the name of the _Pluto_,
as a dredging-boat in 1822. Thence she went to Arrakan as a floating
battery. She was afterwards lost in a gale in 1830.
In 1819, Mr. W. Trickett built a small steam-boat of 8 horse-power at
the Butterley Works, for the Nawâb of Oude, to ply on the Jumna. “Early
Steam Navigation to India,” by G. A. Prinsep, Calcutta, 4to, 1830.)
[381] These vessels were named the _Burhampooter_ and _Hooghly_; they
were each 105 feet in length and 18 feet in breadth. Each had two
engines, which were sent from England, of the combined nominal power
of 50 horses, but working up to 80 horse-power on a consumption of 709
pounds of coal per hour.
[382] Previous to 1828, owing to the bad state of the Ganges, arising
from the sand-banks and heavy floods, against which native genius and
native boats were unable successfully to contend, communication with
the interior was alike slow and expensive. Thus, it took two and a-half
months to go from Calcutta to Benares; three and a-half to Caunpore;
six to Agra; and seven and a-half to Delhi. The premium of insurance
on a voyage from Calcutta to Caunpore was 3½ per cent.—as much as to
England. Treasure, too, and other valuable property was constantly lost
by the upsetting of the boats.
[383] See ante, vol. iv. p. 145.
[384] This vessel was built by Messrs. M. Pearce and Company, of
Stockton-on-Tees, and her principal dimensions are as follows: length
over all, 377 feet; beam, 46; breadth over paddle-boxes, 74; depth of
hold, 5 feet; working draught of water, 2 feet; displacement at 2-feet
draught, 739 tons. The engines (built by Messrs. James Watt and Co., of
London and Birmingham) are 220 nominal horse-power, having horizontal
cylinders of 55 inches diameter, and 6-feet stroke, and the diameter
of the paddle-wheels is 26 feet. The hull of the vessel is constructed
of puddled steel, and is strengthened longitudinally by four arched
girders, two of which carry the paddle-wheels, while the other two run
fore and aft, extending nearly the whole length of the ship. Similar
means are employed for strengthening the vessel athwartships. She is
steered at each end by means of “blades,” which, instead of being
worked from side to side in the ordinary manner of rudders, are made to
rise out of, or lower into, the water at the proper angle. Both sets
of these “steering-blades” are worked simultaneously, but provision is
made to work one set only, should an accident occur to the other.
[385] The _John Bright_ is clipper form, barque rig, and fitted
with the screw. Her dimensions are 250 feet in length between the
perpendiculars: breadth 31 feet, and depth 22 feet 6 inches. She is
propelled by engines of 250 horse-power nominal; and is 1192 tons
builders’ measurement.
[386] The earliest, as well as at that time, the fastest steamers
employed in the opium trade between Calcutta and China were the _Fiery
Cross_, and the _Lancefield_, built on the Clyde, and owned by Messrs.
Jardine, Matheson, and Company. These vessels invariably called at
Singapore on their way to Hong Kong, where they waited for despatches
from England by the steamers of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam
Navigation Company. Thus the owners of these vessels, which were much
faster than the Mail boats, not merely realized large profits in their
regular trade, but, with earlier information from home, than their
competitors, had a great advantage in all other branches of commerce,
as well as in that of opium.
[387] Lines of communication maintained by the steamers of the British
India Steam Navigation Company (Limited): Line 1. Between Calcutta,
Chittagong, Akyab, and Kyouk Phyoo, fortnightly. 2. Between Calcutta,
Akyab, and Rangoon, fortnightly. 3. Between Calcutta, Rangoon, and
Moulmein, weekly. 4. Between Calcutta, Chittagong, Akyab, Kyouk
Phyoo, Sandoway, Bassein, Rangoon, Moulmein, Tavoy, Mergui Pakchan,
Kopah, Junkseylon, Penang, Malacca, and Singapore, every four weeks.
5. Between Moulmein, Penang, Malacca, and Singapore, fortnightly. 6.
Between Calcutta, Port Blair, Camorta, and Rangoon, fourweekly. 7.
Between Madras and northern ports to Rangoon, fortnightly. 8. Between
Calcutta and Bombay, calling at ports in the Coromandel and Malabar
coast ports, weekly. 9. Between Bombay and Karáchí, twice a week. 10.
Between Bombay, Karáchí, Muskat, Bunder Abbas, Linga, Bushire, and
Bussorah, weekly. 11. Between London, Lisbon, Algiers, Red Sea ports,
Karáchí, and Persian Gulf, every four weeks. 12. Between Aden and
Zanzibar every four weeks. 13. Between Zanzibar, Mayotte, Nossi Bé,
Majunga, Mozambique, and other East African ports, every four weeks.
[388]
[Sidenote: The _Holy Ship_.]
See Frontispiece, first volume of this work. Without entering into the
vexed question of the antiquity of Indian naval architecture, it is
certain that native-built vessels, dedicated to commercial purposes,
have always been constructed with considerable skill and possess
remarkable _durability_. One of these vessels, built in Surat, called
the _Holy Ship_, as she was employed by the Muhammedans in going to and
returning from Mecca on their pilgrimage from India, though, so far
back as 1702, she was described as the _Old Ship_, continued to make
an annual voyage for three-quarters of a century, subsequently, from
Surat to Mocha, where her owners had the special privilege of taking on
board a certain number of chests and cases of coffee and other produce,
a privilege the more valuable, as the export duties were excessive. The
_Holy Ship_ was lost at last in a violent afflux of the river at Surat
in the year 1777, but there is reason to believe that she had navigated
the Indian seas for much more than a century, thus proving the
superiority of her construction, and the durability of her timbers and
planking. In constructing such vessels, the planks are not put together
in the European manner, with flat edges towards each other, but they
are rabbeted, and the parts are made to fit into each other with the
greatest exactness, much time and attention being bestowed upon this
operation. For this purpose the builders smear the edges of the planks,
as they are set up, with red lead, and those which are intended to be
placed next, are put upon them and pressed down, in order to be able to
discern the inequalities which are marked by the red lead. These are
afterwards removed, and the test is repeated, until the whole exactly
fits; they then rub both edges with a sort of glue, which becomes by
age as hard as iron, and they cover this with a thin layer of capoc,
after which they unite the planks so firmly, and closely with pegs,
that the seam is scarcely visible, and the entire frame seems to form
one single piece of timber. The beams and ribs are fitted in the same
way to the planks, so that a piece of wood is sometimes put in and
taken out more than ten times before it is finally fixed. The knees,
or crooked timbers, are generally by natural growth of the bent form
required, without being forced or warped by fire, especially where
special care is taken in the construction and no expense spared.
Instead of bolts, pieces of iron are used, forged like spikes, the
point of which is driven through, clenched on the inside, and again
driven into the wood. The iron employed for this purpose is previously
made very rough and flexible. A peculiar method is also employed for
the preservation of ships’ bottoms, by occasionally rubbing them with
an oil, called wood-oil, whereby the planks, imbibing this preparation,
are greatly nourished and protected from decay.
[389] Mr. James Galbraith, the managing director of this company, is
in every respect competent to carry out with success this interesting
and important undertaking. He is the chief partner of the firm of
Messrs. P. Henderson and Co., of Glasgow, and the senior partner of
the firm of Messrs. Galbraith, Stringer, Pembroke and Co., of 8 Austin
Friars, London—successors to the firm of W. S. Lindsay and Co., which
I established, and from which I retired in 1862.
[390] It was in these researches that Mr. Margary, of the China
consular service, a young gentleman of great enterprise and promise,
recently (February 1875) lost his life, and where, also, various
employés of the English Mission, which left Calcutta, in December 1874,
to explore the country lying between Bhamo and Hankow on the Yang-tse
river, were killed by the treachery of the natives, the mission itself
having been forced to return before it reached the Chinese frontier.
[391] See an interesting paper on the inundation of the Yang-tse-Kiang,
by E. L. Oxenham.—Report of the Proceedings of the Royal Geographical
Society, 1875.
[392] When, in September 1858, the question arose as to how far it
was possible to declare the River Yang-tse navigable for Europeans,
the late Admiral Sherard Osborn undertook to test it by taking Her
Majesty’s ship _Furious_, which he then commanded, accompanied by the
_Cruiser_ and two gun-boats, up the river as far as she would go.
He was the first to navigate a foreign ship of any kind to Hankow,
and the service he thus rendered was a very important one, for it
enabled Lord Elgin to insist on this great river being opened to
foreign commerce.—See address at the anniversary meeting of the Royal
Geographical Society by its President, Sir Henry C. Rawlinson, 24th of
May, 1875.
[393] The _Scotland_ sailed from Shanghai with a full cargo for Hankow
in June 1860. She drew 17 feet of water. Two light-draught trading
steamers preceded her: one an American river-boat, and the other a
Russian vessel from the Amoor.
[394] The cargo of the _Robert Lowe_ from Hankow for London consisted
of 9568 chests, 234 half chests, and 2064 boxes of black (Honor) teas;
535 bales of cotton, 192 packages of sundries. Her freight amounted to
10,315_l._, and 480_l._ passage money.
[395] It may, however, be stated that the chief emigration is from
the southern parts of China, and, rarely, north of Amoy. This, on the
whole, is a well-regulated trade, and generally carried on in British,
American, and German ships, specially chartered for the purpose; all
of which, while thus engaged, are under the Hong-Kong Passenger Act,
which has been adopted by the consuls at the different Treaty ports.
The coolie trade from the Portuguese settlement of Macao, with which
it is sometimes confounded, is of an entirely different character,
and resembles much more the old and iniquitous slave-trade than free
emigration. At Macao and in its vicinity, the coolies are collected,
often in large numbers, by coolie-brokers, who are, invariably, men
of very questionable, if not of the most depraved, character. These
scoundrels, for the most part Chinese and Portuguese, stow these poor
creatures away in well-guarded barracoons, ready for shipment; many,
perhaps, most of them, not knowing for what purpose they have been
collected. Some of them have been actually sold by their relatives
to the brokers, or decoyed away from home by false representations;
indeed, cases might be produced, where fathers have even staked their
children and themselves at gambling-tables, and, on losing their stake,
have been, summarily, transferred or exchanged for their price in coin
to these still more depraved dealers in human beings. The most usual
destination of these unfortunate creatures is Peru, where they are
employed on the Guano Islands, and from which, alas, they seldom return.
[396]
[Sidenote: Her power and capacity.]
The _Hankow_ and three other steamers of a similar class were built for
Messrs. Swire by Messrs. A. and J. Inglis of Glasgow, expressly for the
trade of the Yang-tse; their dimensions are as follows:—
-------------------------------------+-----------+--------------+-----------
|_Pekin_ and| |
|_Shanghai_.| _Ichang_. | _Hankow_.
+-----------+--------------+-----------
Gross tonnage |3076 |1781 |3168
Length on load-water line | 292 feet | 242 feet | 308 feet
Breadth, moulded | 42 feet | 36 feet | 42 feet
Depth, moulded | 15 feet | 12 ft. 6 in.| 16 feet
Load draught | 10 feet | 9 feet | 11 feet
Dead weight capacity | 664 tons | 460 tons | 840 tons
Measurement capacity in tons of 40 | | |
feet |3668 |1972 |3800
Passenger accommodation, Europeans | 14 | 10 | 14
Passenger accommodation, Chinese, 1st| 16 | 6 | 18
Passenger accommodation, Chinese, 2nd| 164 | 106 | 170
Speed on trial | 13 knots | 12 knots | 12¾ knots
Diameter of cylinder | 68 inches| 62 inches | 72 inches
Stroke | 12 feet | 10 feet | 14 feet
Indicated horse-power |1450 |1200 |1840
Pressure of steam | 27 lbs. | 33 lbs. | 35 lbs.
Consumption of fuel at full power | | |
(per hour) | 33 cwt. | 27 cwt. | 40 cwt.
-------------------------------------+-----------+--------------+-----------
The _Pekin_ was finished in May 1873; the _Shanghai_ in July 1873; the
_Ichang_, October 1873; and the _Hankow_ in April 1874.
The hulls of these vessels are of iron to the main-deck, and of the
most substantial construction, every precaution being taken to give
them sufficient strength to make the voyage to China in safety, as well
as to withstand the severe strains they are occasionally subjected to
in the river, by being left aground with a full cargo. The _Hankow_
cost, delivered at Shanghai, close upon 70,000_l._
In forwarding the particulars of these vessels, Messrs. A. and J.
Inglis remark: “Though the hulls are constructed entirely of iron, the
entire structure above the main-deck is of wood, as light as possible
consistent with the requisite strength, so as to lessen the top weight,
as we were informed that the steamers of the Yang-tse were peculiarly
liable to get aground, owing to the frequent shifting of the channel in
some parts of the river. The cargo spaces,” they add, “are in the lower
holds, and also between the main and saloon decks. The accommodation
for passengers and officers, the galleys, pantries, bath rooms, store
rooms, and other conveniences are all above the saloon deck.
“The main saloon is placed forward between the captain’s rooms and the
machinery space; above the captain’s rooms are the pilot-house and
quarter-masters’ cabins.
“The engines are after the American style, with walking beam, but are
rather more solidly constructed than is usual in America. The gallows
frame, which supports the main centre of beam, instead of being made of
wood as in the States, is of malleable iron; box framing is secured to
massive box keelsons on the floors of the ship. This style of framing,
never before adopted in beam engines, has given great satisfaction in
the six steamers to which we have fitted it.
“The _Ichang_ and _Hankow_ had common radial wheels, but in the _Pekin_
and _Shanghai_ feathering wheels were adopted, with marked advantage in
point of speed. We have no doubt that the Hankow would have attained 15
knots speed, had she been fitted with feathering wheels.
“Besides these four vessels we built a similar vessel, the _Hupeh_, for
Messrs. Russell and Company, Shanghai, in 1868, and the _Shing-King_,
a sea-going steamer with beam engine, in 1873. Messrs. Russell and
Company had previously built all their steamers in America or China,
but, becoming alive to the advantages of iron over wooden hulls, had
the above vessels and three screws built by us for their trade on the
Yang-tse and Gulf of Pechili.”
[397] _North China Herald_, 21st of January, 1875.
[398] The Chinese Government have during recent years established
various very extensive arsenals, especially at Nankin, Foochow, and
at Shanghai, where they manufacture large quantities of small arms,
and various kinds of machinery. At the two latter places, they are
now building gun-boats and war cruisers, and they contemplate, also,
constructing iron-clads at these places.
[399] Chinese junks vary in size from 120 to even 1000 tons, but, as
they stand high out of the water, their capacity seems greater; they
are usually fitted with two or three masts, and their sails are furled
or unfurled like Venetian blinds. Those built and equipped for war
are somewhat superior in strength and in speed to those employed in
commerce; but, in general, the decoration and design are similar. The
merchant vessels are provided with ports, so as to carry guns. The most
remarkable features in their hull are the abrupt and flat termination
of the bow, together with the absence of a bowsprit. A strangely
fashioned contrivance answers the purpose of a windlass. It is affixed
to the outside of the bow, by means of which the anchor is weighed. As
among the ancients, an eye is sometimes painted upon the bows of their
war junks. The lower part of the stern is either entirely hollowed out,
in an angular form, or, being flat in its primary construction, has
in its centre a recess of that description. Within this, is a second
hollow or chamber, rising the whole height, nearly from the keel to
the bottom of the quarter gallery, within which the rudder moves, and
is protected from the violence of the sea. This rudder is 5 or 6 feet
in length, and managed by ropes only, one of which is fastened to the
poop, so as, occasionally, to lift it out of the water, with a view to
its preservation.
But the Chinese have another, and much more ornamental description
of sea-going vessels called the “Soma,” with (see illustration, p.
475) usually only one mast: and, with these vessels, the Chinese sail
along the coasts of Batavia, Manilla, Annam, Cochin China, Cambogia,
Chinchiu. They are capacious for their tonnage and will hold about
a thousand chests of tea. They are high and round on each side, the
rudder is slender and can be taken out with very little difficulty.
They have no upper sails, but only one great fore-sail, besides the
sprit-sails, and the mizen, all of which are made of mats tied together
across bamboo sticks. They lower the sails with difficulty, and to
effect this are generally obliged to send a sailor up the mast to tread
the yard down.
All Chinese sea-going junks are armed with cannon—some of them heavily
for defence, and when it suits their purpose for attack, as too many of
them, though professing to be honest traders, become pirates whenever a
fitting opportunity offers. Numerous instances might be given of these
marauding attacks upon the defenceless trading vessels of all nations,
especially when a rich booty is anticipated. In such cases, their
practice is to sail to windward of their prey, sheer alongside and, if
the weather permits, throw from the mastheads “stink-pots” on board
of their victims. The atrocious smell from these pots is certain to
clear the decks and drive the crew below so that the Chinese can thus,
generally, obtain a footing on board without opposition. Except when
resistance is offered, the lives of the crew of the merchant-vessels
are generally spared; but there have been many instances when all
on board have been massacred, when the most revolting scenes have
occurred, and when the ships have been scuttled and sunk with all on
board. As a rule, however, these pirates, if they obtain what they
require, leave the plundered ship and crew to their fate.
[400] The whole of the native craft of China, above a certain size,
are usually described as junks, and the name of this particular
description is, comparatively, modern. Charnock and other writers have
puzzled themselves to know why they are called soma or sommes. Soma in
Portuguese signifies cargo or burthen, and the French have the same
meaning, _bêtes de somme_, beasts of burthen; so that soma or sommes
as now applied to these vessels, simply means vessels of large cargo
capacity, and is not, as Charnock supposes, a corruption of any Chinese
word.
[401] See Report of the Delegates of the Shanghai General Chamber of
Commerce on the trade of the Upper Yang-tse, 1869, a most interesting
and instructive document published at Shanghai.
[402] Report, p. 3.
[403] Report, p. 14.
[404] Ibid., p. 17.
[405] Ibid., p. 19.
[406] As the merchants resident in the interior of China had no
intercourse with, nor, in fact, any knowledge of, Europe till a
comparatively recent period, it may be inferred that such guilds are of
the most remote antiquity, if not of pre-historic times; and although
no mention is made of them in the early records of the Chaldeans,
Assyrians, Phœnicians, or Egyptians, it is quite probable that similar
customs prevailed among the earliest of those nations, and were
interchanged by them in their commercial intercourse with the Chinese
on the one hand, and with the Europeans on the other.
My learned friend Sir P. Colquhoun is of opinion that we got our guilds
(not corporate bodies, as they became afterwards, but associations of
men similarly employed like the present trades’ unions), which existed
in England as early as the ninth century, from the East, through the
Teutonic tribes who came from the north of Europe. He adds, that the
word “Zunft,” German for “corporation,” is also possibly derived from
the Arabic plural word “Esnáf,” a view which Mr. Redhouse supports:
other Oriental scholars, however, whom I have consulted, see no reason
for its derivation from the Arabic.
[407] These boats are usually known by the name of _sampans_, and are
generally used for the transport of commodities from the interior
to Hankow, and sometimes to the coast. But they do not serve for
commercial purposes only; they are used as dwellings for whole families
or populations, who are born, marry, and die in them. In those employed
for the conveyance of salt on the Yang-tse, the chief type of the
Chinese art of shipbuilding may be seen in all its singularity. Their
sides are mostly painted black. The upper portions of these craft are
strengthened by broad but thin beams, which are painted in various
colours, but most frequently in red, and, between these, the port-holes
are represented in the middle of a square of a similar colour. Towards
the bows the sides are raised, and form continuous cheeks, painted
green, with an eye, or some other fantastic emblem, in the centre. The
bow is quite flat; its width at the water-line, is usually from 9 to 12
feet; and, there being no stem or cutwater, the bow can only repulse
the pressure of the water, without dividing it. The poop is raised, and
open at the fore part, with a white scutcheon covered with paintings,
representing flowers, dragons, or other allegorical figures.
[408] The tea boats on the Canton river and the Yang-tse are very
numerous. They are clumsily built, and of various forms. Some have a
high stern, ornamented with paintings of the brightest colour. The
stern has usually a considerable rake, and the sides terminate with
planks distinct from the hull, resting on a cross-beam. They are
covered with varnish, and, as the heads of the nails by which they are
fastened are pointed with mastic, the line of the ribs is not apparent.
Most of them are covered in with a round water-tight roof, over which
an awning is sometimes spread. On both sides of the roofs are uprights
with rails resting on a deck, sufficiently wide and long to pass to the
stern. They have seldom more than one mast and one large sail.
[409]
[Sidenote: Their mode of rowing.]
In the best class of these vessels, the cabin projects from the ship
about 2 feet on each side, and there are folding windows round it,
which may be opened or shut as pleasure or occasion may require. In
the furthermost part are the rooms for passengers, separated from each
other by folding-screens or doors, with the floors covered with fine
mats. The outer cabin is always considered the best, and is accordingly
assigned to the most distinguished passengers. The roof, or upper
deck, is flattish, and constructed of neat boards, curiously joined
together. In rainy weather, the mast is let down upon the upper deck,
and the sail extended over it for the sailors and the people employed
in the ship’s service to take shelter under it, and to sleep at night.
Sometimes, the better to defend the upper deck, it is covered with
straw mats, which, for this purpose, are kept at hand. There is but
one sail, made of canvas, and very large; and one mast, standing up
about midships, but somewhat towards the stern. This mast, which is of
the same length as the ship, is wound up by pulleys, and again lowered
upon deck when the ship comes to anchor. The anchors are of iron. Ships
of this burden have commonly thirty to forty hands to row them, if
the wind fails. The rowers’ benches are towards the stern. They row
in unison with the air of a song, or tune with words, which serves at
the same time to direct and regulate their work, and to encourage each
other to exertion. They do not row after the European mode, extending
their oars straight forwards, with the blades just below the surface,
but they let them fall down into the water almost perpendicularly,
and then lift them up again. This way of rowing not only answers the
same purpose as our own, but is performed with less labour, and seems
to be more adapted to circumstances, considering the narrowness of
the passage through which ships sometimes pass, or when vessels pass
each other, or when the benches of the rowers are raised considerably
above the surface of the water. The oars are made in a peculiar manner,
suitable for this mode of rowing, being not all straight, like the
Europeans’ oars, but somewhat bent.
[410] In January 1861, I sold to the Prince of Satsuma one of my
auxiliary steam-ships, the _England_, which had been employed in trade
between India and China, and had made one or two voyages to Japan, soon
after the ports of that country were opened to the vessels of foreign
nations. Captain A. D. Dundas, R.N., who commanded her, and was a
part owner with me of this ship and of a sister-ship, the _Scotland_,
which afterwards became the property of the same prince, informs me he
is under the impression, that the _England_ was “the _first_ foreign
vessel purchased in Japan, except by the Government proper.” If so,
her sale may be considered the introduction of the thin edge of the
wedge which has rapidly led to a very general introduction of foreign
bottoms. As an instance of the remarkable skill and ingenuity of the
Japanese, they made new boilers of copper for this ship, within twelve
months of the time when she came into their possession (I believe they
had never before seen a boiler), but I am uncertain whether these
boilers were ever fitted into the ship. If they were, I fear the
small pieces of copper of which they were made (Japanese mechanical
knowledge not having as yet learnt the art of constructing plates of
the necessary size) would render them useless. The _England_ was seized
and scuttled by the British fleet in August 1863, at the time of the
bombardment of Kagosima, and, having been sunk in very deep water, was
never raised. The _Scotland_ was still in the service of the Japanese
in 1870.
[411] Though the above drawing represents one of the largest of the
Japanese junks, she, like all the others, had only one mast, its place
being opposite the vacant space shown at the gangway. The apparent
bulwark of trellis-work before this gangway is meant to break the sea
and allow the water to wash through. Besides, as nearly all the junks
carry deck cargoes (covered with water-tight mats where perishable)
the gratings serve the purpose of protection to the goods thus stowed,
and afford facilities for lashing and securing them in their places on
deck.
CHAPTER XIII.
Eastern Steam Navigation Company—Detailed proposals of
the directors—Capital subscribed to build the _Great
Eastern_—Relative size and speed of sailing-ships—Mr. Brunel
proposes to build a ship five or six times as big as any existing
vessel, and is supported in his views by Mr. Scott Russell—Plan
of construction, size, &c.—Mr. Atherton considers the views of
the directors are not supported by their data—The _Great Eastern_
commenced May 1, 1854—Details of her dimensions and mode of
construction—Practically, one ship within another—Compartments
and bulkheads—Floor—Construction of the iron plates for
hull—The deck and its strength—Enormous steam-power from
combination of paddle and screw—Paddle-wheel, auxiliary,
and screw-engines—Donkey-engines—Proposed accommodation
for passengers, &c.—View of deck, &c.—Saloon—Intended to
carry twenty large boats and two steamers—Compasses—Size
of sails—Magnetic apparatus of Mr. J. Gray—Apparatus for
steering—Rudder and anchors, and _note_—The ship itself a marvel
though, commercially, a failure—Preparations for, and details of,
the launching of the _Great Eastern_.
[Sidenote: Eastern Steam Navigation Company.]
In tracing the progress of steam navigation to the East the various
tenders for the conveyance of the East India and Australian mails have
been incidentally noticed. Among those which were lodged, in reply
to an advertisement from the Admiralty issued on the recommendation
of Lord Jocelyn’s Committee of 1851, there was one from a new
undertaking—the Eastern Steam Navigation Company—offering to convey
the mails from Plymouth to Sydney and to the East Indies, &c., monthly,
viâ Alexandria, in vessels of from 1300 to 2100 tons, with engines of
from 400 to 600 horse-power.[412] This company had been incorporated
by royal charter with a nominal capital of 1,200,000_l._ in 20_l._
shares, having power to increase it to 2,000,000_l._ The projectors
of the proposed undertaking were, in the highest degree, respectable,
comprising some men of great wealth, and others of well-known
scientific attainments. They were, in every way, competent to carry out
the service they had tendered to perform. The general impression, at
the time, seemed to be that they intended to act in concert with the
Austrian Lloyd’s Steam Navigation Company, a well-known undertaking
trading from Trieste to different ports in the Mediterranean and
represented in London by the late Mr. Joseph Edlmann, a merchant of the
highest standing, whose name appeared as one of the directors of the
new undertaking. But, as the ships the company intended for the service
to India and Australia were not mentioned, and more especially as the
directors did not state in their tender the sum they required for the
performance of the latter service, their offer was not accepted, though
it may have been considered.
[Sidenote: Detailed proposals of the directors.]
After the directors had communicated to the shareholders the result
of their tender, some of them, on the suggestion of Mr. I. K. Brunel,
recommended the construction of a steam-ship of extraordinary
dimensions to trade with India. On looking at the export and import
trade of Great Britain they observed that the main line of commerce
passed round the Cape of Good Hope towards India, China, and
Australia, following nearly the same track as far as Ceylon. On the
fact of this great pathway of commerce they grounded, and not without
plausible reasons, their scheme for the profitable employment of
various vessels of gigantic size between England and Ceylon, from which
place smaller vessels were to diverge to the other parts of India, as
well as to China, Japan, and Australia; the intention, however, being
to despatch their first great vessel, when ready, direct either to
Calcutta, Sydney, or Melbourne.
Having made the calculations (to their own satisfaction) that such
ships would maintain a speed of fifteen knots per hour, there was in
their judgment no doubt that they would “attract so large a portion
of the traffic as to afford full cargoes at remunerative rates
both outward and homeward.” The voyage from England would thus be
accomplished in thirty days to Trincomalee, which had been selected for
their central station, as it offered every facility for such a purpose.
Thence they estimated that the voyage in ordinary steam-vessels could
be accomplished to Madras in two days, Calcutta in four, Hong Kong in
ten, and Sydney or Melbourne in fourteen respectively; the auxiliary
steamers on these lines transferring the outward cargo from the
leviathans, and bringing to them “the valuable products of all these
countries as a back freight to England.”
“Should the great ships,” they said, “fulfil only the most moderate of
the anticipations, in regard to speed, and be able to land goods in
Calcutta within thirty-five days of their shipment in London, in Hong
Kong within forty, or in Melbourne within forty-four, it is certain
that they will take up at higher freights a large amount of goods
now conveyed in ordinary vessels. Of the whole Eastern tonnage, all
that portion which will bear a minimum freightage of 5_l._ per ton,
may be fairly calculated on as cargo available for their ships. Of
such are the silks and silk piece-goods of India and China averaging
from 2000_l._ to 3000_l._ per ton in value; indigo from 500_l._ to
1000_l._ per ton; tea, coffee, spices, lacdye, shellac, &c., of the
value of between 100_l._ to 300_l._ per ton. Among the export goods
intrinsically valuable enough to pay the higher rates of freightage
may be reckoned the principal manufactures of Birmingham, Manchester,
Sheffield, and Leeds: woollens, silks, satins, velvets, millinery,
haberdashery, oilmen’s stores, and hardware, besides the costly
productions of France and Germany.”
Going into various calculations in detail, they arrived at the
conclusion that out of the exports to India there would be 180,000
tons of goods able to afford the minimum freight, without considering
the goods at that time transported by the overland route in the ships
of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, the greater
portion of which the directors of the great ship company felt certain
they would secure, while they were, further, convinced that their ships
would “attract a considerable portion of the exports to Australia
were a line of branch steamers to be laid on from Trincomalee to the
Australian ports.”
The import trade, in the opinion of the directors, was even more
valuable than the export, and could “well afford a higher freightage
in return for speedy transport.” The Aberdeen clippers they said
“obtain from 8_l._ to 12_l._ per ton for the carriage of fine teas
from China, in which trade they will be utterly unable to compete with
their great ships should they reduce the voyage from 80 to 40 days.”
Estimating at least 50,000 tons of tea from China should the freight
not exceed 6_l._ or 7_l._ per ton, and, without considering the large
and rapidly increasing amount of that article imported from Assam and
the Himalayas, the tea from China in itself would be, in the opinion
of the directors, an enormous source of profit. Then, should they
reduce the voyage from Australia to 45 or 50 days, they might calculate
with certainty on obtaining “the conveyance of all the gold from that
country.” In a word, they were of opinion that, after making the most
ample allowance for working expenses, wear and tear, depreciation and
insurance, “a surplus would remain equal to 40 per cent. per annum on
the capital invested.”[413]
[Sidenote: Capital subscribed to build the _Great Eastern_.]
Nor were the vast and increasing number of passengers overlooked in
their calculations as affording a larger source of profit than even
gold or merchandise, while, in their opinion, “for the transport of
troops the capabilities of their ships would be such as always to
command a preference from Government over vessels of smaller burden.”
Such were the views and calculations of the directors of the Eastern
Steam Navigation Company.
Nevertheless, in spite of these glowing prospects, many of the shrewd
and more cautious shareholders in the original undertaking, including
nearly all the persons interested in the Austrian Lloyd’s Company,
preferred receiving back the money they had deposited, on account of
their shares, and declined to support the new company. Others, however,
and among them many men of great capital and of high position in the
world of science, consented, and, after considerable difficulty,
sufficient capital was raised to construct the _Leviathan_, the largest
ship ever known either in ancient or modern times, and the first, as
well as the last, of the ships of this size they had contemplated
building.
[Sidenote: Relative size and speed of sailing-ships.]
About this time the important question of increased speed in
combination with increased dimensions was receiving the special
attention of scientific men, and was discussed with great animation at
the meetings of various associations. Mr. Charles Atherton, the chief
engineer of the Royal Dockyard at Woolwich,[414] had taken the lead in
forming public opinion on the novel problem of steam-ship capability.
As regards _sailing-vessels_ it had been observed that the average
length of their voyages to Australia bore the following relation to
their tonnage:
Tons.
750 to 1000 took 140 days.
1000 to 1500 took 112 days.
1500 to 2000 took 95 days.
3000 and upwards took 70 days.
[Sidenote: Mr. Brunel proposes to build a ship five or six times as
big as any existing vessel, and is supported in his views by Mr. Scott
Russell.]
The inference drawn from these and similar observations, more or
less founded on correct data, was that, to obtain high velocities
in sea-going vessels, it was merely necessary to make them large;
it being argued that a mass of two or three thousand tons, once set
in motion at a given speed, would overcome the resistance both of
atmosphere and water with greater ease than a mass of half its weight.
Mr. I. K. Brunel carried these opinions to an extreme length, and
argued that there need be no limit to the size of a vessel, except what
tenacity of material must impose. He further argued, from scientific
theory and actual experience, that as the “tubular principle” provided
the greatest amount of strength of construction with any given
material, it, therefore, was possible to construct a ship of six times
the capacity of the largest vessel then afloat, and one, too, that
would steam at a speed hitherto unattainable by smaller vessels. Mr.
Brunel, having originated this conception, communicated it, at the
outset, to Mr. Scott Russell, and suggested the construction of a
steam-ship large enough to carry all the fuel she might require for
the longest voyage; and Mr. Scott Russell shared with Mr. Brunel in
the merit of contriving the best method of carrying out these views.
The idea of using two sets of engines and two propellers (screw and
paddle) is solely due to Mr. Brunel, as was, also, the adoption of a
cellular construction, like that at the top and bottom of the Britannia
Bridge, in building the _Great Eastern_, the name this huge ship was
now to bear.[415] These main characteristics distinguished the _Great
Eastern_ from all other vessels then afloat. Her model and general
structure were in other respects identical with those of the ships
built by Mr. Scott Russell, on the principle of the “wave line,” which
he had systematically carried out during the previous twenty years.[416]
[Sidenote: Plan of construction.]
Having obtained the requisite capital, the directors now concluded
provisional arrangements for the construction of the screw-engines with
Messrs. James Watt and Co., of the Soho Works, near Birmingham, and
for the paddle-engines and hull with Messrs. Scott Russell and Co., of
London. But, considering the novelty and magnitude of the undertaking,
it may be interesting and instructive to review, still further, the
grounds on which the projectors anticipated its success.
The ship, the directors said, “would be built in the Thames, to be
completed in eighteen months; and would fulfil certain conditions,
the most important of which was that she should not be obliged to
stop at any place on the way to take in coal, stoppages for coal not
only causing great delay by the time required for taking it on board,
but compelling the vessels to deviate widely from the best route, in
order to touch at the necessary coaling stations;” and, in avoiding
the delay of coaling on the voyage, the ships would also escape the
great cost of purchasing coals at a foreign station. “These ships,”
they added, “will carry, besides their whole amount of coals for
the voyage (out and home[417]), upwards of 5000 tons measurement of
merchandise, and will have 500 cabins for passengers of the highest
class, with ample space for troops and lower class passengers. These
the company will carry at rates much smaller than those of any existing
steam-ships and, moreover, with an unprecedented degree of safety,
comfort, and convenience which the great size of their vessels will
afford.” In thus increasing the size of their ships, the directors
said, “they believed they were also obtaining the elements of a
speed heretofore unknown: and if, hereafter, coals applicable to
the purposes of steam navigation could be supplied from the mines
of Australia, their carrying capacity both for cargo and passengers
would be proportionately increased. The great length of these ships
will undoubtedly, according to all present experience, enable them to
pass through the water at a velocity of 15 knots[418] an hour, with a
smaller power in proportion to their tonnage than ordinary vessels now
require to make 10 knots.”
[Sidenote: Mr. Atherton considers the views of the directors are not
supported by their data.]
These views were, however, not allowed to pass unquestioned by many
scientific men, and more especially by Mr. Atherton, who rejoined
that, whatever pride the projectors might reasonably feel in the
production of such an extraordinary vessel as the _Great Eastern_, the
data relied on by them did not support their anticipations. He argued
that, if based upon the performance of the _Rattler_, the size of the
vessel that would be required for the due fulfilment of the conditions
of the project, as announced by the directors, would, probably, be
not less than 100,000 tons displacement, and that the whole capital
of the company, as proposed in their prospectus would, probably, be
much more than absorbed in the construction of a single vessel of the
stupendous size indispensable for the performance of 25,000 nautical
miles, without recoaling, at the average speed of 15 nautical miles per
hour. As an engineer, Mr. Atherton was not opposed to the construction
of large ships, but he, like many other scientific and practical men,
questioned the fulfilment of the mechanical conditions as respects
the combination of a 15-knot speed with a 25,000-mile voyage without
recoaling, on which the Eastern Steam Navigation Company had founded
their project. Indeed, both practically and theoretically, he declared
himself in favour of the superior capabilities of large ships as
respected either speed or distance, but he forewarned the proprietors
of the _Great Eastern_ of the mercantile disappointment to which
extravagant expectations, as to the combination of high speed and great
length of voyage without recoaling, by the mere agency of size, would,
in his opinion, inevitably lead.
The directors might, therefore, have seen that extreme caution was
necessary for all mercantile steamship undertakings requiring the
maintenance of so high a rate of steaming speed as they contemplated.
Indeed, taking the actual results of the most successful steam-vessels
of that day, it was more reasonable to doubt the realization of the
hopes entertained by the projectors.[419]
[Sidenote: The _Great Eastern_ commenced, May 1, 1854.]
Nevertheless, the sanguine expectations of the directors were in no way
shaken and, under the advice and personal superintendence of Mr. I. K.
Brunel, Mr. Scott Russell commenced the arduous undertaking in his yard
at Millwall on the north side of the Thames.[420]
[Sidenote: Details of her dimensions.]
To prepare the ground for the reception of the enormous weight about
to be placed upon it, 1500 huge piles of timber were driven through the
loose surface soil into the more solid stratum below. These were girded
so as to form a platform bound together by transverse and longitudinal
balks of timber, between which thick beds of concrete were embedded,
and, on this structure, _iron_ rails were laid to form the launching
ways, of which the following is the longitudinal section.
[Illustration]
On this platform the first plates of the great ship, built entirely of
iron, were placed, May 1st, 1854.
[Sidenote: And mode of construction.]
The hull of the _Great Eastern_,[421] which is of immense strength, is
divided transversely into ten separate compartments of 60 feet each,
and rendered perfectly water-tight, in all its parts, by bulkheads
through which there is no opening, whatever, below the second deck:
two longitudinal walls of iron, 36 feet apart traverse 350 feet of the
length of the ship. Instead of the usual keel there is a flat plate
of iron in its place, about 2 feet wide and 1 inch thick, running
the entire length of the vessel from stem to stern, and so set up as
virtually to form part of the base on which all the rest of the fabric
is raised, whether of plates or girders. The bottom and sides which
ascend immediately from this keel plate are also 1 inch tapering to
three-quarters of an inch thick, the entire structure having been
raised from below by adding plate to plate upwards. These plates are
fastened together by more than 3,000,000 rivets, each an inch in
diameter, the whole being hammered in when at almost a white heat, and
welded so close as to form parts of the plates which they bind together.
[Illustration: TRANSVERSE SECTION.]
[Sidenote: Practically, one ship within another.]
From the keel to the water-line the hull is double, having an inner
and outer skin of the same thickness of iron, 2 feet 10 inches apart,
between which, at intervals of 6 feet, run horizontal webs of iron
plates thus materially increasing the power of resistance both of the
inner and outer skin. So far, therefore, as regards the portion of the
vessel immersed when laden, the _Great Eastern_ is, practically, two
ships, one within another, as may be seen by the transverse section,
page 498, which exhibits the principle of her construction.[422]
The danger of a collision at sea is, thereby, greatly lessened, for
if the outer skin is pierced, the inner one, remaining intact, as it
would, except under very extraordinary circumstances, the safety of the
vessel would not be endangered. Looking, also, at this arrangement in
a commercial point of view, should the ship require ballast, the space
between the outer and inner skin can be filled with water, so that
whatever may be necessary in this respect can be obtained in a very
economical and expeditious mode, to the extent in weight of 2500 tons.
[Sidenote: Compartments and bulkheads.]
Besides the principal bulkheads, there is in each compartment a second
intermediate bulkhead forming a coal bunker and carried up to the main
deck, which can on an emergency be closed. Two continuous tunnels run
through the principal bulkheads near the water-line in one of which
the steam pipes pass, and, under the most improbable circumstances
of damage to the ship, arrangements are made, so that facility and
ample time would be afforded to close them leisurely, and to make them
perfectly water-tight.
[Sidenote: Floor.]
The floor of the ship is perfectly flat, the keel being turned inwards,
and riveted to the inner skin. The bow and stern have additional
strength imparted to them by strong iron bulkheads specially fitted to
those parts of the ship.
[Sidenote: Construction of the iron plates for hull.]
Every distinct plate employed in the construction of the hull was
moulded, beforehand, to the exact shape required by the situation
it was to occupy. They were each gauged according to mathematical
principles, wooden moulds being first prepared from the gauges, and the
iron plates and angle iron accurately fashioned to correspond with the
moulds.
10,000 tons of iron plates were used in the construction of the hull,
or 30,000 plates (with about 100 rivets to each), each plate weighing
on an average a third of a ton.
[Sidenote: The deck, and its strength.]
The deck of the ship is double or cellular, and is formed of two
half-inch plates, at the bottom, and of two half-inch plates at the
top, between which are webs of iron which run the whole length of the
ship. The upper deck runs flush and clear from stem to stern for a
breadth of about 20 feet on either side of the skylights and hatchways,
thereby affording two magnificent promenades for the passengers just
within the bulwarks; these promenades are altogether more than the
eighth of a mile in length, as four turns up and down either side of
them exceed a mile by 640 feet. Between the two side promenades of the
upper deck are several quadrangular openings edged with low bulwarks,
and looking down into the recesses of the structure. These openings are
42 feet wide, and nearly 60 feet long, the longest being 100 feet, and
there are deck gangways connecting the side promenades between each of
them. In these spaces the skylights of the large passenger saloons are
fixed.
[Sidenote: Enormous steam-power from combination of paddle and screw.]
The distinguishing feature of the _Great Eastern_, in addition to her
vast size, is the combined application of both the paddle-wheel and the
screw. The engines are considerably larger than any previously made
for marine purposes. There are ten boilers and five funnels, and each
boiler can be cut off from its neighbour and used or not, as desired.
The boilers are placed longitudinally along the centre of the ship,
and are entirely independent of each other. Every paddle boiler has
ten furnaces, and each screw boiler twelve furnaces, thus giving to
the whole, the prodigious number of 112 furnaces. The funnels are each
about 100 feet in length measuring from the floor of the boilers to the
top of the funnel.
The paddle-wheel engines, of which the following is a transverse
section, are a magnificent piece of workmanship, combining vast
strength with great beauty and apparent lightness of design.
[Illustration]
When these, combined with the screw engines (to which reference
will presently be made), are at work the mind is lost in wonder at
the amount of mechanical power which is thus brought to play in the
propulsion of one vessel, and the smoothness and harmony with which
that duty is performed, in a space necessarily confined and limited,
and amid the violent turmoil of the ocean. No work of art ever yet
produced furnishes more exalted ideas of man’s genius and skill than
the unceasing and regular motion of these gigantic engines, especially,
when we consider the tremendous shocks to which they must be at times
subjected, and the delicate nature of some portion of the machinery,
resting as this does, not upon solid granite as is the case with land
engines, but on the ever straining ribs of a ship.
[Sidenote: Paddle-wheel,]
The paddle-wheel engines have a nominal power of 1000 horses, they have
four cylinders, the diameter of each being 74 inches, with a stroke
14 feet in length, giving 14 strokes per minute. Each cylinder with
piston and piston-rod weighs no less than 38 tons, while each pair of
cylinders with its crank, condenser, and air-pumps, forms in itself
a complete and separate engine, and each of the four cylinders is
so constructed that it can be, at once, disconnected when required,
from the other three, so that the whole forms a combination of four
engines, altogether complete in themselves, whether worked together or
separately. The two cranks are connected by a friction-clutch by means
of which the two pairs of engines can be connected or disconnected,
by a single movement of the hand and at a moment’s warning. All the
engines are provided with expansion valves, and their combined force,
when working 11 strokes per minute, indicates 3000 horse-power, with
steam in the boilers at 15 lbs. on the inch and the expansion valve
cutting off at one-third of the stroke. But as all the parts of the
engines are so formed and proportioned that they will work safely
and smoothly at 8 strokes per minute, with the steam at 25 lbs. and
fully open without expansion (beyond what is unavoidably effected
by the slides), or at 16 strokes per minute, with the steam in the
boiler at 25 lbs. and the expansion valve cutting off at one-fourth
of the stroke, they can be made to give a power of 5000 horses. The
paddle-shafts are each 38 feet long and weigh 30 tons, while the
intermediate cranked shaft, 21½ feet in length, weighs 31 tons.
[Sidenote: Auxiliary,]
Two auxiliary high pressure condensing engines are fixed, adjacent
to the paddle engines, for working the pumps and performing other
necessary duties on board of the ship; these auxiliary engines are
equal to 60 horse-power and can be worked to double that power if
necessary.
[Sidenote: and Screw engines.]
But the screw engines are even more surprising than those of the
paddles: they are also of 1000 horse-power with four oscillating
cylinders each 84 inches in diameter with 4-feet length of stroke
and performing 50 revolutions per minute. They can work up to 4500
horse-power with steam in the boiler at 15 lbs. and revolving at 45
strokes a minute, the expansion valve cutting off at one-third of the
stroke; but, with steam at 25 lbs., without expansion, and cutting
off at one-fourth of the stroke, they can propel with a power of
6000 horses, so that the combined force of paddle and screw engines
gives the tremendous power of 11,000 horses! The propeller shaft,
in two parts, is 160 feet in length and weighs 60 tons, while the
screw-propeller itself is 24 feet in diameter with 44 feet pitch. The
paddle-wheels are, however, still more stupendous, being no less than
58 feet in diameter with a boss which alone weighs 16 tons, each wheel
when complete weighing 90 tons.
Abaft the bulkhead of the screw engine-room are placed two auxiliary
engines of 20 horse-power each for moving the screw-propeller, when the
larger engines are disconnected, at such a velocity as will prevent the
speed of the vessel from being retarded when the ship is under weigh
with paddles alone, or when under sails and paddles.
There are, also, two auxiliary high pressure engines, each of the
nominal power of 10 horses, for working the pumps, shafting, or
other parts of the machinery, and for hoisting sails, taking in or
discharging cargo, lifting the anchor, and for performing many other
services usually carried on by the crew.
[Sidenote: Donkey-engines.]
Each set of boilers is provided with donkey-engines, with independent
boilers, and pumps of power sufficient to feed both sets of boilers,
and are capable of being connected or disconnected, so that one
donkey-engine may supply any set of boilers. These are each of about 10
horse-power.
[Sidenote: Proposed accommodation for passengers, &c.]
This mighty vessel was destined to afford accommodation for 4000
passengers, viz., 800 first class 2000 second class, and 1200 third
class, independently of the ship’s complement of crew, amounting to
about 400. The series of saloons, which were elegantly fitted and
furnished, together with the sleeping apartments (as will be seen by
referring to the longitudinal section in the frontispiece to this
volume) are situated in the middle of the ship and extend over 350
feet of her length.
[Sidenote: View of deck, &c.]
As everything about this vast ship is really of historical interest,
I present my readers (see frontispiece) with a view of her deck as
seen from the bridge between the paddle-wheels, looking towards
the stern, a sight which affords a more imposing appearance of her
magnitude than any other view. The first skylight covers the passage
to the engine-room and the captain’s cabin, which is in itself a
moderate-sized house, consisting of several rooms; behind it there are
other two companions or staircases leading to the after saloons. As the
old-fashioned speaking trumpet would be useless in such a ship, the
captain signals his orders either from his cabin or from the bridge by
semaphore arms during the day and by coloured lamps at night; while
electric telegrams convey his wishes, not merely to the engine-rooms,
but to other places below the decks where it may be necessary that his
instructions should be instantaneously communicated. With regard to the
main or upper deck itself, there is ample clear space to drill a full
regiment of soldiers.
[Illustration: GRAND SALOON OF THE “GREAT EASTERN.”]
[Sidenote: Saloon.]
The lofty saloons and cabins are very imposing, differing as they
do in most respects from those of ordinary passenger steam-ships,
indeed, more resembling the drawing-rooms of the mansions of Belgravia
of London or of the Fifth Avenue of New York. The one of which an
illustration is furnished (page 506) bears the name of the “Grand
Saloon.” The illustration, however, shows only one half of this
magnificent apartment, which is 62 feet long, 36 feet in width, and 12
feet in height, with a ladies’ cabin, or rather boudoir, adjoining,
20 feet in length. Massive looking-glasses in highly ornamented gilt
frames decorate its sides; the strong iron joists (beams) overhead are
encased in wood, the mouldings being delicately painted and enriched
with gilt beading. Around two of the funnels which pass through this
gorgeous apartment are large mirrors, with alternate highly ornamented
panels, and at their base are groupings of velvet couches. The columns
(staunchions) which support the beams are richly decorated, while
the iron work of the railings of the staircases leading to the lower
cabins, or surrounding the open spaces necessary for more perfect
ventilation, are, by some particular process, made to resemble oxidized
silver, which is relieved by gilding. The walls (sides) are hung with
rich patterns in raised gold and white, and at the angles are arabesque
panels ornamented with groups of children and various emblems of the
sea; other illustrations personify, in graceful forms, the arts and
sciences connected with the construction and navigation of ships, while
sofas covered with Utrecht velvet, buffets of richly carved walnut
wood, carpets of surpassing softness, and _portières_ of rich crimson
silk to all the doorways, give an elegance to the whole, combined with
a display of taste and beauty far surpassing, and an extravagance
almost equalling, the gigantic toy ships of ancient monarchs.[423] Nor
are the dining-rooms and family cabins much inferior in style, while
the bed-rooms, in space, fittings, and comfort are all that the most
fastidious voyager could expect, if not all they would desire.
[Sidenote: Intended to carry twenty large boats and two steamers.]
The _Great Eastern_ was planned to carry twenty large boats on her deck
or hanging from the davits. Some of these boats are patents on very
ingenious principles. In addition, it was intended she should carry,
suspended abaft her paddle-boxes, two small steamers, each 100 feet
long and of between 60 and 70 tons burden. These were to be raised or
lowered by small auxiliary engines and kept in all respects completely
equipped for sea, but to be principally used for embarking or landing
the passengers with their luggage.
[Sidenote: Compasses.]
The compasses were placed at a height of 24 feet from the deck on
a staging, in order to remove them from the disturbing influences
inherent in the vast masses of iron below; and it was proposed that
strong shadows of the needle should be cast down a tube so that the
steersman might by watching the shadow of the points at once follow the
movements of the compasses above.
[Sidenote: Size of sails.]
Besides the mizen-mast, which is of wood, there are five other masts of
hollow wrought iron. Two of these carry large square sails, the others
fore and aft sails, the fore-mast having a jib as well as trysail,
there being neither bowsprit nor jibboom. The standing rigging consists
of iron wire rope, and the lower mast shrouds of this material are 8½
inches in circumference. The running gear, manufactured chiefly from
Manilla hemp, is beautifully made. Instead of the ordinary dead-eyes
and lanyards, an ingenious contrivance has been devised for letting go
the shrouds instantaneously on an emergency. When under full sail the
_Great Eastern_ will spread 6500 square yards of canvas.
[Sidenote: Magnetic apparatus of Mr. J. Gray.]
The magnetic apparatus or floating compass invented and patented by
Mr. John Gray, of Liverpool, is to the navigator, perhaps not the
least interesting instrument of the great ship. The binnacle consists
of an isolated battery of magnets adjusted by vertical screws, which
move them in proportion to the deviation of the compass arising from
the influence of the iron used in the construction or equipment of
the ship. The original error having been ascertained by careful
observations (a duty invariably devolving on the makers of the
instrument) and the compass thus adjusted and regulated, the process of
readjustment, when necessary, is so simple that, by the officer of the
ship merely placing her head in two positions—north and south, east
and west—the compass in the northern hemisphere can be made perfect.
If any alteration takes place in the ship’s magnetism of an opposite
character in the southern hemisphere, by reversing the position of
the magnet and by adopting the same process, the instruments will be
found as correct as in the northern. There are other applications
all calculated with the utmost precision for navigating the ship,
one of which is highly important, in that it corrects the dangerous
influence arising from heeling. A vertical magnet is made moveable in
the centre of the apparatus so as to obviate errors arising from this
cause,—errors sometimes amounting, by the deflection of the needle,
to 50 or even a greater number of degrees. As these disturbances
produce considerable oscillating of the card when the vessel rolls,
their repetition often causes a momentum that ultimately makes the card
revolve with such velocity as to render it useless to the helmsman.
The patent floating compass, constructed to prevent vibration from
affecting the centres of action, consists of an inner bowl floating in
an outer one, the object being to render the former insulated in its
water bed, the exterior being solely influenced by the action of the
ship. Through a very ingenious mechanical arrangement in the interior
of the inner bowl the hardest gems and the finest centres may be
applied without fear of oscillation of the card. The entire combination
of these essential points insures steadiness of action, perfect
indication, and great durability.
There is also a vertical double disk to register the ship’s course
and to show whether the man at the helm has attended strictly to his
instructions with regard to the course to be steered. On each side
of the binnacle there is a metal box containing soft iron for the
adjustment of any small amount of deviation in the quadrants, which
remains stationary with its contents throughout every change of
latitude.
[Sidenote: Apparatus for steering.]
Nor must I omit notice of the mode of directing the course of the
ship. On one side of the platform between the casements of the
paddle-wheels (the deck most in use by the commander and officers of
all steam-ships), stands an ingenious apparatus, in which there is a
compass, the duplicate of the one in the binnacle, and before it an
officer stands when the ship is under weigh, who is under the immediate
eye of the captain. This pedestal is covered with a brass circular
slide, with an aperture sufficiently large to permit of one of the
points on the card being seen through it. The captain or officer in
charge of the ship, by turning a handle, exposes the point at which
he wishes the ship’s head to be kept, and by means of connecting rods
a coincident point is disclosed on the compass in the binnacle, which
is watched by the steersman, who thus knows in a moment the course he
has to steer, so that, without verbal orders (which are frequently
indistinctly heard and sometimes misunderstood, even when the officer
is close to the helm) the ship is directed on her course with more ease
than an ordinary sized vessel.
Beyond the original plan contemplated of manufacturing gas on board to
be laid on to all parts of the ship, it was further intended to carry
the electric light so as to secure a perpetual artificial moonlight
around the vessel.
[Sidenote: Rudder and anchors.]
The rudder[424] is constructed of two plate-iron cheeks framed together
on a wrought-iron rudder-post, tapering from 14 inches diameter
downwards, the frame being 9 feet wide from back to belly. The space
between the 2 plate-iron cheeks within the rudder-frame is filled with
solid blocks of wood, bound together and bolted through the plates,
combining great strength with lightness.
There are ten anchors on board which, with their stocks, weigh 55 tons,
and 800 fathoms of chain cable weighing 98 tons, the capstan and warps
weighing 100 tons, so that there are 253 tons weight of appliances on
board devoted exclusively to the purpose of anchoring or mooring the
great ship. Through the centre of her stem there are two hawse-holes
each 18 inches in diameter, so that the large cable runs straight out
from the stem; and, besides these, there are additional hawse-holes on
each side of the cutwater.
[Sidenote: The ship itself a marvel though, commercially, a failure.]
Such is or, rather, was the _Great Eastern_ in all the leading features
of her construction and equipment, and, however fallacious many of
the calculations of the directors and designers may have proved, (and
none were more so than those referring to the project as a commercial
undertaking),[425] they and the constructors have produced a ship
which is not merely a marvel in size, but, in beauty of symmetry,
strength of hull, completeness of machinery, organization, and
arrangement of details, equals, if she does not surpass, any vessel
that has yet been constructed for ocean navigation.
It is to be regretted that the plans for launching the monster were
not (for the credit of science and the great mechanical knowledge of
the age) as perfect as the ship herself. Instead of constructing a
dock, wherein she could have been built with less labour than upon
piles, and which would have been valuable as a graving-dock when she
was floated from it, they built her in a yard, and, contrary to the
established custom, built her broadside to the element into which she
had ultimately to be launched.
[Sidenote: Preparations for, and details of, the launching of the
_Great Eastern_.]
The apparatus for launching the ship consisted of two inclined planes,
each about 200 feet long by 80 feet broad, and nearly 140 feet apart,
falling at an inclination of one in fourteen, to low-water mark. On
these ways two cradles, each 80 feet square, were destined to slide,
the object being that the great ship should be moved sideways into the
river on two massive platforms, underlaid with transverse bars of hard
iron, and corresponding in length to the width of the launching ways
upon which they rested.
The cradles were provided with two enormous chains, with crab blocks
and tackle, the standing part fastened to the further bank of the
river and the ends carried through two portholes, and under the ship’s
bottom. Two small steam-engines in the yard worked the crabs and
blocks attached to the chains whereby the ship was, if necessary,
to be dragged down the launching ways, which were prepared with an
anti-attrition composition to facilitate the movement of the enormous
mass. Besides these powerful tackles, there were two hydraulic presses,
each of one thousand tons lifting power, placed behind the cradles,
to which they could be applied to set the vessel in motion should the
engines prove inadequate for that purpose.
But, in order to regulate the descent of the vessel, and check her
progress, should it become too rapid, two immense friction drums or
capstans were constructed, and fastened firmly by means of piles into
the earth, so as to resist any possible strain that might be placed
upon them. These drums, seven feet diameter in the barrel by twenty
feet in length, were furnished with iron cables, each link of which
weighed seventy pounds, attached by a double purchase to the cradle,
and regulated by two gigantic break-levers worked by blocks and
pulleys, a gang of men being at hand ready to apply instantaneously on
receipt of signal this powerful check to the momentum of the vessel
should it be found too great.
Such were the vast preparations made to launch the _Great Eastern_.
FOOTNOTES:
[412] See Appendix to Report of Committee, 1851.
[413] See Report of 6th August, published in the _Times_, 8th August,
1853.
[414] Author of important works on “The Construction of the
Steam-engine,” and “The Capability of Steam-ships.”
[415] As every important fact connected with the design and
construction of this vast ship must prove of historical interest, I
think it desirable to give an extract from the letter which Mr. Scott
Russell himself wrote at the time on the subject, addressed to the
editor of the _Times_, and which appeared in that journal on the 20th
April, 1857:
“My share,” says Mr. Scott Russell, “of the merit and responsibility
is that of builder of the ship for the Eastern Steam Navigation
Company. I designed her lines and constructed the iron hull of the
ship, and am responsible for her merits or defects as a piece of naval
architecture. I am equally responsible for the paddle-wheel engines of
1000 horse-power, by which she is to be propelled.
“But Messrs. James Watt and Co., the eminent engineers of Soho, have
the entire merit of the design and construction of the engines of 1500
horse-power, which are to propel the screw.
“It is to the company’s engineer, Mr. I. K. Brunel, that the original
conception is due of building a steam-ship large enough to carry coals
sufficient for full steaming on the longest voyage. He, at the outset,
and long before it had assumed a mercantile form, communicated his
views to me, and I have participated in the contrivance of the best
means to carry them into practical effect. I think, further, that the
idea of using two sets of engines and two propellers is original,
and was his invention. It was his idea also to introduce a cellular
construction like that at the top and bottom of the Britannia Bridge
into the construction of the great ship. It will be seen that these are
the main characteristics which distinguish this from other ships, and
these are Mr. Brunel’s. Her lines and her structure in other respects
are identical with those of my other ships, which are constructed like
this on a principle of my own, which I have systematically carried out
during the last twenty years, and which is commonly called the ‘wave’
principle. In other respects, also, her materials are put together in
the manner usual in my other ships.”
[416] See article in the ‘Encyclopædia Britannica,’ 7th edition, on
“Steam Navigation.”
[417] Whatever may be gained by not requiring to stop at any
intermediate port, I consider it a mistake, in a commercial point of
view, to suppose any advantage is to be derived from taking on board
a steam-ship, especially when engaged on distant voyages, sufficient
coal to carry her out and home. The space the coals occupy in a steamer
ought to be of more value, for the reception of cargo, than the cost of
sending coals in sailing-vessels to the ports abroad where required,
and than any loss sustained by the expense and detention of shipping
them there.
[418] Equal to 17¼ statute miles.
[419] I need not dwell upon these points, for which see _Times_, 28th
February, 1854, and Mr. C. Atherton’s note, 20th April of that year.
[420] The precise dimensions of the _Great Eastern_ will be found with the
Frontispiece illustrations.
[421] I take the description of the vessel and everything relating to
her from Mr. Scott Russell’s “_Great Eastern_ Steam-ship,” H. S. Clarke
and Co., Strand, London, 1857, the public journals of the period, the
reports of the directors, and from my own observations at the time,
as I more than once inspected the ship, when on the stocks and when
afloat, for which every facility was afforded by her builders.
[422] The following references will serve more fully to explain the
illustration of the transverse section of the hull of the _Great
Eastern_: 1, upper saloon or main deck; 2, principal saloon in lower
deck; 3, side cabins and berths; 4, tunnels for steam and water
pipes; 5, boiler; 6, coal bunkers; 7, space between skins of ship; 8,
skylights to principal saloons; 9, double deck.
[423] The decorations of this saloon, which were exceedingly beautiful,
were executed by Messrs. Crace, of Wigmore Street, London.
[424] As I have been frequently asked when the “rudder” was invented, I
may here state that I really do not know, and I should be disposed to
question the accuracy of any writer who fixed any epoch or any age for
its invention. Before me I see, at this moment, a swan in pursuit of
other swans which have evidently been poaching upon its manor on that
portion of the River Thames where, on its banks, I now revise the proof
sheets of this volume. It is in full chase, with its wings so arranged
as best to gain advantage from the breeze; its feet are paddling it
onward with great vigour, but to turn the corner opposite to where
I sit, I see that the swan sweeps itself round by the operation of
one of its feet, which has been brought close to the surface, and is
performing exactly the same part, only in a more rapid and perfect
manner, which the rudder, attached to a boat, performs, when sweeping
round the same bend of the river. Perfect rudders may, therefore, be
said to have existed from the creation, for nothing could be more
complete in the shape of a rudder, than this action of the swan’s foot
in the water. A similar action may be seen in the fins and tails of
fish.
Turning to mechanical contrivances which had this object in view, it
will be found that, during the earliest historic ages, the paddle of
the canoe was used, not merely to propel, as in the case of the gondola
of the middle ages as well as in the gondola of to-day, but also to
guide, and was, in itself, one of the most powerful mechanical rudders
which have yet been produced. The oar over the quarter followed, and
if my readers will refer to the sculptured illustration of a vessel on
the leaning Tower of Pisa (see _ante_, vol. i. p. 521) erected A.D.
1178, they will find, that that was the only description of a rudder
represented at that comparatively recent period. At a later period,
by referring to the contracts still extant which Louis IX., King of
France, entered into, A.D. 1268, with the Venetians and Genoese for the
construction of various ships (_ante_, vol. i. p. 510), “two rudders”
for each vessel (_one on each side_) “nine palms long” are required to
be provided, showing that this mode of steering, which is no advance
upon what may be found on the ancient sculptures of Egypt, was, then,
the only one known, or at least in use, among the most celebrated
navigators of the middle ages; and from their dimensions, the vessels
which Louis IX. ordered to be built were large ships, _not boats_,
which the one represented on the Tower of Pisa may have been.
In the drawings of some vessels of a subsequent period, a hole is
shown in the stern above the stern post, through which an oar, sweep
or “rudder” was passed for guiding the course of the vessel, its lower
extremity being probably worked by tackles from each quarter; from
this appliance the _hanging_ rudder now in use no doubt originated,
being improved on by slow degrees, and gradually assuming a more and
more perpendicular position; thence, the transition to hanging it by a
second ligature was easy and natural; thence, the gudgeons and pintals,
by which the rudder now swings from the stern post; and, hence, the
tiller and, subsequently, the wheel to move the tiller, the blade
of the rudder itself being increased in size according to the force
required to turn the vessel. Thus, the foot of aquatic birds first gave
the idea of the paddle, and this, in time, was displaced by the oar,
from which the rudder evidently sprung. The Dutch and German word for
oar is now and always has been “Ruder.”
[425] In the summer of 1857, the late Robert Stephenson and I paid a
visit to the ship. We were accompanied by Brunel. The hull was then
drawing towards completion, and preparations for launching were about
to be commenced. After thoroughly inspecting everything about the
vessel, Brunel asked me what I thought of her. “Well,” I replied, “she
is the strongest and best built ship I ever saw and she is really a
marvellous piece of mechanism.” “Oh,” he said, rather testily and
abruptly, “I did not want your opinion about her build. I should think
I know rather more about how an iron ship should be put together than
you do. _How will she pay?_”
“Ah,” I replied, “that is quite a different matter;” and, seeing that
I did not care to answer his question, he repeated it, adding, “If she
belonged to you in what trade would you place her?” “Turn her into a
show,” I said, with a laugh, “something attractive to the masses; for,
if you insist on having my opinion about her commercial capabilities,
it is only in that direction where you can look for profit. She
will never pay as a ship. Send her to Brighton, dig out a hole in
the beach and bed her stern in it, and if well set she would make a
substantial _pier_ and her deck a splendid promenade; her hold would
make magnificent salt-water baths and her ’tween decks a grand hotel,
with restaurant, smoking and dancing saloons, and I know not what all.
She would be a marvellous attraction for the cockneys, who would flock
to her in thousands.” And, as I saw he was far from pleased with my
answer—no wonder—though given half in joke and half in earnest, I
added, “As you would insist on having my opinion, I have given it to
you candidly, for I really do not know any other trade, at present,
in which she will be likely to pay so well.” Stephenson laughed, but
Brunel never forgave me.
CHAPTER XIV.
Commencement of launch of the _Great Eastern_, November 3rd,
1857—Christened by Miss Hope—Comparative failure—Renewed
efforts scarcely more successful—Hydraulic ram bursts—Floats
of her own accord, January 31st, 1858—The whole scheme of this
launch a thorough mistake—Difficulties of the company—Offer
to Government wisely declined—Further proposal to employ her
as a cable layer—Makes her first sea trip, September 9th,
1859—Accident off Hastings, and the opinion of the pilot—Reaches
Holyhead; and details of her voyage—Makes her first voyage
across the Atlantic, June 1860—Second voyage, May 1861—Third
voyage to Quebec, July 1861—Fourth voyage, September 1861—Heavy
gale off S.W. coast of Ireland, and compelled to return to
Cork—General remarks on the sea-going qualities of different
ships, and on the effect of wind in causing “rollers”—Real
truth about “momentum”—Very large ships not so safe as smaller
ones, as their damages are less easily repaired—Chief later use
of the _Great Eastern_ as a cable layer, but, not even here,
remunerative—Concluding remarks.
[Sidenote: Commencement of launch of the _Great Eastern_, November 3rd,
1857.]
After various unavoidable delays rendered necessary by such an
unexampled experiment, the day for the launching of the _Great Eastern_
was fixed for the 3rd of November, 1857.
A vast concourse of people assembled on land and river to witness the
launch. Crowds of naval and scientific men from all parts of the world
were there, and, in spite of the inclement season of the year, numerous
members of the aristocracy came to see this marvellous feat; nor indeed
was royalty, itself, unrepresented. Probably no such multitude had on
any previous occasion congregated on the banks of the Thames. It was a
magnificent sight, but one, also, the practised eye could not survey
without apprehension of danger. The preparations for her launch were,
it is true, made with the object of lowering the vessel slowly into
the water by means of cradles erected on the launching ways, but if
the huge mass had received the impetus which in all similar cases is
given to vessels when the retaining and supporting shores are removed,
the cables, though of unusual strength, would have proved altogether
insufficient to restrain so ponderous a weight when once in motion;
they must have snapped asunder like hempen cords, and, considering the
number of small boats and steamers full of people at the time on the
river, and the crowds on its banks, no one can contemplate without a
shudder the loss of life which, under such circumstances, would have
probably occurred.
By reference to the following illustration the reader will better
understand the nature of the danger apprehended, and, also, see at a
glance the position of the great ship as she lay on the cradles ready
for launching.
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: Christened by Miss Hope.]
The ceremony of christening the vessel was performed by Miss Hope (now
Duchess of Newcastle), daughter of the Chairman of the Great Eastern
Steam Navigation Company. When the moment for launching arrived, the
interest of the vast assembly of people who had gathered together to
witness the operation became intense, increasing as the shores were one
by one struck from under her and the last cable fastenings loosened.
But the leviathan did not seem to move, and it was, only, when the
stationary engines tightened the chains which passed from the vessel to
the opposite shore, that any motion became perceptible. A tremendous
cheer then burst from the excited multitude. Immediately afterwards,
however, there was a pause: silent suspense again prevailed, with
increased anxiety blended now with evil forebodings. A whisper passed
along the dense crowd that the slide down the inclined plane of 3½ feet
at the stem and 7 feet at the stern thus effected, was of an alarming
character. It was one, too, which had not been anticipated; and, when
it became known that the rapid revolution of the drum and fly-wheels
caused by the sudden motion of the vessel had seriously injured several
of the men employed upon these ponderous machines, there were grave
apprehensions of further danger.
[Sidenote: Comparative failure.]
Some delay in the operations now necessarily occurred, but, at a
quarter past three P.M., the time of high water, when the engines were
again set to work, expectation was once more raised to the highest
pitch. Every eye was now directed towards the cradles, but this time
they did not stir an inch, and, as the chains tightened it became too
apparent that if the vessel was not forced towards the water they must
break. At length, subjected to a strain greater than ought to have
been applied, the ponderous chain attached to the fore part of the
vessel snapped asunder, and then all hopes of launching the leviathan
were ended for that day. It would be superfluous to dwell on the many
speculations as to the cause of this failure; certain it is that it was
great and lamentable, and, as it was impossible to repair the injury
the launching machinery had sustained, in time for further operations
on the following day, no time was, then, fixed for resuming action.
However, on the 19th of November, these operations were again begun,
the alleged object on this occasion being to move the great ship 40
feet lower down than the position she then occupied, so as to be ready
for launching when the tide suited; but this effort equally proved
abortive. The immediate cause of this second failure is accounted for
by the abutments of the piles, against which the bases of the hydraulic
rams rested, yielding under the enormous pressure exerted between
them and the ship’s cradle, in many cases giving way or breaking down
altogether.
[Sidenote: Renewed efforts scarcely more successful.]
Most of the subsequent operations of the company were kept as far as
possible secret, and the presence of the public, which had been courted
to witness an anticipated triumph, was now as studiously avoided, under
the prudential plea of avoiding accidents, involving loss of life,
by the too rapid motion of the ship towards the river. But a fresh
experiment, after prodigious efforts, and the snapping of one of the
3-inch chains, proving likewise unsuccessful, the report of it soon got
mooted abroad, and the public, always fluctuating between extremes,
now began to entertain serious doubts whether the _Great Eastern_
would ever get afloat.
[Sidenote: Hydraulic ram bursts.]
A third attempt, on Saturday, November 28th, proved however more
successful than the previous efforts. On this occasion the _Great
Eastern_ was gradually lowered down the launching ways some 25 feet in
a slow but satisfactory manner; while, on the 1st December, when the
tedious process of moving the gigantic structure was recommenced, she
moved steadily, for a time, at the rate of half an inch a minute, but,
suddenly, soon after slipped 5 inches forward and 9 inches aft, to the
terror of every person engaged in the operation; and, when renewed
efforts were made in the course of the afternoon, one of the ten-inch
hydraulic rams burst, as might have been anticipated, under the
tremendous pressure of 1300 pounds to the square inch of its cylinder:
consequently, the work of launching was suspended for that day.
Six weeks elapsed ere the operations were resumed, and, this time,
with the most sanguine hope on the part of Mr. Brunel that the great
ship would reach her destination by the spring tides of the 28th or
30th of January, 1858. On this occasion the plans could not be kept
secret. Crowds of people were again in attendance, among whom were the
Duchess d’Orleans, the Comte de Paris, and various other distinguished
personages, as well as many men of science. The _Great Eastern_ was,
indeed, not merely the wonder of this age, but she created more
sensation among men of scientific and maritime pursuits in all parts
of the world than any vessel had ever done in any age. Nor was she an
object of much less interest at the time to the general public, while
the difficulties of her launch and the appliances for this purpose
were freely discussed, often in no friendly spirit, at the meetings
of the learned institutions, as well as in the gay gatherings of
Belgravia, and in the more humble homes and workshops of Mile End and
Poplar. The subject was one of hardly less interest throughout Europe
and the United States. But shrewd practical men, while envying the
superabundant wealth of the shareholders, and admiring their boldness
in investing in her as a commercial undertaking with so questionable
a chance of profit, quietly sneered at the futile attempts to launch
the leviathan. Though of unusual weight and size, they said, that had
the ordinary process been adopted, she would have found her way to the
water with as much ease and safety as a vessel of ordinary dimensions.
There was no need, they remarked, to launch her broadway to the Thames,
as, in their opinion, she might have been so built that when started
from her ways she would shoot either up or down the river, as hundreds
of vessels launched from the banks of much narrower streams had done
before her.
[Sidenote: Floats of her own accord, January 31st, 1858.]
However, on this occasion, the efforts at launching were so far
attended with success, an average advance of 20 feet having been
obtained in the course of the day, so that when the tide reached its
height, the monster was 7½ feet in the water; but the only distance
accomplished on the following day, was one solitary slip of “2½
inches,” and in this state she lay until Tuesday, the 31st January,
when the great ship quietly floated of her own accord, the tide having
risen sufficiently high to lift her from the cradles on which she had
so long lain.
[Sidenote: The whole scheme of this launch a thorough mistake.]
The struggle of hydraulic power with the monster the company had
created, and other appliances proved most expensive, the launch of
this ship having cost no less than 120,000_l._ when 10,000_l._ or even
5000_l._, it was said, might have sufficed;[426] nor, indeed, is it
easy to understand how, with all the data before them, the tons weight
to be lifted, the angle of inclination, and the well-known rate of
friction, dynamic science could not have calculated with the utmost
accuracy the amount of force requisite to move the _Great Eastern_
on her launching ways. No adequate consideration, however, seems to
have been given to these important matters, for additions were made,
day by day, to the force applied, and these, too, experimentally, and
not, as might have been expected, as the result of careful, previous
calculations. No doubt the chief cause of this expensive failure is
attributable to the fact that Mr. Brunel (it was well known at the time
that Mr. Scott Russell strongly opposed Mr. Brunel’s plan of launching)
was permitted to try the almost insane experiment of launching the
ship on iron instead of wooden ways, as has, hitherto, invariably been
adopted in the launch of all other vessels.
The expenses attending the launch exhausted the funds of the _Great
Eastern_ Company; and brought it to the brink of dissolution. Nor was
this the only trouble to which the _Great Eastern_ was exposed. On
the 5th of April, 1858, a sharp north-easterly squall, which swept the
river with considerable violence, subjected her moorings to a strain
so severe, that one of the chain cables on the port-bow parted about
20 feet below the hawse-hole, and for a time exposed the vessel to
great danger; fortunately, however, this unfair weight snapped, also,
the second stern-chain, and thus allowed the vessel’s bows to swing in
towards the Deptford shore, thereby saving the _Great Eastern_ from
more serious loss.
[Sidenote: Difficulties of the Company.]
[Sidenote: Offer to Government wisely declined.]
The difficulties, however, in which the company were involved had now
become a matter of public notoriety; the more so, that the vessel
remained for more than a year equally unfinished as on the day she
launched herself, and was in fact nothing more than a vast iron hulk
lying on the waters of the Thames. Ineffectual efforts were made to
induce the public to come forward and subscribe the extra capital
requisite to complete her, but the launch, and other circumstances,
had increased the doubts long entertained by men of business with
regard to the prospects of the ship, as a commercial undertaking;
hence, the public could not be induced to re-invigorate the exchequer
of the company with sufficient money to equip her for sea. The various
suggestions made to persuade the shareholders of the company to come
forward with additional capital, were of no avail and they all, alike,
failed in raising the requisite funds. A negotiation was even opened
with the Government with a view to the purchase of the vessel, the
press, all at once, teeming with articles to the effect that, whether
important or not as a mercantile adventure, the great ship, as a
vessel of war, would be “almost invaluable.”[427] This discovery, it is
true, had been previously overlooked, but it soon became the theme of
general discussion.
The difficulties of the existing means of oceanic communication it was
said, compelled Government to maintain larger forces at all points
of the empire, and at the same time, than were actually requisite;
consequently, it was argued that, with two or three such stupendous
vessels as the _Great Eastern_, such a necessity would be obviated,
and Government would really have increased strength, even though her
present military establishments were greatly reduced. It was, further,
urged that continental nations were well aware that the secret of
England’s weakness, as a military power, is not so much from the
smallness as from the wide dispersion of her army. Once shown that
means exist for obviating this necessity, and that she is able, in a
few days, to transport an army of 10,000 men to any part of Europe,
and England’s position, as a military empire, would be established. It
was asserted that the political results, accruing from any Government
having at its disposal such a class of ships, would be equally
important; while the facility provided for the transportation of large
numbers of soldiers across the seas would necessarily consolidate
more closely the power of Great Britain with that of her distant
possessions. The revolution a squadron of such vessels would effect
in war would be as great as their results in commerce; moreover, for
the first time, steam would achieve on the ocean what it had already
achieved on land.
But the arguments employed by the negotiators, backed as these were
by suggestions artfully thrown out by a portion of the public press,
to the effect that foreign powers might become possessed of this
invaluable ship to the prejudice, disadvantage, and dishonour of
Great Britain, terminated in failure. Government decided against the
proposal, and no alternative remained, but to wind up the affairs of
the existing company and to endeavour to make some arrangement whereby
fresh capital could be raised to complete the vessel.
[Sidenote: Further proposal to employ her as a cable-layer.]
The Atlantic cable, which was to form a telegraphic communication
between Europe and the United States, was completed in the summer of
1858, and the vessels of war employed in laying it across the Atlantic
having made an unsuccessful voyage on the first occasion, it was
strongly urged upon Government[428] that the _Great Eastern_ should
be fitted up by the Admiralty for the purpose of laying it down, as
the whole of the cable could be contained in this one vessel, thus
diminishing the risks of failure necessarily inseparable from employing
two ships, each starting in opposite directions from the middle of the
Atlantic. But the prevailing opinion then was, though it changed a
few years later, that the _Great Eastern_ from her height out of the
water was unadapted for such a service, and, further, that there were
no public grounds on which the application of the necessary sum from
the Exchequer to assist the operations of a private company could be
justified: therefore, Government distinctly refused to entertain the
proposal.
Renewed endeavours were now made to reorganise the undertaking, and
after much difficulty the affairs of the original company were wound
up, the sum of 160,000_l._ having been accepted for the sale and
transfer of the vessel to a new company, which came into possession of
her in the beginning of the year 1859.
[Sidenote: Makes her first sea trip, September 9th, 1859.]
Somewhere about 300,000_l._ having been subscribed for the new
undertaking, which received the name of the Great Ship Company, the
directors, after paying for the ship, had 140,000_l._ left to equip her
for sea; but it was not until September 1859 that the _Great Eastern_
was sufficiently complete to make her first trial trip. On Wednesday,
the 9th of that month, she took her departure from the Thames under
the most favourable circumstances, the weather being very fine with a
light breeze of wind and blue sky overhead. Starting with four tugs,
two on the bow and two at the quarter, to guide her through the narrow
parts of the river, she, after some delay and a few slight mishaps,
reached Purfleet, where she anchored for the night. At daylight, on the
following morning she started for the Nore, where she arrived about
noon, having obtained a speed of “13 knots” an hour, though only at
“half-speed”, her engines making not more than eight revolutions a
minute.
From the Nore the _Great Eastern_ proceeded successfully to Whitstable,
where she anchored, getting under weigh, thence, at a quarter past nine
on the following morning with a fresh breeze. After passing Margate
she encountered a stiff gale, where, as represented in the following
woodcut, she appears “quite at ease,” when “large ships were under
double reefed topsails” and small vessels were obliged to “lie to.”
[Sidenote: Accident off Hastings, and the opinion of the pilot.]
But an unfortunate accident occurred to her, when off Hastings, through
the explosion of one of her funnel-casings, causing the death of six
men employed in the engineering department, injuring various others,
and destroying nearly all the mirrors and other ornamental furniture
in the grand saloon. Though appalling enough at the time, no injury
was done to the hull or machinery of the vessel sufficient to prevent
her proceeding on her voyage to Weymouth, which she reached without
any further misfortune on the afternoon of Friday, within the time
anticipated for her arrival.
[Illustration: S.S. “GREAT EASTERN,” UNDER FULL SAIL AND STEAM, PASSING
DOVER.]
[Sidenote: Reaches Holyhead; and details of her voyage.]
On her arrival, the pilot who had been in charge of the _Great Eastern_
from Deptford to Portland (Weymouth Bay), made an official report of
her performances to the company,[429] confirming, in some measure,
the glowing accounts in many of the public journals and realising the
sanguine expectations of the directors, though their hopes of profit
had been somewhat damped by the accident which, apart from the loss of
life, entailed an outlay of 5000_l._ The necessary repairs having been
completed, the _Great Eastern_ proceeded from Portland to Holyhead,
but without passengers as originally contemplated. Starting at noon of
the 8th of October, she made the run to Holyhead in forty hours at an
“average speed of close upon 13 knots or more than 15 statute miles
in the hour,” having on some occasions attained a speed of 15 knots
an hour, the engineers and other experienced men on board feeling
“thoroughly convinced that, when in the condition which the company has
a right to expect, she will make easily 18 knots or 21 miles an hour.”
The paddle-engines, during one portion of the passage where a careful
record was kept, appear to have made from 8¾ to 9¾ revolutions per
minute, and the screw from 32 to 33½ revolutions in the same time,
the pressure being 20 pounds per square inch in both cases with the
throttle-valves half closed and both engines working on the second
grade of expansion, giving an average speed of 12 knots an hour, but
with an outlay of “10 tons of coal per hour.” On another occasion when
the sails were set, and the weather more favourable, she is said to
have attained a speed of 15 knots, with the screw making from 38 to 40,
and the paddles from 10½ to 11 revolutions per minute, and, at this
rate of speed, the screw boilers consumed on the average at the rate
of 170 tons per day, and the paddle-engines on the average 110 tons,
giving a consumption of 280 tons of coal each day under favourable
circumstances. During the highest rate of speed the engines made 11
revolutions for the paddles per minute and 43 for the screw. A special
trial gave the speed of the ship under paddle-wheels alone 7¼, and
under the screw alone 9 knots an hour.
[Sidenote: Makes her first voyage across the Atlantic, June 1860.]
Having made the trial trip to Holyhead to the satisfaction of her
directors, the _Great Eastern_ left that harbour shortly after noon on
the 2nd of November for Southampton, but did not leave that port on her
first voyage across the Atlantic until the morning of the 17th of June,
1860, reaching New York on the 28th of that month. The greatest speed
attained during the passage was 14½ knots an hour, and the greatest
distance run in any one day 333 knots.[430] Only thirty-six passengers
were found bold enough to accompany her on this voyage, besides two of
the directors. But the Americans gave her a warm and hearty reception
on her arrival at New York; hundreds of small vessels crowded with
people having gone out to meet her and bid her welcome, the scene in
the North River, where she moored, being described[431] as a “perfect
ovation.”
In the report which the directors issued to the shareholders[432]
shortly after the _Great Eastern_ returned to Milford Haven (where she
was placed with great skill on a gridiron and had her bottom cleaned
and painted) they state that 14,000_l._ had been remitted from the
agents at New York, and, though they had not then furnished their
accounts, the directors expressed a hope that the receipts would cover
the expenses of the trial trip to America without trenching on the
capital; they, however, stated that heavy outstanding claims remained
unsettled, and that they would require, to meet these demands and
put the ship into good working order, an additional capital of from
30,000_l._ to 40,000_l._
[Sidenote: Second voyage, May 1861.]
The requisite sum having been provided, the _Great Eastern_ left
Milford Haven on her second passage for New York on the 1st of May,
1861, with 100 passengers. On this occasion she consumed from 159 to
295 tons of coals per day; the entire distance (3093 miles) being
accomplished in ten days, though the wind, by her log, appears to have
been ahead during a considerable portion of the voyage. In one day,
she accomplished a distance of 348 nautical miles, her _greatest_
speed being 14½ knots an hour, or one half knot per hour less than the
_average_ speed anticipated on a voyage to India.[433]
[Sidenote: Third voyage to Quebec, July 1861.]
On the return of the _Great Eastern_ to England in the following month
of June, the apprehension of war with the United States occasioned by
the _Trent_ affair induced the British Government to engage her, with
other steamships, to transport troops and munitions of war to Canada.
But those embarked (or rather, for prudential reasons, allowed to
embark) fell far short of the number her designers had contemplated;
they had estimated 10,000, but the Government wisely limited the
number to 2079 men, 46 officers, 159 women, and 244 children, besides
40 cabin passengers who were civilians. Having landed her troops at
Quebec, she left that place on her return to England at four o’clock
on the morning of the 6th of August, and, though detained twelve hours
in crossing the bars in the River St. Lawrence, she arrived at her
moorings in the Mersey on Thursday at 8.30 P.M. of the 15th of that
month.
[Sidenote: Fourth voyage, September 1861.]
[Sidenote: Heavy gale off the S.W. coast of Ireland, compelled to
return to Cork.]
Early in the course of the following month, the _Great Eastern_ sailed
from the Mersey on her fourth Transatlantic voyage with 400 passengers
of different classes for New York. On this occasion she encountered,
on the 12th and 13th of September, a heavy gale of wind when about 280
miles off Cape Clear, and sustained so much damage that she was obliged
to put back and seek shelter in Cork Harbour. Various accounts of this
disaster appeared, at the time, in the daily journals. Her paddles,
it would appear, were seriously injured, and her rudder “rendered
useless.” Nor do the writers of these accounts speak very highly of the
anticipated superior sea-going qualities of the great ship, or of her
freedom from that violent motion in a gale, to which ordinary vessels
are subjected. Indeed, one of her passengers on this occasion, in a
letter he addressed to the _Times_, gives the most melancholy account
of her, but this description of the disaster and the imminent danger
to which her passengers were exposed, is probably exaggerated.[434]
Landsmen in a gale, especially when anything goes wrong, generally,
take the most gloomy view of matters; they picture to themselves
dangers which have no reality, and, when they see the seamen hurrying
to and fro to rectify, as far as possible, any damage the ship may have
sustained about her spars, rigging, or bulwarks, they too frequently
give themselves up for lost.
So long as the hull of a ship keeps sound the action of the ocean,
however disturbed, does not, materially, affect her safety, but, in
this action, the landsman, too frequently, sees just that kind of
danger which the sailor is said to have dreaded during a gale on land,
from falling slates and broken chimney-pots, congratulating himself
that he was at sea and not on shore in the midst of the storm.
[Sidenote: General remarks on the sea-going qualities of different
ships,]
On the other hand, the anticipated ease and safety of the _Great
Eastern_ during a gale was about as much exaggerated, as the
discomforts and danger the narrator of the gale has described. One
enthusiastic writer, among numerous others equally sanguine, in his
description of what might be expected from the great ship in a storm,
remarks “she will set circular sailing at defiance,” as if circular
sailing has anything whatever to do with the sea-going qualities of a
vessel. He then exclaims: “The line which in a tornado is said to make
a steady but resistless run of 20 miles will be counteracted by the
‘wave line,’ which Mr. Scott Russell has adopted as the principle on
which she has been built. Storms and tempests will be looked upon as
merely sublime phenomena, in nowise menacing peril as things scarcely
affecting the ship, but to be gazed upon out of snug cabin windows as
interesting episodes of the voyage.”
[Sidenote: and on the effect of wind in causing “rollers.”]
So much for the two extremes, but from these glowing anticipations on
the one hand, and the exaggerated account of the actual event on the
other, some lessons may be learned. The wave line (whatever may be its
advantage, if any, over the lines usually adopted by shipbuilders) can
produce no sensible difference in the violent motions of a ship at sea,
even if it tends to promote greater speed. Waves are of greater length
and height, according to the force of the gale and its extent of sweep
over the ocean.[435] In channels, where broken by projecting points of
land or promontories, they are short and disturbed. When crossing the
whole breadth of the Atlantic during a westerly gale, they are long,
and, as they roll between the headlands forming the Bay of Biscay,
they are also disturbed, rendering a voyage across that part of the
ocean a proverbially unpleasant and, with deeply laden and badly found
ships, a somewhat dangerous one. To insist, therefore, as some writers
appear to have done, that the lines of a ship should be in conformity
with the length and action of the waves, or that, by a careful study
of the law of fluids, they can be so drawn as to render, under all the
varied circumstances of a long voyage, one ship more easy or even more
swift than another, is, I fear, attributing to science more than it can
reasonably claim; for though, by its general application to the models
of ships, great improvements have of late years been made, I can hardly
suppose that _lines_, based on the action of fluids, which must be
more or less disturbed by the weight and velocity of a vessel passing
through them, and by the action of the winds on their surface, do
really possess any superior advantages so far as regards greater ease,
speed or safety.[436]
Nor had the idea, which prevailed at the time, that a ship of the vast
dimensions of the _Great Eastern_ would bid defiance to the danger of
the ocean, much more foundation in fact. No doubt a vessel of 1000 tons
is a much safer mode of conveyance across the Atlantic than one of 100
tons, and a vessel of 2000 tons may be still more so, but not to either
the same degree or extent. Moreover, a ship of double that size, or say
4000 tons, is no safer, though she may be more comfortable, for various
self-evident reasons, such as being less liable to receive on deck the
crest of the waves, or by affording more space and better ventilation
in her cabins; but anything beyond that size will, assuredly, not
realize much greater speed, though she may afford greater comfort.
[Sidenote: Real truth about “momentum.”]
A vessel of 100 tons is lifted by every large wave, and, consequently,
the distance she has to traverse is increased. As the size is enlarged
this particular description of motion diminishes, in proportion to
the length of the vessel. But there is a limit to this advantage, as
there is to most other things, and a vessel of 5000 tons and 400 feet
long, will be, similarly, borne on the crest of two or more of the
largest waves as a vessel 700 feet in length, and, therefore, would
lose nothing in speed from the ascending and descending motions: this
fact has, indeed, been satisfactorily proved, as the ships of the
Ismay, Cunard, Inman, Allan, and other lines of steamers employed in
Transatlantic voyages have made more rapid passages than ever the
_Great Eastern_ did.[437] Speed, beyond a certain size, is determined
by the model, and the power of propulsion, due regard being had to
the weight to be propelled and the resistance offered by the depth and
extent of immersion. The momentum, about which a great deal was said
and from which so much was expected in the case of the _Great Eastern_,
though of some importance, when vessels of 100 tons are compared with
those of 1000, is of much less consequence in the case of vessels of
unusual weight and dimensions. It is at best only transitory, while, to
drive a vessel of 20,000 tons through the water at the rate of 15 miles
an hour, somewhere about four times greater power would be necessary
than to secure the same speed in a vessel similarly constructed, of
5000 tons, although less power in proportion to tonnage would suffice
in smaller vessels.
[Sidenote: Very large ships not so safe as smaller ones, as their
damages are less easily repaired.]
But, with regard to the first and by far the most important
consideration, the safety of a vessel at sea, I am disposed to think,
though contrary to the generally accepted view, that ships of vast
dimensions are less safe, in exceptional circumstances, than those of
ordinary size. Take for instance the case of the accident to the _Great
Eastern_, to which I have just referred, in which she lost her rudder,
or when, at all events, it was so seriously injured as to be rendered
inefficient. I need say nothing of the difficulty, or it might be of
the impossibility, of providing a temporary mode of guiding a vessel of
such huge dimensions. The loss of the rudder of any vessel in a gale of
wind is no doubt a serious matter and one which must ever cause peril,
but that peril increases with the size of the ship, for, when thus
rendered helpless, the greater the bulk, the greater is the resistance
offered to the action of the waves as they strike her sides. This is
exemplified, though to a far greater degree, by the fact that a strong
ship, on which the beating of the waves in the open sea would make
little or no impression, would be dashed to pieces by the same waves
if she was stranded on a lee shore. A large ship without rudder and,
consequently, helpless in the hollow or trough of the sea would offer
resistance to the stroke of the wave in proportion to her weight, and
the wave would, consequently, strike with the greatest force on the
body of the greatest weight. This, in some measure, and not without
reason, accounts for the alarm created in the mind of the passenger
on board of the _Great Eastern_ during the gale he so graphically
describes.
[Sidenote: Chief later use of _Great Eastern_ as a cable layer, but
not, even here, remunerative.]
From the time of this disaster, the movements of the _Great Eastern_
are not of much historical interest, so far as regards merchant
shipping. It is true, that she proved of great value and importance in
laying the Atlantic telegraph cable during the summer of 1865, and, in
the very skilful feat of picking up from the depths of the ocean the
broken ends, and in laying another Atlantic cable during the summer of
1866, when no other ship of sufficient dimensions could then have been
found to perform that difficult and hazardous undertaking.[438] She has
also proved very useful since, in other similar operations, in India
and elsewhere; but, for ordinary commercial operations as various
persons predicted,[439] when she was first projected and long before
she was sent to sea, she has been a ruinous, though not a lamentable
failure.[440] Even the work of laying cables was not remunerative, for,
by a report of the directors issued in March 1869, it appears that the
great ship had been arrested for a debt of 35,000_l._, that the current
expenses had, considerably, exceeded the receipts, and that there were
other claims which had to be met, before she could again proceed to
sea. These difficulties were, however, overcome. The debt of 35,000_l._
was settled for the comparatively moderate sum of “4000_l._!” and
the other demands, though not nearly so extortionate, were amicably
adjusted. In 1868 the _Great Eastern_ was again chartered by the
Telegraphic Construction and Maintenance Company, for the purpose of
laying a telegraph cable between Brest and Ducksburgh near Boston; and
for the same company she laid a telegraph cable between Aden and Bombay
in the spring of 1870.[441] In 1873 and 1874 she laid other two cables
between Valentia and Heart’s Content in Newfoundland; and on the 25th
of July, 1875, she completed her charter (20,000_l._ per annum), and
was handed over to her owners. Since then she has been placed upon a
gridiron to have her bottom cleaned, and I daresay her owners are now
at a loss to know how she can be profitably employed.
[Sidenote: Concluding remarks.]
But it will hardly be gainsaid, that the building, launching, and
navigating such a ship are events in the history of merchant shipping,
sufficiently important to justify the extent of space devoted to her
in these pages; and, should my imperfect record survive for the next
hundred or fifty years, there may be found in these pages a collection
of facts relating to a ship, more marvellous than that of Hiero, King
of Syracuse, or of the Penteconter of Ptolemy Philopator. Perhaps, too,
this record may contain more details of value, than the historians
of those ships have handed down to posterity, for it may be that,
a hundred or fifty years hence, the maritime commerce of the world
may have grown to an extent sufficient to justify, with reasonable
prospects of profit, another ship of the dimensions of the _Great
Eastern_. I can only write of the past and the present, leaving the
future to be dealt with by those who may follow me, and, perhaps, all
that posterity will be able to say against the enterprising promoters
of the _Great Eastern_ may, hereafter, be condensed in the flattering
eulogium, “their ideas in regard to dimensions were in advance of their
age—they were only before their time.” Though far from realizing
the expectations once entertained with regard to speed and small
consumption of fuel, her failure is, mainly, to be attributed to the
fact that, at the time she was constructed, there were no lines of
traffic on which a vessel of such huge capacity could procure, with
despatch, the amount of freight or passage money necessary to insure a
profit. But, from first to last, even when the failures of her launch
had become too apparent, the people of England were proud of her,
and this is not surprising, for no other country could have raised,
by voluntary subscription, and without any aid from Government, the
capital requisite to construct and equip this monster ship for sea.
That their pride should have found vent in numerous paragraphs in
the public press is only what might have been expected, for, though
shrewd men shook their heads, and cautious men declined to invest their
capital in the ship, she was a marvellous piece of workmanship, even
the Americans admitting, that England might well feel an honest pride
in having produced such a triumph of mechanical skill, and welcoming
her as they did to their shores, as a characteristic evidence of the
genius, energy, and pluck of their fatherland.
Although I have not hesitated to expose the want of forethought, which
rendered the _Great Eastern_ a commercial failure, and the grave
mistake in her launch, I cannot refrain from admiring the extension
of the spirit of national pride to private undertakings such as
these. Much has been learned and much has still to be learned from
her. Various mechanical contrivances, now in use, were first adopted
in this great ship. In herself she indicates the most astounding
progress. Indeed, when I consider that only forty years had elapsed
since the small engines of the _Comet_ which, though they puffed and
strained, and made noise enough to frighten the people who watched the
little vessel in her progress down the Clyde, were the finest of the
period, and compare them with the vast engines of the _Great Eastern_,
working in their combined action without the slightest jerk, and almost
noiselessly, my mind is lost in wonder at the prodigious advance made,
within my own time, in this mighty civilizing instrument.
FOOTNOTES:
[426] Mr. Brunel’s estimate to the directors of the cost of the launch
was 14,000_l._
[427] “What fleet (exclaims the writer of a leading article in one
of the London daily papers) could stand in the way of such a mass,
weighing some 30,000 tons, and driven through the water by 12,000
horse-power at the rate of 22 or 23 miles an hour?”
[428] See Mr. Griffiths’ speech in the House of Commons, 9th July, 1858.
[429] Extract from the pilot’s report:
“On arriving at Sea Reach I found the vessel so completely under
command with the use of her own paddle-wheels and steam-engines, that
I decided on casting off the steam-tugs altogether, and proceeding
afterwards without any assistance. On reaching the North Foreland,
we experienced a stiff double-reefed topsail breeze, during which
other vessels were pitching and tossing a good deal, and, on passing
the Downs, the wind increased to a close-reefed breeze, and many
large vessels were lying with two anchors down. Throughout, the
vessel steered with the greatest ease, and, literally, without any
perceptible motion, and for some time I have no hesitation in stating
that, computing our distance by points on land, which admit of no
mistake as to distance, we were making fully 14 knots an hour with
both paddle-wheels and screw-engines working fully one-third under
their pressure. The misadventure, which occurred off Hastings, in no
way interfered with the working or progress of the vessel, and, with
the single engineering accident in question, we made the voyage from
Deptford to Portland without any check or interference of any kind. The
vessel is, in every respect, an excellent sea-boat, and I may state
without any hesitation that, with sufficient sea-room, she is even
more easily handled and under command than an ordinary ship, either
sailing-vessel or steam.”
[430] Her daily performances were as follows:
17th June 285 knots
18th June 296 knots
19th June 296 knots
20th June 276 knots
21st June 304 knots
22nd June 280 knots
23rd June 302 knots
24th June 299 knots
25th June 325 knots
26th June 333 knots
27th June 254 knots
[431] Letter from passenger in the _Great Eastern_.
[432] 14th October, 1860.
[433] In the various newspapers and reports I have searched for
information about this ship, and other inquiries, I have never had any
reason assigned for the _Great Eastern_ not having been placed, when
ready for sea, on the India line, from which so much was expected of
her, and for which she was specially built; or why her new directors
sent her, on hap-hazard and expensive cruises, down channel and across
the Atlantic, when every trip showed a ruinous loss. But I suppose the
true reason is to be found in the fact, that they could not obtain for
either India or Australia sufficient goods and passengers to justify
the heavy outlay necessary for such long voyages (the cost of outfit
may in itself have been an obstacle), and that, in truth, there was
no branch of maritime commerce wherein she could then be profitably
employed.
[434] “_Thursday._—This morning we have a fresh gale, with a good
sea. Noon: A heavy gale; wind, from north to west; sea, tremendous. We
roll very heavily, and ship many seas. I now begin to understand the
true meaning of a gale in the Atlantic. The captain looks anxious, but
the passengers have faith in the ‘big ship.’ The ‘rolling’ is fearful,
and quite upsets all persons’ notions of the steadiness of the _Great
Eastern_. Two o’clock: Things look worse. The captain tries to put our
head to the wind. The port paddle gives way with a great crash in the
attempt. The jib is set, I presume to aid in steering, but it is blown
to ribands in a few moments. The rolling increases; the deck presents
an angle of 45 degrees, and none but experienced seamen can walk
about. Attention is suddenly drawn to the boats; they are suspended
on either side, but mostly on fixed davits. The heavy rolling brings
the boats in violent contact with the waves. The tackling of the long
boat becomes deranged; a man and a boy enter it to remedy the evil, but
the wind strikes the boat, and gives the occupants forcible ejectment,
happily upon the deck, and in a moment it is floating far away from us.
Four other boats share a similar fate in rapid succession. Continued
efforts are made to bring the ship to the wind. I watch the men at the
wheel—there is almost an army of them. 5.45.—Our position is indeed
critical. A tremendous sea has just struck our stern. It has broken her
rudder head. Still, we are not quite at the mercy of the waves; we have
our screw, and we have our starboard paddle. The wind is now getting to
the south-west.
“_Friday_, 6 A.M.—We are drifting before the wind at the rate of 3
or 4 knots an hour. We have never been more than 300 miles from land.
We are drifting eastward now; but, even if the wind does not change,
it will be many days before we can reach land in this manner. The
pumps are all going. I do not like the sound, but am assured they have
complete mastery over the water. The water has got in through the ports
and by way of the deck.
“There is scarcely a cabin in the ship to which the water has not found
its way. Many require a change of clothes, and the hatchways of the
baggage stores are opened. The scene that presents itself defies all
description. The water has got in, and in sufficient force to float
even many of the larger articles. The rocking of the ship has set the
whole mass in motion.”
[435] “From a paper of great interest it would seem that,
approximately, the cube of the height of the waves is proportional to
the square of the velocity of the wind. Most of the conclusions drawn
in this paper are from observations made during the voyages of the
_Bonite_ and _Astrolabe_.” (“Naval Science,” October 1874, Part II., p.
159.)
[436] See paper on “The Difficulties of Speed Calculations,” by Mr.
Denny, read at the Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders in
Scotland, 23rd March, 1875, pp. 2, 3, and 4.
[437] See Appendices Nos. 10 and 17, pp. 606 and 617.
[438] 1000_l._ per month was paid for the use of the ship alone. When
the agreement expired in 1867, she was chartered by a French Company to
carry passengers between New York and Brest for the Paris exhibition.
Her cabins were then altered and redecorated, and new boilers fitted
to the screw engines. But the French Company was unsuccessful, and the
_Great Eastern_ only made one voyage in its service.
[439] Towards the close of the year 1857, when the prospects of the
_Great Eastern_ were exciting much public attention, the author
ventured to offer to his constituents at Tynemouth, nearly all of
whom were interested in ships, the following remarks (reported in the
newspapers of the period) with regard to her:
“Very shortly there will be launched a ship of vast and hitherto
unparalleled dimensions: I allude to the _Great Eastern_. If that ship
answers, I do not know where we shall be with our small vessels. As
this is a subject, upon which opinions have been greatly at variance,
perhaps you would like to hear mine. It must be a matter of deep
interest to all present, because you are all directly or indirectly
interested in the shipping trade, to know whether such a ship as the
_Great Eastern_ is, or is not, likely to answer in a commercial point
of view, and I venture on this topic because I have heard strong
opinions expressed to the effect that, commercially, she will be a
great triumph. For my part, I believe her to be a great triumph of
mechanical skill, I believe that no finer or stronger vessel has
ever been put together: so far as regards her formation, I think she
is a very splendid model: but, with reference to the speed she is
expected to attain, I doubt very much whether she will ever realise the
anticipation of her builder, though I think that we, as a nation, ought
to be proud of having men who can produce so marvellous a piece of
mechanism. But we must look, also, to the commercial element, because
in this, I, and most of you are deeply interested. If such a ship
as the _Great Eastern_ be found to answer commercially, most of our
property will go to the wall, for, in a short time, our small vessels
will be of very little use to us. The course of commerce is this: If a
Manchester merchant has 1000 bales of a particular description of goods
to send to Calcutta, he does not send the whole of them in one bottom,
because he might thus overstock the market. On the contrary, he sends
them in from four to six different vessels, and he does this for two
reasons: first, that by so doing he feeds the market; and, secondly,
that he gets, thereby, quicker returns. The principle of commerce is to
send out supplies in relays. Then again, we find that passengers do not
go out in masses, but, at such intervals, as suit them best. And, in
times of war, statesmen find it the wisest plan to send out not 1000,
much less 10,000 men in one bottom, but from 400 to 600, at the utmost,
in one ship. And this must appear to be sound policy, when we picture
to ourselves what might be the result of sending out a whole army in
the _Great Eastern_. I do not take into consideration the contingency
of the ship going to the bottom. I shall not ask you to imagine so
fearful a calamity, but, supposing anything happened to her machinery
and occasioned a serious stoppage, when expedition was necessary to the
attainment of a certain object, the effect would be that the whole army
would be detained. No Government would dare to send so large a force in
one vessel. Therefore, looking at the question, politically as well as
from a commercial point of view, I am of opinion that we have nothing
to fear from the competition of leviathans such as the _Great Eastern_.”
[440] If any further proof was required that the _Great Eastern_
proved a failure in the two points, speed and comfort at sea, on which
her protectors mainly built their hopes, it will be found in a small
and amusing book by M. Jules Verne, translated from the French, and
published by Messrs. Sampson Low and Co. (1875), entitled “The Floating
City.” M. Verne, who made a voyage in this ship in 1867 from Liverpool
to New York, records, from the official returns, her speed as not
exceeding 250 nautical miles each day on the average, and he describes
her movements during strong winds as “rolling frightfully, her bare
masts describing immense circles in the air.”
[441] It has been stated that the loss upon the _Great Eastern_ up to
this period amounted to close upon 1,000,000_l._ sterling!
CHAPTER XV.
River and coast trade of Great Britain—The _Iona_, paddle
steamer—First screw collier _Q. E. D._—The _King Coal_
collier—Her dimensions and crew, _note_—Improvement in care
of seamen—Leith and London traders—Dublin and Holyhead
Mail-Packets—Their great speed and regularity—Dimensions,
power, capacity, and cost—Dover and Calais Mail-Packets—The
_Victoria_—Her speed—Proposed tunnel and other modes of crossing
the Straits of Dover—Mr. Fowler’s plan—The _Castalia_—The
_Bessemer_—Her swinging saloon—The cigar-ship built at
Baltimore, 1858—Similar ship built on the Thames, 1864—Perkins’s
economical steam-engine and proposed fast boat—The Engine
of the _Comet_—Modifications in the construction of Marine
Engines—Ratio of speed to power—The Compound Engine more
economical than the simple—Great skill required for building
perfect ships, and, especial importance to England of having the
best ships—But her ships not yet perfect, though great progress
has been made during the last half century.
[Sidenote: River and coast trade of Great Britain.]
Although Great Britain supplies from its rivers and coasts
three-fourths of the ocean-going steamers of the world, its own
coasting and inland navigation affords but a very limited field for the
employment of vessels of any kind compared with the shores and rivers
of America, India, and China.
Before the introduction of steamers, a few row-boats, sailing wherries,
and barges were sufficient to conduct the whole of the river traffic.
This new expedient, however, though soon met in another form by the
competition of railways, has vastly developed even this comparatively
limited trade. Steam-boats now, whether on business or pleasure, are
to be found in great numbers on every navigable stream, and are still
on the increase; indeed, the improved facilities for intercourse on
land, so far from retarding that increase, gives fresh life to the
swarms of passenger-boats, yachts, steam-launches and steam-barges,
which ply wherever they can find the means of flotation, and,
especially, on the Thames and Clyde.
[Sidenote: The _Iona_ paddle steamer.]
Offering, as it does, greater inducements than any other river in the
United Kingdom, there are now to be found on the Clyde many elegant and
commodious steam-boats. Although generally inferior in size, equipment,
and speed to those of the Hudson or Long Island Sound, one of them, the
_Iona_, a paddle-wheel boat, employed in the passenger traffic between
Glasgow and the Western Highlands, is almost unrivalled.[442] This
beautiful vessel affords deck and cabin accommodation for no less than
1200 passengers, and her long range of saloon houses, with plate-glass
windows extending right fore and aft, gives her a graceful and imposing
appearance. Fleets of similar vessels, though of inferior dimensions,
now ply between Glasgow and the numerous watering places which line the
shores of the estuary of the Clyde, presenting a striking contrast to
the times of Henry Bell’s _Comet_.
[Sidenote: First screw collier, _Q. E. D._]
[Sidenote: The _King Coal_ collier.]
Equally marked has been the improvement in the vessels now
employed in the coal and coasting trades of Great Britain. From the
sailing-vessels of the north-east coast, of which an illustration has
been furnished,[443] we advanced to the screw, and, in 1844, built of
iron the first screw-collier, the _Q. E. D._, for the conveyance of
coal from Newcastle to London. She was heavily barque-rigged, and, in
style and form, somewhat resembled the fast Baltimore clippers, the
intention of her owners being to depend chiefly for speed upon her
sails, and to use her engine as an auxiliary power. Her mizen mast, a
hollow tube of iron, was made to serve the purpose of a funnel, and
the whole of her standing rigging consisted of _wire rope_. She had a
double bottom, divided into separate chambers, so that any injury to
the one would not affect the other, each being covered with a false
floor and hermetically closed. Into these vacant spaces between the
bottom and the floors, water could be admitted by means of cocks, for
the purpose of ballast, and, at the same time, easily pumped out again
by an engine when not required. The _Q. E. D._ therefore, in herself,
contained many inventions then little known, the more important of
which, as the wire rope and water ballast, are now in general use. But
the auxiliary engine and full sailing rig did not answer in the coal
trade better than it had done for distant voyages, the sails in this,
as in all cases, having become auxiliary to the engine as a propelling
power. Steamers of light rig and comparatively full power, now carry on
the largest proportion of this trade, although there is still room for
a considerable number of the old sailing-colliers. An illustration of
one of the finest steam-colliers will be found on the following page,
and I am enabled through the courtesy of her owners to furnish not
merely a drawing, but the particulars of this vessel, which bears the
appropriate name of _King Coal_.[444]
[Illustration: “KING COAL.”]
We see, here, another instance of the vast progress of the last forty
years. The ordinary collier of that period, of 230 tons register, or
with a capacity of from 16 to 17 keels of coals, required[445] a crew
of ten men, and from a month to five weeks for the round voyage
to London. In the course of the year she delivered, under the most
favourable circumstances, 3500 tons of coals; but the screw-collier of
to-day, requiring a complement of only seventeen men, including the
engineers and stokers and a steward (a luxury wholly unknown to the
collier skipper of byegone days), conveys, annually, on the same round,
50,000 tons; while the deck-houses for the protection of her men in wet
and stormy weather are comforts the crew of a sailing-collier never
would have dreamt of.
[Sidenote: Improvement in care of seamen.]
Nor are the seamen less cared for in other respects. The accommodation
provided for the collier sailor of to-day is of an order very superior
to that afforded him forty years ago. Thus he can make sure of a dry
bed and a fire to cook his victuals during the stormiest weather,
comforts too frequently unknown to his predecessors; if he may still
have causes for complaint, they are incomparably few to those his
fathers had before him, and if this service does not now produce the
same class of hardy men, who helped to crown the ships of England with
laurels of immortal fame in the days of Duncan and Nelson, this arises,
in some measure, from the fact that the good living and comforts of
modern times tend to render them less willing to endure, or perhaps
less disposed for, the prompt and resolute action which, in most
achievements, alike of war and peace, insures success.
But, even, if it be true that the seamen of to-day are too much
pampered and nursed, they have, unquestionably, in their profession
many hardships still to endure, with discomforts and even dangers,
which might be avoided. The philanthropist, however, who advocates
changes likely to weaken the Inspired maxim that man was born to live
by the sweat of his brow, forgets his calling and injures those whose
cause he advocates.
[Sidenote: Leith and London traders.]
In every other branch of our coasting trade, the change has been quite
as marked as in that of the coal trade, steamers, on all the important
lines, having superseded sailing-vessels. A few of my readers may
remember the celebrated Leith smacks which derived their name from
trading between that port and the Thames, carrying on, before the
invention of railroads, a great portion of the passenger and goods
traffic between Edinburgh and London.[446] Although the line of
maritime communication, thus opened in 1809, was conducted in these
smacks with considerable success, they were, subsequently, in part,
replaced by clipper schooners, vessels of great speed, which maintained
their position for some years against the steamers of the General Steam
Navigation Company; but the London and Edinburgh Shipping Company, to
whom they belonged, were obliged, in 1853, to adopt the new mode of
propulsion, so that all the most valuable portion of this trade is now
conducted by steamers. Indeed, they now encircle the whole of the
coasts of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and there is hardly a port in
the kingdom which has not its steam-ship communication either with the
respective capitals or elsewhere.
[Sidenote: Dublin and Holyhead Mail Packets.]
Although constructed chiefly for the conveyance of goods, most of these
lines have excellent accommodation for passengers, especially those I
have just specified. This is also the case with the steamers plying
between London, Dundee, and Aberdeen, Glasgow and Liverpool, and with
many of the lines connecting Ireland with England and Scotland. Among
the most celebrated are the Dublin and Holyhead packets, whose work is
confined exclusively to the conveyance of the mails and passengers.
Before the introduction of steam-vessels, it was no unfrequent
occurrence for the sailing-packets, then engaged in this service,
to be three or more days in crossing the Irish Channel; and, from a
Parliamentary return issued in 1815, we learn that, for the space
of nine days in the previous year, only one packet could sail owing
to adverse winds. In 1819, the passage of the sailing-cutters then
employed averaged twenty hours from Holyhead to Dublin. In the summer
of that year, however, the _Talbot_, of 156 tons, built by Wood of Port
Glasgow, with engines of 30 horse-power each, by Napier, was placed on
the station; and the _Ivanhoe_, of somewhat the same size, by Scott of
Greenock, with engines also by Napier, followed in the course of the
ensuing year.
[Sidenote: Their great speed and regularity.]
The unexpected success of these steamers overcame the professional
prejudices of the commanders of the sailing mail-packets, who had
recently recorded as their opinion “that no vessel could perform the
winter passage with safety but sailing-cutters.” The wish alone in
this case must have been father to the thought, for, when the steamers
_Royal Sovereign_ and _Meteor_ soon afterwards took up their station
on the line, the cutters disappeared from it for ever. In fact, these
steamers had so fully established the numerous advantages to be derived
from the employment of vessels of this description, that, as early as
1823, a company was formed to carry on the communication regularly
throughout the year by means of steam-vessels only. Subsequently,
vessels superior to those of the class of the _Meteor_ were constructed
for this important service, and there were no faster or finer vessels
of the period than the _Banshee_ and the _Llewellyn_, which, in 1848,
were placed on this station, having on their trial trips attained a
speed of upwards of 18 statute miles per hour.[447]
[Sidenote: Dimensions, power, capacity, and cost.]
But the public soon required still faster and more commodious steamers;
and a committee of the House of Commons appointed to inquire into the
subject recommended the construction of vessels of 2000 tons each,
with power sufficient to attain a speed of upwards of 20 statute
miles the hour. Consequently, four ships were built, the _Connaught_,
_Ulster_, and _Munster_ by Messrs. Laird and Sons of Birkenhead, and
the _Leinster_ by Mr. Samuda of London.[448] The engines of all these
vessels are on the oscillating principle. In the two pairs constructed
by Messrs. Ravenhill, Salkeld, and Co., for the _Leinster_ and the
_Connaught_, the cylinders are 98 inches diameter with a length of
stroke of 6 feet 6 inches. The eight boilers are multitubular, four
being at each end of the engine-room space, arranged in pairs, with
one funnel to each pair. The paddle-wheels are on the feathering
principle, and are each 31 feet extreme diameter. On the trial trips
the engines worked at the rate of 25½ revolutions per minute, under
a steam pressure of 25 lbs. per square inch. The mean of the runs of
the _Leinster_ at the measured mile in Stokes Bay was at the rate of
20½ statute miles an hour, a greater speed by one mile an hour, than
had up to this time (1860) been obtained by any other vessel in this
country:—but the _Connaught_, when subsequently tried at the measured
mile, attained a still higher result, the mean of her runs showing the
speed of 20¾ statute miles per hour.[449]
The engines of the _Ulster_ and _Munster_ (constructed by James Watt
and Co.) as well as their lines, very much resemble the other two, the
main difference being that the diameters of the cylinders are each
96 inches, with 7-feet length of stroke. The internal arrangements
of all the vessels are planned, with the object of providing for the
comfort and accommodation of the public, in the way best calculated
to mitigate, and, as far as possible, to prevent, the sufferings
often accompanying the passage of the Irish Channel. In this and in
most other respects, great success has attended the objects their
designers had in view. Their saloons and cabins are large, lofty, and
well ventilated; the principal one being upwards of 60 feet in length
by 17 feet in breadth, and 9 feet 6 inches in height. Nor have these
magnificent vessels failed to meet the requirements of Government.
The regularity of their voyages has been surprising;[450] and I am not
aware of any loss of life or property which has occurred in connection
with them since they started in 1860.
[Sidenote: Dover and Calais Mail Packets.]
[Sidenote: The _Victoria_.]
[Sidenote: Her speed.]
Among the numerous other steamers now employed in the short voyage
mail service, may be mentioned the small swift vessels running between
Calais and Dover, Folkestone and Boulogne, Dover and Ostend, as well
as between Southampton and the coasts of France, the Channel Islands,
Jersey and Guernsey. They are beautiful boats of their class, and,
considering their size and the rough weather they are frequently
obliged to encounter, they perform their respective passages with
remarkable speed and regularity. It is a rare occurrence for these
packet-boats to be detained by a storm; and the manner in which they
dash out of Dover or Calais harbours, at almost full speed, against a
strong gale and an angry cross sea, shows that, if the British sailor
has, from want of practice, deteriorated in seamanship, he has lost
none of his native _pluck_. I know no more spirited and daring men than
the masters of most of these small mail steam-packets, unless it be the
Deal boatmen. They are cool and unruffled, while the smart little craft
under their charge forces its way through the waves at the rate of
twelve or thirteen miles an hour in the face of a gale which a landsman
would describe as a “violent storm.”
On the next page is an excellent illustration of one of these vessels
on her passage from Folkestone to Boulogne.
This smart vessel, the _Victoria_ (well known no doubt to many of my
readers), was built by Samuda, and her engines by Penn. On her trial
trip over the measured mile, she attained a speed of 16½ knots or
upwards of 18 statute miles an hour, which has been well maintained on
the service in which she is engaged.[451]
[Illustration: S.S. “VICTORIA.”]
[Sidenote: Proposed tunnel]
These boats, however, are in their turn about to be superseded: at
least, various other means have been suggested for crossing the English
Channel between Calais and Dover. The two most gigantic schemes are
a bridge over the channel and a tunnel below it, both having one
chief object in view, relief from sea-sickness during that short,
and, to most landsmen, very unpleasant passage. The bridge, though
it had a few influential and enthusiastic supporters, appears to
have been abandoned as wholly impracticable; but the tunnel is still
contemplated, and experiments are now being made to ascertain the
nature of the soil beneath the bed of the sea at the requisite depth.
Its projectors, who are men of influence and experience, are sanguine
of success, but as its cost will be enormous, though estimated at
not more than one-half that of the Suez Canal, and, as it cannot
be completed for many years, other plans have been in the meantime
suggested, two of which have been already partially put in operation.
[Sidenote: and other modes of crossing the straits of Dover.]
It would be entirely beyond my province to offer any opinion as to the
practicability of either a bridge or tunnel, but I shall endeavour to
furnish my readers with a brief outline of the novel description of
vessels now prepared to cross this narrow strait.
The question of bridging, tunnelling, or otherwise crossing the channel
by easier modes than the existing mail packets has long occupied the
attention of men of science, however much they may have differed with
regard to the best mode of effecting the object in view. Among various
modes, the one suggested by Mr. Fowler, C.E., in 1864, for which plans
were deposited in 1865 and 1867, and which was fully brought before
Parliament in 1872, seems to be well worthy of further consideration,
embracing as it does the extension of the “through traffic” without
change of carriage to all parts of the continent. This is one of the
important objects sought to be achieved by the tunnel, but at four
times the cost.
[Sidenote: Mr. Fowler’s plan.]
Mr. Fowler proposes to build a steam-boat fit to receive a railway
train complete, and carry it bodily across the channel from the South
Eastern and London and Chatham lines to those of the North Eastern
of France. To effect this object, it will be necessary to increase,
materially, the existing facilities of Dover Harbour, and to construct
a new harbour on the French coast, of sufficient depth of water to
receive, at all times of the tide, vessels of the dimensions he
suggests. The transport of railway trains, by means of vessels across
broad sheets of water, has, already, been proved to be practicable. The
operation may be seen, not merely in various parts of the United States
and on the Lake of Constance, but in Scotland, where “the North British
Railway Company carry trains across an arm of the sea, five miles in
width.”[452] Nor is the plan suggested for connecting the steamers with
the lines of railway, so that the carriages may run on board, either
novel or impracticable. The ferry-boats of New York dove-tail, if I
may so express it, into the end of a street and carry the whole of its
traffic in one continuous line of passengers, carts, and waggons to
Brooklyn, or across the Bay of New York to Staten Island and other more
remote places: so that, in this respect, there is nothing visionary or
impracticable in the scheme proposed by Mr. Fowler. Nor, so far as my
nautical knowledge extends, are there any valid objections to it in
other respects except the cost. There is no doubt that these vessels,
from their immense weight, size, and speed, will realise every comfort
by way of stability that can be attained in crossing the English
Channel at its narrowest part, while their vast dimensions afford
ample space for every possible convenience to passengers, and, even,
luxuries, if desired.
[Illustration: LONGITUDINAL SECTION
SECTION OF BOAT & HOIST
_Showing Carriages being run on board_
DIMENSIONS
LENGTH 450 _feet_
BEAM 57 ”
DEPTH of HOLD 14 ”
DRAUGHT 12 ”
FREEBOARD 8½ ”
TRANSVERSE SECTION
CHANNEL PACKET PROPOSED BY MR. FOWLER, C.E.]
But in order that my readers may more clearly understand Mr. Fowler’s
proposal, I furnish (page 559) longitudinal and transverse sections of
the boat he contemplates, with an illustration of the mode by which
the carriages are to be transferred from the lines of railway on board
the vessel, and, in a footnote,[453] his explanatory remarks. Further
explanations will be found in detail by reference to the evidence
given before a Committee of the House of Lords, but the more important
points of that evidence with the number of the question is supplied
herewith.[454]
The other boats, which have been already built, do not contemplate the
transport of the railway carriages, but are simply meant to afford an
easier mode of transit for passengers than at present exists.
The first, planned by Captain Dicey, formerly Master Attendant at the
port of Calcutta, proposed, according to the prospectus issued by the
company, “To provide ample accommodation for all classes of passengers
under shelter as well as on deck; to reduce the motion of rolling and
pitching of the vessel to a minimum; and to keep the draught of water
of the vessel to 6 feet, so that she may enter the ports on either side
of the channel at all hours of the tide.”
[Sidenote: The _Castalia_.]
To accomplish these objects, the company has built, at the Thames Iron
Works, a ship named the _Castalia_, which may be roughly described as
the two halves of a longitudinally divided hull, 290 feet long, placed
26 feet apart, and strongly bound together by a system of girders upon
which is erected, as may be seen by the following woodcut, a raised
deck inclosing cabin space. Under this deck in the water-way between
the halves of the hull, work a pair of paddle-wheels side by side upon
two separate shafts so that each wheel can be worked independently;
these wheels are driven by two pairs of engines, one pair in each half
of the vessel. The division and separation of the hull provides a deck
of no less than 60 feet in width, with a stability much greater than
any ordinary vessel possesses. Before and behind the engine, there are
various state saloons inclosed by the hurricane deck, running the whole
width of the vessel. These spacious rooms are handsomely decorated,
and provide various comforts seldom attainable at sea, while the top
platform affords a magnificent promenade 14 feet above the level of
the water-line. There are, also, decks below running fore and aft to
within a few feet of the double bow or stem in the separate hulls.
The _Castalia_ has accommodation for somewhere about 1000 passengers.
Her estimated cost was only 60,000_l._, but the actual outlay must
have been considerably in excess of that sum. Captain Dicey states
that, in designing this vessel, he was in some measure guided by
the performances of the “outriggers” that ply in the harbour of
Galle—“long cranky boats hollowed out of tree-trunks, and steadied in
the water by a log of timber fixed to the end of two wooden outriggers
which project some way from the vessel’s side.”[455]
[Illustration: CHANNEL PACKET “CASTALIA.” (BETWEEN DOVER AND CALAIS.)]
[Sidenote: The _Bessemer_.]
The other vessel, the _Bessemer_, is in many respects as different from
all other steam-ships afloat as the _Castalia_; but was constructed
with exactly the same objects in view, viz., to insure great speed,
light draught of water, and, more especially, the smallest possible
rolling or pitching motion. In a word, to afford to passengers crossing
the channel the quickest means of transit with the greatest amount
of ease, at an immersion so small, that the vessels could enter the
existing English and French harbours at all times of the tide. This
was the problem to be solved, and each inventor set about it in a
wholly different way. Nor was this surprising, considering that each
had been trained in an entirely different school. The projector of
the _Castalia_ is a sailor of great nautical experience; the designers
of the _Bessemer_ are an engineer and iron worker together with a
scientific shipbuilder. Perhaps, had the originators of the two schemes
consulted, amicably, instead of entering on a needless rivalry, they
would have produced a better and much swifter ship than the _Castalia_;
and a considerable sum of money expended on experiments would also have
been saved.
The _Bessemer_, of which an illustration is given on next page, was
designed entirely by Mr. E. J. Reed (late Constructor to the Royal
Navy), with the exception of the so-called “swinging saloon,” and was
constructed at Hull by Earle’s Shipbuilding and Engineering Company:
she is built entirely of iron, is a vessel of immense strength, and
has, as may be seen from the illustration, very much the appearance
of a breastwork turret ship of war. Her form is the same at bow and
stern and, for 48 feet from each end, she has a freeboard of about 3
feet only. Her extreme length at the water-line is 350 feet, and the
raised central portion, rising 8 feet above the low bow and stern, is
254 feet long, and, extending the whole width of the vessel, is 60 feet
over all. The ends, as will be perceived, are very sharp and low. The
engines and boilers, which drive the two pairs of paddle-wheels, are
fitted in the hold at either end of the raised portion of the vessel. A
series of deck-houses for private parties, refreshment bars, and other
rooms are carried fore and aft of the paddle-boxes on the breastwork
deck; there is, also, a covered walk between these and the windowed
sides of the “swinging saloon,” which rises about 8 feet through the
breastwork deck, with a flat roof pierced by two companion hatches.
[Illustration: S.S. “BESSEMER,” BUILT FOR SERVICE BETWEEN DOVER AND
CALAIS.]
The nominal horse-power of the engines of the _Bessemer_ is 750, but
they can work up to an indicated power of no less than 4600, and were
calculated to drive the vessel at a speed of from 18 to 20 statute
miles an hour. The two pairs of paddle-wheels are placed 106 feet
apart, and each wheel is 27 feet 10 inches in diameter, fitted with
twelve feathering floats. Many of the inventions first produced in
the _Great Eastern_ have been adopted also in the _Bessemer_, such as
hydraulic gear for starting the engines and for steering, telegraphic
wires leading from the bridges to the engine-rooms, and various other
ingenious contrivances to facilitate the working of the ship and her
machinery.
[Sidenote: Her swinging saloon.]
The “swinging saloon,” the invention of Mr. Bessemer, is in the centre
of the vessel, and is entered by two broad staircases leading to a
landing connected with the saloon by a flexible flooring. The saloon
itself is upheld on its axis by four steel supports, one at each end
and two close together in the middle. The aftermost of the two central
supports is hollow, and serves as part of the hydraulic machinery for
regulating the motion of the saloon itself, a spacious and elegant
apartment 70 feet in length, 35 feet wide and no less than 20 feet
high. It is presumed, that the hydraulic machinery will enable the
person in charge of it to keep the floor of this cabin perfectly level,
even when the ship herself is rolling violently in a heavy sea.[456]
Such are the vessels contemplated to supersede the existing Dover
and Calais packets. Although the _Castalia_ has not realised the
anticipated speed, and the _Bessemer_ has been found altogether
unsuitable for the service for which she was built, it would be
premature to condemn even her as a failure, while the _Castalia_, from
the comparative comfort she affords, is daily increasing in public
favour. I have not, however, hesitated to furnish my readers with full
particulars of these vessels, because they are interesting from their
novelty, and no great strides have, hitherto, been made, as we have
seen, in the art of ship-building or in the mode of propulsion, without
the aid of men, who have been bold enough to enter on novel and,
frequently, very costly experiments.
[Sidenote: The cigar ship built at Baltimore, 1858.]
[Sidenote: Similar ship built on the Thames in 1864.]
In these novelties, the Americans have, during recent years, taken
the lead, and, on this subject, I cannot omit to mention one of the
greatest maritime curiosities of this age, the cigar ship built at
Baltimore in 1858 by Messrs. Winans of that city,[457] who also,
subsequently, built another somewhat similar vessel on the Thames. Her
model in all respects resembled a cigar, or, in other words, she is a
great iron tube tapering away to a point at each end, and presenting
perhaps the strongest possible form for a ship, her deck being merely
the arc of a circle, on which were riveted staunchions for rails,
and between these a raised platform with seats on each side. She had
neither keel nor cutwater, and, in the language of the inventors, there
was “No blunt bow standing up above the water-line to receive blows
from heavy seas, no flat deck to hold, or close bulwark (as in the case
of ordinary vessels) to retain the water that a rough sea may cast upon
the vessel; neither mast, spars, nor rigging.” “The absence of sails,”
they add, “not only renders the parts thus abandoned by us useless,
but their abandonment in such a vessel as ours, will, we believe, most
materially promote safety, easy movement, or diminished strain of
vessels in rough weather; will save dead or nonpaying weight, insure
simplicity and economy of construction, and will give greater speed
in smooth water, less diminution of speed in rough water as well as
diminished resistance in moving power at all speeds in all water, and
result in shortening the average time of making sea voyages. The length
of our vessel,” they continue, “is more than eleven times its breadth
of beam, being 16 feet broad and 180 feet long. This whole length
is made available to secure water-lines, which are, materially, more
favourable to fast speed, and also to diminished resistance to moving
power of all speeds, than the water-lines of any of the sea-going
steamers now built, the best of which, looking to speed and ease of
movement, have a length of only eight times their breadth of beam:
the portion of our vessel not immersed, has the same lines as that
immersed, so that it will pass through the heaviest sea; while, from
its form and construction, no water can be shipped that will sensibly
affect the load, or endanger the safety of the vessel, which may, we
believe, be propelled at its highest speed in rough weather with an
impunity which is far from being attainable with vessels as now built,
to be propelled wholly or in part by sails.”
She was fitted with high pressure engines, and her boilers were on
the principle of those used in railway locomotives. With regard to
the propelling power it was a very novel application of the screw,
being a ring to which blades were attached at certain angles to
strike the water, the ring being itself made to revolve round the
vessel with great rapidity by the engines fitted in the centre of the
vessel; but Messrs. Winans do not furnish any further explanation
beyond stating that “Its position is such that its minimum hold of the
water will be much greater in proportion to the tonnage of the vessel
than the maximum hold of the propelling wheel or wheels in ordinary
steam-ships.” In the illustration to which I have referred there will
be found cross and longitudinal sections of this curious vessel.
[Sidenote: Perkins’s economical steam-engine,]
These “cigar” ships appear to have failed through want of sufficient
stability, or, more especially, on account of the novel and complicated
character of their machinery, yet the facility with which they can be
driven through the water may suggest a clue to further improvement
in the construction of ships or at least in their form. There is,
frequently, only a narrow line between the sublime and the ridiculous,
and, in the scheme of a madman (called mad because he proposes
something apparently wild and useless), there _may_ be found the germ
of really useful and grand inventions. Such fancies, therefore, ought
not, in all cases, to be cast aside with contempt, even though they may
create a smile from their novelty. Columbus was pronounced to be mad by
the most learned men of Spain, when he talked of exploring the Atlantic
in search of a world to the west. If Franklin, when he drew a spark
of lightning from the clouds by means of his kite, had spoken about
controlling that spark and rendering it the means of communication with
other parts of the globe, all men would have called him mad.[458] Even
the steam-boat herself was long considered the dream of a schemer.
Something useful may therefore still be learned from the plan of the
“cigar ship,” absurd as she may appear to the practical seaman. With
these feelings I read the other day with great interest a prospectus
brought casually under my notice of a plan for applying an improved
steam-engine (patented by Messrs. Perkins and Sons, Engineers, London),
to a vessel very similar in design to the cigar ship. The value of
this “economical steam-engine,” as it is termed, would seem to be the
greatly improved principle adopted by the patentees in the construction
of the boilers, which, they say, “will work with a pressure of steam
of 300 lbs. to the square inch, and on a consumption of coal not
exceeding 1½ lb. to the indicated horse-power per hour when working at
full speed.”[459] If anything like this can be really achieved, another
surprising stride will be made in the path of progress. The Lords of
the Admiralty, who have not hitherto been prone to adopt “novelties,”
appear to be of opinion that it can, as I understand that an engine
has been ordered from the Yorkshire Engineering Company on Messrs.
Perkins’s principle, and is now in course of construction to be fitted
on board her Majesty’s ship _Pelican_, a sea-going ship of war.
[Sidenote: and proposed fast boat,]
Combining this new principle with a form of hull somewhat resembling
the cigar, Messrs. Perkins propose “to construct and run an
experimental fast express steamer from England to New York for the
speedy crossing of the Atlantic, by passengers and mails as well as
parcels and light goods ... with a light draught of water, great length
and stability, and possessing steam power greatly in excess of any
steam-vessel now afloat.”
The general design of the steamer they propose is represented as
follows.
[Illustration]
It is proposed that she should be 800 feet in length with 40 feet beam,
and, having a flat bottom, it is calculated that she will not draw
more than 11 feet of water with her cargo, passengers, and 500 tons
of coal on board—the quantity estimated to be sufficient to take her
from Liverpool to New York. The midship part of the ship, of which the
following is a transverse section, will, Messrs. Perkins state, be
“400 feet in length, or about equal to that of a first-class Atlantic
steamer of the present day; she is to have every modern convenience”
to accommodate “1000 first-class passengers.” “This vessel,” the
projectors add, “is to be fitted with four separate and distinct
engines, working independent screws, two of which will be at either end
of the boat; they are to be of the collective working power of 12,500
horses, calculated to make the passage either way in 100 hours;” at the
average rate of 30 knots an hour.[460]
[Illustration]
Considering the great resistance which the displaced fluids must offer
to a speed on the ocean so enormous, it is not easy, with our present
state of knowledge, to conceive its realization; but the projectors are
sanguine of success, and, therefore, while recording the results of the
past, I place before my readers such information as is likely to be
interesting, or may prove useful for the future. History is of little
value, unless it teaches lessons to those who are to fill our vacant
places, and, even at the risk of wearying my readers, I have for this
reason gone more into detail than I should otherwise have done on such
subjects, with a full conviction, that we have still very much more to
learn, and especially as regards ships, than one man can hope to teach.
[Sidenote: The Engine of the _Comet_.]
Though the different stages of improvement on the steam-ship have been
carefully and fully recorded, it may be interesting to notice briefly
the progress which has been made in the marine steam-engine itself.
With that object I present my readers with a woodcut of the engine of
the _Comet_ constructed by James Watt and fitted into that boat by Mr.
Robertson, who is still living, and whose photograph accompanies the
illustration. This famous machine is now exhibited at South Kensington,
in the Museum of Patents.
[Illustration: “COMET” ENGINE.]
This engine, which was a “high pressure” one, is simple in construction
and light in weight, and, though many improvements have been made
since it first drove the _Comet_, to the wonder of the people on the
Clyde, few of these changes have embodied any important principles.
Although great strides have been made in the economy of fuel, and in
the harmonious working of engines, the general principle of their
action has undergone no change. By the reciprocating movements of a
steam impelled piston within a closed cylinder, the motive power of the
modern steam-ship is obtained, as in the _Comet_; yet, probably, on
no other subject has more mechanical ingenuity been lavished than on
the marine engine. Twenty years ago, almost every engineer had his own
peculiar type, comprising the “side lever,” the “steeple engine,” the
“grasshopper,” the “trunk,” the “oscillating,” and the “direct acting
engine,” with an endless variety of sub-combinations; but, after all,
these were only variations in the engine left to us by Watt, which, a
few years ago, might be seen in some of the small coasting craft plying
between the Mersey and the Dee and elsewhere.[461]
[Sidenote: Modifications in the construction of Marine Engines.]
It was only when surface condensation and the compound principle were
adopted, with improved boilers, and superior modes of raising steam and
of more effectually applying its power, that the marine engine made
any substantial advance. Thirty or forty years ago the usual pressure
in a marine boiler seldom exceeded from 3 to 4 lbs. above that of the
atmosphere, and, consequently, one of its most necessary fittings was
a safety-valve opening inwardly, and called a “vacuum valve,” so as
to prevent the boiler collapsing if the steam pressure should chance
to fall below that of the atmosphere,[462] but now the usual working
pressure is 60 lbs., and 300 lbs. is the pressure to which many men of
science think we are now advancing.
In a condensing engine, the effective pressure on either side of the
piston is the steam boiler pressure _plus_ the weight of the atmosphere
due to the vacuum produced on the opposite side thereof.[463]
[Sidenote: Ratio of speed to power.]
The boilers for this description of engine, being supplied with water
from the sea, required frequent “blowing out” in order to prevent
incrustation, and keep the water at a safe and regular density. But
this “blowing out” process, which occasioned a very considerable
loss in fuel, was to a great extent overcome by the introduction of
the _surface_ condenser, which produced fresh water; and this water
is pumped back into the boiler to be again and again evaporated and
condensed, thus dispensing with feeding from the sea. When the marine
engine arrived at so comparative a stage of perfection, the public
demanded increased speed, and when steam navigation was extended to
distant stations, where fuel was costly, it became a matter of the
greatest importance to still further economize its consumption; but
considering that the speed of a steam-ship in relation to the power
of the engines is subject to a ratio peculiarly its own (to double
the speed of a ship the engines have to exert eight times the power
necessary for the slower rate), the energies of the engineering world
were severely taxed to obtain a greater speed on a less consumption.
Higher pressures were introduced, and the principles of expansion more
thoroughly worked out. It was known that, when steam from the boiler
was cut off after the piston had traversed any desired portion of the
cylinder’s length, its expansive energy still enabled it to exert a
considerable, though a necessarily decreasing, motive force upon the
piston: that is to say, if steam of 50 lbs. absolute pressure were cut
off at one-half the stroke, its elastic energy at 9/10ths of the stroke
would be 28 lbs., while the mean of its force throughout the whole of
the stroke would be 42 lbs.: in other words, if the whole volume of
steam in the cylinder, at the initial pressure, produced 50 lbs. per
square inch, one-half of that volume, used expansively, would produce
42 lbs. per square inch.
To more effectually work out these principles and utilize the steam at
high pressures, the compound engine was introduced, and is now, almost
universally, adopted in the steamers of the mercantile marine.
[Sidenote: The Compound Engine]
The following woodcut shows an ordinary pair of direct acting inverted
cylinder compound engines, as usually fitted in screw steamers.[464]
It will be seen that they consist of two steam cylinders, one of
small, and the other of large diameter. The steam from the boiler, at
a high pressure, enters the small cylinder, and, thence, at the end of
the stroke, passes, through an intermediate receiver, into the large
cylinder acting upon its piston entirely by its expansive force. At the
conclusion of its double work, it passes into the surface condenser,
and is there condensed into fresh water, producing the vacuum effect in
the large cylinder.
[Illustration: COMPOUND SURFACE ENGINE.]
The distinctive difference between the simple and the compound engine
is that, in the former, the work of the steam is begun and ended in
the same cylinder, whereas, in the latter, it is begun in the small
or high pressure cylinder and completed in the large or low pressure
one; the work obtained in the small cylinder with the high pressure,
and consequently the hotter steam, should be about equal to that in
the large one with the lower pressure and cooler steam: in fact, it
is the aim of engineers in designing a compound engine to proportion
the cylinders and arrange the details of effecting the admission,
expansion, and eduction of the steam, so that its pressure may be
thoroughly utilized and as much work as possible obtained from it.
Some engineers consider the simple engine to be more economical than
the compound engine with the same pressure and total expansion; but
I am informed, by those who have had opportunities of witnessing the
performance of engines made on this principle, that, after a thorough
trial in large ocean-going steamers, the anticipated results were not
obtained from them, and that they were, consequently, replaced by
compound engines.
[Sidenote: more economical than the simple.]
But when the compound engine itself was first introduced, the high
pressure and with it, necessarily, high temperature steam, together
with surface condensation, caused serious drawbacks to its efficiency,
so that great changes had to be made in the internal arrangements of
both engines and boilers. For instance, the high temperature produced
great wear and tear in the cylinders, valves, valve faces, and so
forth, while the boilers rapidly corroded under the influence of the
feed water taken from the condenser. These evils, however, when more
thoroughly understood, were provided against; and the enormous saving
in fuel induced shipowners to adopt the compound engines: under careful
engineers, they last as long as, and cost very little more for repairs
than the ordinary common condensing engines which consumed twice the
amount of fuel.
It will, thus, be seen that the great stride in economy in the
marine engine is due to high pressure steam expansion, and surface
condensation: and, with a view to further economy, pressures are still
advancing, the difficulty now being to construct a boiler that will
withstand these pressures, and, at the same time, fulfil the other
requirements of a marine boiler at sea. With these objects in view a
number of patent water tubular boilers have been made. In 1870 and
1871 three ocean-going steamers were fitted with Howard’s and one with
Roots’ patent boilers to work at a pressure of 120 lbs. per square
inch, but they were not very long at sea before they failed, and
were condemned. Again, in 1870, two very large steamers, each of 800
nominal horse-power, built for one of the Atlantic lines, were fitted
with improved water tubular boilers to work at 120 lbs. pressure, but
the trial of the first set of boilers, which completely failed, led
the owners to condemn them and supply both vessels with those of the
ordinary type to work at a pressure of 80 lbs. per square inch.
The failure of these boilers entailed an immense loss to the owners,
and detained the vessels over twelve months, besides rendering the
large engines, which were designed to work at 120 lbs., much less
efficient at the lower pressure than they were intended to be.
It will, thus, be seen that the primary obstacle to advancement in
economy appears to be the boilers, and although their construction,
for very high pressure, is an expensive experiment, there are no less
than four different descriptions (all of them patented) now being built
in this country for marine purposes, any one of which, if thoroughly
successful, will be another great step in advance.
However great the saving, hitherto, effected in fuel, there is still a
wide margin between the means used and the effect produced, and great
room, in other respects, for improvement. Indeed, Mr. Froude’s late
experiments, at the instance of the Admiralty, on the actual resistance
of ships, show that, in the case of the _Greyhound_, the ship he
experimented on, the efficiency, at a speed of 10½ knots, was only 51
per cent., showing a loss of 49 per cent. of the motive power, which
was even greater when the speed was less.[465]
There remains, therefore, a very large and deeply interesting field of
research; for, of all the heat produced, we utilise in the steam engine
only a small proportion for the purposes of propulsion.[466] Nor have
we yet reached perfection in our ships, so far as regards the best form
for obtaining the greatest speed. I have already shown[467] that, in
river navigation, the American steamers surpass in speed anything we
have as yet accomplished; and that they have made various attempts
towards the adoption of the flat floor or “skimming” process—in other
words, to sail over the surface of the water rather than to force the
ship through it, as in the case of the cigar ship and others.
[Sidenote: Great skill required for building perfect ships,]
To construct a perfect ship is itself a problem of the highest order,
to which the attention of mathematicians and the knowledge, skill, and
tact of naval architects have of late years been constantly directed,
with as yet no examples of complete success, however much the ships of
our own time surpass those of our forefathers. Nor can the construction
of safe, effective, powerful, profitable, and durable engines and
boilers for marine purposes be a matter of easy determination, as shown
from the fact, that there are still continual failures, revealing
many difficulties yet to be overcome. Again, the means of propelling
the vessel through the water suggests questions as to the resistance
of fluids, which hydro-dynamic science has hitherto failed fully to
resolve. Finally, the combination of all these, so as to bring about
to the greatest advantage the effect desired, is a still more arduous
task which the skill of the naval architect, the mechanician, and the
sailor, even when combined, has not yet overcome. To the perfecting of
our steam-ships we must still continue to apply ourselves, if we would
maintain the high maritime position we now hold; for it is, only, by
the unwearied exertions of all who are employed in our varied branches
of industry, and with the aid of wise and just laws, that England can
hope to keep ahead of all other nations.
[Sidenote: and especial importance to England of having the best ships.]
[Sidenote: But her ships not yet perfect,]
We have already, it is true, made extraordinary progress in the model
and propulsion of our ships, but we have not yet approached perfection,
nor shall we reach it, unless we continue earnest in our endeavours
to do so. We know the properties of air, water, and electricity, and
we have discovered the means of utilizing and directing these powers
and of applying them to the most valuable purposes; yet, it is still
necessary to carry in our steam-ships vast stores of coal—so great, on
certain voyages, as to occupy much of the space otherwise available for
cargo. So long, therefore, as this necessity exists, it cannot be said
that we have reached anything like perfection.
Nevertheless, we have made surprising advances, and have derived
many inestimable advantages from the application of the power of
steam to sea and river navigation, far exceeding the most sanguine
anticipations, whether as the means of extending commerce with
the various producing and manufacturing portions of the globe, or
in promoting the advancement of civilization to less cultivated
regions.[468] By steam navigation, the intercourse between maritime
nations has already been facilitated to an almost incredible extent;
while postal communication has been established between Great Britain
and her extensive possessions in India, East and West, as well as with
the United States of America, and, indeed, with all other countries.
Even the most remote regions of Australia, China, and Japan have now a
regular postal steam communication with Great Britain; we have doubled
Cape Horn in our steam-ships, reaching the once distant shores of the
Pacific in a space of time so short, and with certainty so unerring
that, only a quarter of a century ago, the work performed would have
been considered altogether impossible.
[Sidenote: though great progress has been made during the last half
century.]
To enable us to secure these important advantages we have been greatly
indebted to the invention and application of the screw to marine
propulsion, for, without it, we should not have been able to undertake
such remote voyages by means of steam, and without it, also, we
certainly could not have successfully maintained them with profit and
regularity; but there is still much to be done, and were we, in the
pride of our achievements, however great they may be when compared with
those of our forefathers, to assume that we have reached anything like
perfection in Ocean navigation, our children would very likely have
reason in their day to smile at our vanity.
FOOTNOTES:
[442] The dimensions of the _Iona_ are 250 feet in length and 25 feet
breadth of beam. She is propelled by a pair of oscillating engines,
with a combined nominal power of 180 horses. Her draught of water, when
fully laden, does not exceed 6 feet, and her speed under favourable
circumstances is from 20 to 21 statute miles per hour. She is the
fastest vessel in Great Britain, or perhaps in the world, one or two of
the steamers of the United States excepted.
[443] Vol. ii. pp. 536-7. The _Q. E. D._ was 120 feet long, and 27 feet
wide. She registered 272 tons.
[444]
[Sidenote: Her dimensions and crew.]
The _King Coal_, which was contracted for in the latter end of the year
1870, cost complete for sea 15,000_l._ She carries 900 tons coal cargo,
with bunker space for 100 tons more, and has extra water-ballast for
making a passage when she has no cargo on board; against strong winds
her speed is 8½ knots an hour when loaded, and from 9½ to 10 knots
when light in fine weather; her power, 90 horse nominal. She has an
excellent saloon cabin on deck for the captain, with four berths and
accommodation for the chief mate and steward at the entrance; her crew
consists of 17 persons all told. The master and crew find themselves in
provisions; their respective duties and pay are as follows:—
Master £17 0 0 per month, with 2_s._ 6_d._ per day
subsistence money.
1st Mate 7 10 0 ” ” 2 0 ”
2nd ” 6 10 0 ” ” 1 6 ”
Chief Engineer 12 7 6 ” ” 2 6 ”
2nd Engineer 8 15 0 ” ” 2 0 ”
Steward 5 10 0 ” ” 1 6 ”
5 Able Seamen 6 15 0 ” in full each man.
4 Stokers 6 15 0 ” ”
1 Boy 3 0 0 ” ”
1 Carpenter 8 5 0 ” ”
The voyage from Newcastle to London and back usually occupies from six
to eight days. Hoisting sails, lifting anchor, and other heavy work is
done by steam winches. The crew are accommodated in a roomy and well
ventilated forecastle level with the main deck, the seamen occupying
one side of it, the stokers the other, with a bulkhead between them.
The engineers have cabins on deck in the bridge-house, the wheel-house
stands on the platform which spans the deck in midships, and is so
arranged that, while the helmsman can see everything ahead, he is
protected from the inclemency of the weather.
[445] See _ante_, vol. ii. p. 536.
[446] These celebrated smacks were from 160 to 200 tons register. In
the early part of this century (before the close of the great war) they
sailed in company for protection. On one occasion they were attacked
by a French privateer, heavily armed, to which they gave action, and,
after a severe encounter, beat her off in gallant style; the senior
captain, Nesbitt, acting as “Commodore” of the little fleet. Each of
these smacks had accommodation for about twenty first-class passengers.
The passage between Leith and London, a distance of 500 miles, usually
occupied from three to five days, but has been made in fifty hours,
although it was not, unfrequently, protracted from eight to twenty
days. The first-class fare, including a table “groaning with food,” but
exclusive of wine, spirits, or beer, was only two guineas each person;
a rate which must have left little profit on long passages.
[447] After the cessation of the sailing packets, and before the
opening of the Holyhead Railway, the Dublin Mail was for some years
carried _viâ_ Liverpool by the City of Dublin Steam Packet Company.
[448] These celebrated ships are built of iron. The length between
the perpendiculars is 334 feet; the beam is 35 feet, and depth 21
feet. There is a centre keel plate, 3 feet deep and ⅝ inch thick, with
two bars, 9 inches deep by ⅝ inch thick, on each side at the bottom
forming also the keelson; the plate, with the two garboard strakes,
⅞ inch thick each, are secured together with iron bolts riveted and
countersunk. On the top of the centre keel plate, two angle-iron bars
are riveted, 5 inches by 4 inches by ½ inch, and to these angle irons,
and to the angle irons on the top of the floorings throughout the
entire length of the vessel, as far as the fine ends will allow, is
riveted a strong plate, 4 feet wide amidships, and 2 feet 6 inches wide
at the ends. There are, also, two very strong box keelsons, secured on
the floorings at each side of the keel, and another in each bilge. The
engine bed-plates, paddle and spring beams, and all other beams for the
main and lower decks, are of iron. Timber has been used only for the
decks and cabin fittings. There are nine principal iron water-tight
bulkheads, which not only provide for the safety of the ship in case
of accident, but add greatly to her strength in a seaway. The bulwarks
are of iron plates, in continuation of the sides of the vessel to the
rail, and without any break for gangways, such not being required for
landing either at Holyhead or at Kingstown. To give additional strength
in the centre of the vessel, where the weight of the engines, wheels,
and boilers has to be carried, the insides of the paddle-boxes are also
formed of iron plates, continued from the sides and bulwarks of the
vessel, with a strong bow girder, formed of an iron plate 15 inches
broad and ¾ inch thick, so as to provide ample means of resistance to
the severe shocks which these long vessels must encounter in rough
seas, when driven at their high rate of speed. The gunwale is formed
of angle-iron bars, 4 inches by 4 inches, riveted to the sheer strake
and to a plate which is riveted on the top of the beams. At a distance
of about 15 inches from this, an inner angle bar is riveted, against
which the wooden waterway is fitted, so as to leave the outer part,
between this and the gunwale, to form a drain to take the water off
the deck, and to discharge it through the scuppers. This arrangement,
which was introduced by the late Mr. John Laird, has been found very
convenient in freeing the decks quickly from water. These iron gunwale
plates are 5 feet wide by ¾ inch thick amidships, tapering gradually to
about 2 feet 6 inches by ½ inch at the ends, with a system of diagonal
tie plating from side to side, securely bolted or riveted to the deck
beams. Between the paddle-boxes an upper deck, about 50 feet in length,
has been placed.
[449] Each of these vessels cost somewhere about 80,000_l._, complete
in all respects for sea.
[450] See Appendix No. 26, p. 644.
[451] The dimensions of the _Victoria_ are as follows: length 200 feet,
breadth 24 feet, and depth 12½ feet; she is 566 tons gross or builders’
measurement; her engines are 220 horse-power nominal, and her draught
of water 6½ feet.
[452] See evidence, Mr. Samuel Jack Mason, before the Committee of
Lords on the International Communication Bill, 1872, pp. 49, 50, and 51.
[453] The trains will come in from the South Eastern Railway and the
London, Chatham, and Dover systems by independent lines to a central
station. They will then be run on a hydraulic hoist, eight to nine
carriages at a time, and this hoist will be lowered until the rails on
it are exactly level with those on the steamer; a flap is then let down
completing the communication between the rails on the hoist and the
rails on the steamer, and the carriages are immediately hauled on to
the steamer.
When the steamer enters the dock to receive the trains, she is run
between rollers, fixed two on each side of the dock and allowing the
least possible movement of the paddle-boxes sideways. Movements lore
and aft of the steamer are prevented by buffers (similar to ordinary
locomotive buffers) fixed at her end, which butt against recesses at
the end of the dock, and also by blocks fastened to the dock wall which
receives her end a little further aft, ordinary mooring apparatus
keeping the ship tight up against the buffers.
In rough weather there may be a slight vertical movement when the
head of the ship is next the hoist, but the flap which is let down,
as before described, will be sufficient to accommodate this slight
difference of level, which will be little more than is met with in
passing over a turntable as in many railway stations.
[454]
No. of
Question.
49. Length 450 feet to 470.
Beam 95′ 0′′ over paddle-boxes.
123. Beam 57′ 0′′ not including paddle-boxes.
156. Depth 14 feet in hold from floor to
ceiling.
153. Depth 34½ feet inner skin to hurricane
deck.
50. Draught 12 to 13 feet.
513. Freeboard 21′ 0′′ to hurricane deck;
8′ 6′′ main deck.
51. Power Two independent pairs of engines,
one to each paddle, collectively
of 1600 to 1800 nominal horse-power,
12,000 indicated horse-power.
167. Speed Twenty knots or 23 miles.
130.} {Seventeen carriages, containing
274.} Capacity for passengers { 336 passengers; or 2000
278.} { passengers, neglecting carriages.
132. Cargo 22 trucks, say 180 tons goods.
68. Cost of boats £500,000 for three.
60. Estimate for construction of harbour at £
Andrecelles, coast of France 700,000
63. Estimate for extension of Dover Harbour, &c. 1,000,000
---------
£1,700,000
Cost of three steamers 500,000 (?)
---------
£2,200,000
----------
[455] Such vessels are well-known to Indian navigators; and, while
carrying between 100 and 200 tons, ride steadily on a heavy swell
that causes a large steamer to roll its ports under water. They are
extraordinary looking craft, and are frequently to be found, not merely
in the vicinity of Ceylon, but about the islands of the Pacific, and
along the coasts of Northern India, as well as on the shores of Java
and Sumatra, though nowhere else. The Indian boat, however, so far
as I can judge, most resembling the steamer which Captain Dicey has
built, is the _jangá_ (not the _catamaran_),—a double platform canoe
of the Cochin China backwater. The pontoons at Chatham are of a similar
construction. To form the jangár, a floor of boards is laid across two
boats, with bamboo railings 10 to 12 feet broad and 16 feet long; in
these boats, native regiments, cattle, &c., are ferried across rivers.
I may add, that the _catamarans_ proper are constructed of three logs
lashed firmly together, the centre one being the largest. They are
usually from 20 to 25 feet in length, and from 2½ to 3½ feet only in
width.
[456] On Saturday May 8th, 1875, the _Bessemer_ underwent what may
be called her first trial—that is, she crossed from Dover to Calais
and back again. It would appear from the narratives in the different
journals that she had nothing to contend with, on this occasion, in the
way of weather or sea, and that, starting at 11.17 A.M. and reaching
Calais Harbour at 12.45, her speed was about the same as that of the
ordinary boats. Her greatest novelty, the saloon, was, however, not
tried on this occasion. On this point Mr. Bessemer remarked, at a
dinner given to him in Calais on the same day:—“I never dared to hope
that, at first, this ship would be completely successful, so much
depends on skill, and you must remember that there are no means whereby
absolute automatic action can be given to the saloon, because there is
no absolute point of stability. Within the ship we are like Archimedes
who wanted a fulcrum for the lever that was to move the world; what we
want is to place our fulcrum in an absolutely quiet spot.... In port
the machinery will move with a degree of steadiness that is all that
can be desired, the very reverse of this will take place at sea when
the vessel itself moves and the cabin is required to be quiet: and,
just as we require more practice to move the cabin in still water, so
we require more practice to keep the cabin still in the moving ship.”
[457] See _Harper’s Weekly Illustrated Newspaper_, New York, October
28th, 1858, where drawings are given. I visited the cigar ship
which was built at Milwall, London, in 1864, when she was ready for
launching, and inspected her carefully.
[458] Though lightning from the heavens has never yet been usefully
employed, and is not likely to be so, the electricity generated in
galvanic batteries and used for telegraphy is precisely the same as
lightning.
[459] Among other advantages the projectors offer an almost absolute
safety of boilers from explosion, as they are made of 3-inch
wrought-iron tubes ⅜ inch thick; the boilers when put together are
proved to 2500 lbs. hydraulic pressure on the square inch, are worked
from 300 lbs. to 500 lbs. per square inch as desired, and their
bursting pressure is 20,000 lbs. per square inch.
[460] Messrs. Perkins and Son base their calculations for speed on the
fact that the vessel they propose will have 30 horse-power to a foot
of midship section, the best Atlantic steamers having only from 4 to 5
horse-power to each foot of midship section.
I have submitted these particulars to a gentleman of great scientific
and practical knowledge of marine propulsion, who remarks: “This
large steamer is, I fear, a wild idea, until the form of the present
steam-ship is very much improved. It will require a great deal more
power than what Mr. Perkins proposes to drive such a vessel 30 knots
an hour; and marine engines must be very much improved to get anything
like this power in a ship, and to maintain it for 100 hours on a
consumption of 500 tons of coal.” But as everybody admits that we have
not yet reached perfection, it is solely with the object of furthering
improvement, that I furnish my readers with the plans and proposals of
Mr. Perkins.
[461] It will be remembered that the earliest application of the
steam-engine was for the purpose of pumping water; hence, when applied
to turn machinery, the great lever of the pumping engine was retained.
The same thing took place on the application of the steam-engine to
navigation; and, even now, the beam or lever engine is in common use
both here and in America.
[462] A practical engineer, with whom I had recently some conversation
on this subject, informed me that when, many years ago, he was
superintendent of one of the oldest Steam Navigation Companies, it was
scarcely possible to maintain a pressure sufficient to keep the air out
of the boilers, and the hissing noise it made, when rushing into the
boiler through the reverse valve, was a not unfrequent tell-tale of the
slackened efforts of the over-worked fireman.
[463] To convert a quantity of water at 32 degrees into 10 lbs. of
steam, requires 1 cwt. of coal; but to convert it further into steam at
40 lbs. pressure, would only require 1·012 cwt., and to raise it into
even 90 lbs. not more than 1·024 cwt. of coal would be required.
[464] The following illustration is from a photograph furnished by
Messrs. T. Richardson and Son of West Hartlepool. It is exactly the
same in principle as those supplied by Messrs. J. and G. Thompson
of Glasgow, to the _Bothnia_ and _Scythia_, belonging to the Cunard
Company, which I have already described, and represents the usual
construction of modern marine engines of the best class.
[465] See details in the Transactions of the Institution of Naval
Architects, 1874.
[466] It may be stated, generally, that 1 lb. of coal can, under the
most favourable circumstances, be made to evaporate from 12 to 16
lbs. of boiling water, the evaporation of each pound being equivalent
to 745,800 foot-pounds of mechanical work. At this rate 1 lb. of
coal ought to give out from nine to twelve million foot-pounds of
work, while, in reality, no steam-engine does so much as two million
foot-pounds for a pound of coal, so great is the loss from the want of
proper means of utilizing the whole work produced by the combustion of
the coal.—Vide Text-Books of Science, p. 174; by C. W. Merrifield,
F.R.S.
[467] See _ante_, vol. iv. p. 150.
[468] In the Appendix No. 27, p. 645, will be found the number of iron
steam-vessels built and first registered in the United Kingdom in each
year from 1861 to 1874; and the amount of British tonnage, steam and
sailing, from 1850 to 1873, as compared with the United States, France,
Holland, and Norway.
LIST
OF
ARTICLES AND TABLES IN APPENDICES.
No. PAGE
1. ROBERT FULTON, HIS ORIGIN AND PLACE OF BIRTH 587
2. DREDGING MACHINES OF THE RIVER CLYDE TRUST, WITH
THEIR DIMENSIONS, COST, AND POWER 591
3. SHIPS LAUNCHED ON THE CLYDE, 1863-4 593
4. SHIPBUILDERS ON THE CLYDE, FROM JAN. 1 TO DEC. 31, 1871 594
5. SHIPBUILDING ON THE WEAR FOR 1874, AND FOR THE QUARTER
OF 1875 ENDING 30TH SEPTEMBER, WITH NAMES OF BUILDERS 595
6. RELATIVE WEIGHT AND STRENGTH OF WOODEN AND IRON
SHIPS 599
7. DIMENSIONS OF MACHINERY AND BOILERS OF THE AMERICAN
COASTING STEAMERS “BRISTOL” AND “PROVIDENCE” 600
8. COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF THE AVERAGE SAILINGS OF
THE CUNARD AND COLLINS LINES OF STEAMERS DURING
THE GREAT RACE OF 1851 AND 1852 601
9. PASSAGES OF THE CUNARD STEAMER “PERSIA” BETWEEN
LIVERPOOL AND NEW YORK, 1856 TO 1868 603
10. STEAM-SHIPS (CUNARD LINE, &C. &C.), BELONGING TO MESSRS.
BURNS, MACIVER, AND CUNARD, 1875, AND THE TRADES IN
WHICH THEY ARE ENGAGED 606
11. TABLE SHOWING THE PROGRESS IN THE CUNARD STEAMERS
FROM 1840 TO 1875 _to face_ 608
12. CUNARD COMPANY’S REGULATIONS 609
13. STEAMERS OF THE INMAN COMPANY, 1875 611
14. STEAMERS OF THE ALLAN LINE, 1875 612
15. LETTER OF INSTRUCTIONS, “WHITE STAR” LINE 613
16. PASSAGES OF THE “WHITE STAR” STEAM-SHIPS 614
17. TABLE OF THE PASSAGES OF TRANSATLANTIC STEAM-SHIPS,
1873-74, BETWEEN LIVERPOOL AND NEW YORK, WITH AVERAGE
OF EACH LINE 617
18. PARTICULARS OF “ANCHOR” LINE OF STEAMERS 633
19. STEAMERS OF THE ROYAL MAIL WEST INDIA STEAM PACKET
COMPANY, 1ST JANUARY, 1875 634
20. STEAMERS OF THE PACIFIC STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY
(1ST JANUARY, 1875), WITH THE TONNAGE, DIMENSIONS,
AND COST OF EACH 635
21. STEAMERS OF THE LIVERPOOL, BRAZIL, AND RIVER PLATE
STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY, JANUARY, 1875 637
22. LOG OF THE PENINSULAR AND ORIENTAL COMPANY’S S.S.
“KHEDIVE” 637
23. LIST OF STEAMERS BELONGING TO THE PENINSULAR AND
ORIENTAL STEAM COMPANY, JUNE, 1875 639
24. LIST OF STEAMERS BELONGING TO THE FRENCH MESSAGERIES
MARITIMES COMPANY, AND HOW EMPLOYED IN 1875 641
25. STATEMENT OF THE NUMBER OF VESSELS, WITH THEIR TONNAGE,
WHICH HAVE PASSED THROUGH THE SUEZ CANAL,
FROM 1870 TO 1874 INCLUSIVE 643
26. AVERAGE TIME OF PASSAGES OF THE MAIL PACKETS BETWEEN
KINGSTOWN AND HOLYHEAD, FOR FOURTEEN YEARS, ENDING
30TH SEPTEMBER, 1874 644
27. NUMBER AND TONNAGE OF IRON STEAM-SHIPS BUILT AND
REGISTERED IN THE UNITED KINGDOM FROM 1861 TO
1874, AND THE TOTAL TONNAGE, STEAM AND SAILING, AS
COMPARED WITH FOUR OTHER NATIONS 645
APPENDICES.
APPENDIX No. 1. VOL. iv., p. 50.
_Robert Fulton._
In the life of Henry Bell by E. Morris (Glasgow, 1844), there is the
following letter from Mr. Bell to a Mr. John McNeill. It is dated,
Helensburgh, 1st March, 1824, and is as follows:—
“Sir, I this morning was favoured with your letter. In reply to your
enquiry respecting the late Robert Fulton the American engineer, his
father was a native of _Ayrshire_, but of what town or district there I
cannot say. He went to America, where his son Robert was born.”
As Ayrshire is my own native county, I was curious to ascertain if
the Robert Fulton of whom Henry Bell writes was any connection of an
old man named Fulton who rented a farm belonging to Lord Ailsa in
the district of Carrick about four miles from the town of Ayr where
I was born, and where also I was educated under a very dear uncle,
the Rev. William Schaw, after whom I was named. Old Fulton (or rather
old “Ballig,” which was the name of his farm, and that by which he
himself was better known) and his family were members of the United
Presbyterian Church, of which my uncle was minister. On his ministerial
visits to Ballig, I used, as a boy, frequently to accompany him,
perhaps, more for the good fare which was produced on these occasions,
than for anything else. Old Ballig or Fulton would be then (1827-1829)
a man of somewhere about 80 years of age, and I remember he frequently
spoke of an elder brother who had settled in America whose son became
a “_great man_.” What that greatness consisted of, I do not recollect,
but as it was something which in my boyish days had, with the good
fare, made a lasting impression on my mind, it came fresh to my
recollection when I read the letter I have just quoted in the life
of Henry Bell, and I wondered if the “great man,” the nephew of old
Ballig, was the Robert Fulton of worldwide fame.
Through my friend Mr. T. M. Gemmell, of Ayr, I ascertained that the
grandson of the old man whom I knew now occupied the farm of Ballig.
From this person, however, no reliable information could be obtained
as to the position or fate of his ancestors. Perhaps, that was not
surprising, as the schoolmaster does not appear to have paid many
visits to Ballig since the days of my boyhood. Resolved to trace the
matter still further, I applied to my friend and school companion, Mr.
H. G. Reid, of H. M. Stationery Office, who, from his literary tastes
as editor of his father-in-law’s great work ‘McCulloch’s Commercial
Dictionary,’ readily lent me a helping hand. He, in turn, applied to
his friends in Scotland, and among others to Mr. Cochran Patrick, of
Woodside, in the parish of Beith, Ayrshire, where the Fulton family
appear to have had their origin.
Mr. Patrick himself, a gentleman of considerable literary acquirements
and fond of antiquarian research, heartily joined us on our voyage
of discovery and, after some trouble, found a Mr. James Stevenson,
residing on his own property in Lochwinnoch, who said he knew all about
the Fulton family, and who made the following statement in writing,
which I give in his own words as follows:—
“_Knows, 31st March, 1875._
“Robert Fulton was born at Mill of Beith, parish of Beith,
Ayrshire, in the year 1765. His father, William Fulton, was born
at Threepwood, also in the parish of Beith, about the year 1720.
He took a lease of Brownmuir and Mill of Beith, corn mill, about
the year 1742. He married Rose Mitchell, a native of Dumbarton,
in the year 1744. He had issue five daughters and two sons. The
eldest son, William, was born about the year 1747 or 1748; he
became a partner in the firm of Fulton, Buchanan, and Pollock,
who erected a large cotton mill in Lochwinnoch. William Fulton
was manager, and carried on the engineering connected with the
mill. Among the workmen employed were the late William Dunn of
Duntocher, and Henry Bell of Glasgow. Robert Fulton, when young,
was educated in the highest branches of learning, being master
of nine different languages. He had a cousin, Henry Fulton, in
London, who had a warehouse, and Robert’s father intended him to
go there. He was educated so that he might be able to transact
business with foreign merchants. He went to London about the year
1788, but he did not like to be confined in the warehouse or
office. He went to sea many different voyages, was at Greenland,
America, and the Indies. He was often in London, and came
different times to Scotland to see his father, mother, and his
brother and sisters, and also got models and machines made by
his brother’s workmen at Lochwinnoch for some of his inventions.
He was in Scotland about the year 1801, and visited a steam-boat
in the Forth and Clyde Canal along with Henry Bell. He was about
London after that. He had inventions of different things, which
he made offer of to the British Government, but they would give
him no encouragement, after that he went to Paris and made offer
of them to Bonaparte. The British Government, hearing that he
had made offer of them to Bonaparte, issued an order for his
apprehension. He was in Paris about the year 1803, and left for
America in company with the American Consul Livingston. He got
acquainted with his daughter or niece, Harriet Livingston, in the
vessel, and was married to her in a short time after. It was after
that that he started the steam-boat on the Hudson River. He had
been at great expense and got into difficulties for want of money.
He left America and went to Antigua, and commenced business, and
remained there, except when visiting his friends in Scotland. I
recollect him being here, in this house, visiting my father and
mother, my sister and elder brother very well recollect the same;
it was in the year 1821. He returned to Antigua and died in about
a year after that; also his wife died about a year after him. His
will and settlement came home and was in the hands of Martin and
Simpson, writers, Paisley; the way I know this he was uncle to
both my father and mother, their mothers being both sisters of
Robert Fulton.
“The few statements herein contained are within my own knowledge.
“JOHN STEVENSON.”
By this very distinct statement, it appeared we had discovered that the
celebrated Robert Fulton was not merely of Ayrshire parentage, _but was
himself born in Ayrshire_, a fact, if substantiated, of no ordinary
importance to us as Scotsmen, who, proud of our countrymen Watts and
Symington, could now rank with them as a countryman also of our own,
the only rival claimant, of note, to the invention of the marine steam
engine. It may have been the case that he was a renegade, who having
propounded to Napoleon a scheme for the invasion of England, had
disowned the land of his birth, and sought protection as an American
subject—an opinion, however, which tended to confirm our belief
that the Robert Fulton of engineering fame was _really_ a Scotsman.
Indeed, considering the statement made by Mr. Stevenson, there were
many reasons for supposing that such was the case; and our belief was
strengthened when, on searching the parochial register of the parish
of Beith, deposited in the General Register House, Edinburgh, we found
the following entry: “Robert, lawful son to William Fulton and Rosie
Mitchell in Miln of Beith, April 17th; baptised April 22nd, 1764.”
The only real differences (apart from the dates 1764 instead of 1765,
in the statement) which required to be cleared up, was his death in
Antigua in 1821, instead of in New York in 1815, as stated by his
biographers, and, also, the fact of his marriage to Miss Livingston.
To ascertain these points I communicated with the Governor of Antigua,
who courteously obtained and forwarded, in due time, a copy from the
register of the parish of St. George in that island of the entry of
the death of a Robert Fulton at the age of fifty-three, and his burial
on the 25th November, 1819. As this Robert Fulton was buried two years
before Mr. Stevenson saw the Robert Fulton of whom he speaks, as the
copy of his will which the Governor of Antigua was also good enough to
obtain, makes no mention of the name of Livingston, and as no record
could be found of the death in that island of any other person of the
name of Robert Fulton, we reluctantly arrived at the conclusion that,
after all, we had not found the man for whom we had made so diligent a
search.
The incidents in the lives are, however, so much alike, that they are
worthy of record, and may give my readers some idea of the labours of
an author to arrive at the truth; labours which are frequently made in
vain, as in the present instance. But, though the Fulton from Beith was
apparently not the Fulton of fame, I have a strong impression that the
nephew of my old friend Fulton of Ballig was so, though I have not the
time, at present, to make further researches, as this volume is now on
its way to press.
W. S. LINDSAY.
_Shepperton Manor, Nov. 1875._
APPENDIX No. 2. VOL. iv., p. 69.
_Dredging Machines of the River Clyde Trust, with their Dimensions,
Cost, and Power._
The plant is made up as follows:—
6 steam dredgers,
14 steam hopper barges,
1 steam tug,
3 diving bells,
270 punts, and numerous small boats.
The value of the whole plant is estimated at 140,000_l._
General Dimensions of Largest Dredger:—
Ft. In.
Extreme length 161 0
Depth at sides amidships 10 0
Breadth moulded 29 0
Rise of deck at centre 0 10
Sheer of deck 2 3
One bucket ladder, 89 ft. 6 in. between centres.
Size of buckets, 3 ft. 3 in. ⨉ 2 ft. 5 in. ⨉ 1 ft. 11 in.
Capacity of buckets, 13½ cubic ft. each.
Mean working draught, 6 ft. to 7 ft.
Engines.—Horizontal, condensing, 2 cylinders with link motion,
governor, and all recent improvements, say 75 H.P.
Ft. In.
Diameter of cylinders 2 3
Length of stroke 3 0
Average strokes per minute, 33.
Boiler.—Horizontal, tubular, with 3 furnaces, each 3 ft. 1½ in. wide.
Ft. In.
Length at bottom 9 4
Width 11 4
Height 13 10
Working pressure of steam, 10 lbs. to 15 lbs. per square inch.
Consumption of coals, &c.:—
Coals, per day of 10 hours 50 cwts. to 60 cwts.
Tallow, per day of 10 hours about 1 lb.
Oil (lard,)per day of 10 hours 13½ gills.
Waste, per day of 10 hours 1½ lb.
Nos. 11, 12, 13, and 14. STEAM HOPPER BARGES.
General dimensions:—
Ft. In.
Length of keel and fore rake 145 0
Breadth, moulded 25 0
Depth, moulded 11 9
Length of hopper 56 0
Breadth of hopper at deck 19 6
Breadth of hopper at bottom 8 6
Height of coamings at sides of hopper 1 4
Capacity of hopper, about 320 cubic yards, or 400 tons.
Engines, &c.—Direct acting, condensing, 2 cylinders, each 24 in.
diameter and 24 in. stroke. Expansion valves, link motion, &c., say 40
H.P.
Propeller, 3 bladed, 8 ft. diameter, pitch about 16 ft.
Boiler.—Cylindrical, 11 ft. diameter, and 9 ft. 6 in. long, tubular,
fitted with superheater, 2 furnaces, working pressure, 30 lbs. per
square inch.
Draught, speed, &c.—Loaded, with sand, 9 ft. 6 in. forward, and 11
ft. 6 in. aft. Light, boiler full, and 20 tons to 30 tons of coal in
bunkers, 4 ft. forward, and 8 ft. 2 in. aft.
Speed, 8 miles to 9 miles per hour.
Strokes of engine, average 70 per minute.
Steam pressure, 25 lbs., vacuum, 24.
Consumption of coals, &c.:—
Coals, per day of 10 hours 70 cwts.
Tallow, per day of 10 hours 5 lbs.
Oil, per day of 10 hours 20 gills.
Waste, per day of 10 hours 2 lbs.
“The cost of dredging, of course, varies much according to the
character of the material to be lifted, and to the power of the dredger
employed and the capacity of its buckets. The material to be dredged
ranges from silt and sewage deposit to the hardest of gravel and
boulders, completely concreted together. Where good lifting sand was
being dredged, one of the two most powerful of the dredgers lifted, on
each of five consecutive days, 2240 cubic yards, or about 2800 tons;
the engine working 9 hours the first day, 9¾ hours the second, third,
and fifth days, and 9¼ hours the fourth day; the average strokes of the
engine being 33 per minute, and the average depth of water that the
points of the buckets were working at, 20 ft.”
APPENDIX No. 3. VOL. iv., p. 71.
_Ships Launched on the Clyde, 1863-74._
The following return is from the Report, for 1873, of Mr. Wm. West
Watson, Chamberlain to the City of Glasgow.
-----+---------------------+-----------------------
|Amount of new Tonnage|Amount of new Tonnage
Year.| launched | on the Stocks or
| during the year. | under contract at
| |31st Dec. of each year.
-----+---------------------+-----------------------
1863 | 124,000 | 140,000
1864 | 178,505 | 105,957
1865 | 153,932 | 109,404
1866 | 124,513 | 71,869
1867 | 108,024 | 124,082
1868 | 169,571 | 134,818
1869 | 192,310 | 140,999
1870 | 180,401 | 180,175
1871 | 196,229 | 301,809
1872 | 230,347 | 247,345
1873 | 232,926 | 192,608
1874 | 262,430 | 182,303
-----+---------------------+-----------------------
_New Vessels launched on the Clyde during the Year 1874._
Nos. Tons. Nos. Tons.
Iron Steamers under 100 tons each 14 543
Iron Steamers from 100 to 500 tons each 25 7,621
Iron Steamers from 500 to 1000 tons each 29 19,121
Iron Steamers from 1000 to 2000 tons each 23 36,029
Iron Steamers from 2000 to 3000 tons each 25 61,202
Iron Steamers from 3000 tons and upwards 19 70,969
------------ 135 195,485
Iron Sailing Ships, under 500 tons each 1 415
Iron Sailing Ships, from 500 to 1000 tons each 12 8,867
Iron Sailing Ships, from 1000 to 2000 tons each 37 56,266
----------- 50 65,548
Composite Steamer 1 100
Composite Steamer Gunboats for the 2 656
British Government
----------- 3 756
Composite Sailing Ship 1 241
Iron Canal Lighter 1 100
Iron Steam Launches 3 30
Iron Hopper Barges 2 140
Wooden Schooner 1 130
------------
196 262,430
The returns from which this table is constructed were obtained
confidentially from the respective builders, and I may add that the
value of the vessels specified above may be assumed, notwithstanding
a fall of from 2_l._ to 3_l._ a ton, when compared with the value in
the year 1873, as amounting, in round numbers, to the enormous sum
of nearly 6,500,000_l._ sterling.—_Note by Mr. William West Watson,
Chamberlain of the City of Glasgow._
APPENDIX No. 4. VOL. iv., p. 71.
_Shipbuilders on the Clyde, from 1st January to 31st December, 1871._
The following return from the ‘North British Daily Mail’ of 1st
January, 1872, includes not merely the vessels built at Glasgow,
but also at Greenock, Port-Glasgow, Dumbarton, and other places on
the Clyde.
--------------------------------------+----------+--------+---------+---------
Names of Builders. | Steamers.| Sailing| Tonnage.| H.P.
| | Ships.| | Nominal.
--------------------------------------+----------+--------+---------+---------
John Elder & Co., Fairfield | 12 | 2 | 31,889 | 5,275
Caird & Co., Greenock | 6 | .. | 18,400 | 2,820
William Denny & Brothers, Dumbarton | 7 | .. | 14,921 | 1,810
Archibald M’Millan & Son, Dumbarton | 7 | .. | 9,720 | 500
London & Glasgow E. & I. S. Co., L.,} | 8 | .. | 8,740 | 1,220
Glasgow } | | | |
J. & G. Thomson, Govan | 6 | .. | 8,715 | 1,040
A. Stephen & Sons, Linthouse | 5 | 2 | 8,529 | 965
Henderson, Coulburn, & Co., Renfrew | 11 | .. | 7,386 | 1,200
Aitken & Mansel, Whiteinch | 7 | 4 | 6,760 | 840
Blackwood & Gordon, Port-Glasgow | 7 | .. | 6,284 | 870
Barclay, Curle, & Co., Stobcross and} | 7 | 1 | 6,070 | 500
Whiteinch } | | | |
Robert Duncan & Co., Port-Glasgow | 4 | .. | 5,726 | 1,528
R. Napier & Sons, Govan | 5 | .. | 5,709 | 860
Charles Connell & Co., Scotstoun | 3 | .. | 5,560 | 385
Tod & M’Gregor, Patrick | 2 | .. | 5,500 | 710
William Simons & Co., Renfrew | 7 | .. | 5,450 | 1,050
Scott & Co., Greenock | 7 | .. | 4,900 | 710
J. G. Lawrie, Whiteinch | 4 | 1 | 4,760 | 800
John Reid & Co., Port-Glasgow | .. | 5 | 4,620 | ..
Robert Steele & Co., Port-Glasgow | 3 | .. | 4,389 | 611
A. & J. Inglis, Pointhouse | 6 | 2 | 4,322 | 730
Henry Murray & Co., Port-Glasgow | 14 | .. | 3,780 | 569
Dobie & Co., Govan | 5 | .. | 3,445 | 450
Thomas Wingate & Co., Whiteinch | 12 | 5 | 2,947 | 395
William Hamilton & Co., Port-Glasgow | 3 | .. | 2,304 | 308
J. & R. Swan, Dumbarton | 6 | 5 | 2,000 | 230
Cunliffe & Dunlop, Port-Glasgow | 4 | 3 | 1,381 | 210
Thomas B. Seath & Co., Rutherglen | 6 | 9 | 1,000 | 100
Irvine Shipbuilding Co., Irvine | .. | 4 | 973 | ..
John Fullarton & Co., Paisley | 4 | .. | 916 | 173
Robert M’Lea, Rothesay | .. | 5 | 700 | ..
J. & J. Fife, Rothesay | .. | 17 | .. | ..
Scott & M’Gill, Bowling | 2 | 1 | 200 | 20
William Fyfe & Sons, Fairlie | .. | 3 | 175 | ..
Peter Barclay & Sons, Ardrossan | .. | 1 | 117 | ..
--------------------------------------+----------+--------+---------+---------
_Note._—No reliable return similar to the above has been compiled
since 1871 of the names of the builders, and the number of ships built
by each firm, but the aggregate amount of tonnage launched on the Clyde
each year since then, inclusive of 1874, has been quite as great (see
preceding page), though the proportion to each builder has of course
materially varied.
APPENDIX No. 5. VOL. iv., p. 71.
_Shipbuilding on the Wear, from the 1st January to the 31st December,
1874._
The following return from the ‘Sunderland Times’ includes all the
vessels built at Sunderland and places in the immediate vicinity
on the River Wear for the above year.
IRON SHIPS.
-----------------------+--------------------+------+-----+------------------
Builders’ Names. | Ships’ Names. |Tons. |Class| Port of Register.
| | | A 1.|
-----------------------+--------------------+------+-----+------------------
Austin and Hunter |Barambio | 754 | 90 |Bilboa.
” ” |Knight Templar | 1546 | 90 |North Shields.
Bartram, Haswell & Co. |Cumbria | 675 | 100 |Scarbro’.
” ” |Clan MacLeod | 671 | 100 |Glasgow.
” ” |Stag | 1558 | 90 |North Shields.
Blumer, J., and Co. |St. Peter | 753 | 90 |Sunderland.
” ” |Waikato | 1053 | 100 |London.
” ” |Dacca | 1153 | 100 |London.
” ” |Waitangi | 1161 | 100 |London.
” ” |Blyth | 751 | 90 |North Shields.
” ” |Waimate | 1157 | 100 |London.
” ” |Fernglen | 850 | 100 |Sunderland.
Doxford, W., and Sons |Yen-tai | 947 | 100 |London.
” ” |Broomhall | 1430 | 100 |Dundee.
Laing, James |Kashgar | 2621 | 100 |London.
” |St. Lawrence | 2220 | 100 |London.
” |Formosa | 1024 | 100 |London.
Mounsey and Foster |Roderick Dhu | 1723 | 100 |Liverpool.
” ” |Santander | 709 | 90 |Newcastle.
” ” |Imbro | 1222 | 90 |Sunderland.
” ” |Eastern Monarch | 1769 | 100 |London.
” ” |Senator | 1768 | 100 |Liverpool.
” ” |Duchess of Edinburgh| 1766 | 100 |London.
” ” |Dunalistair | 1756 | 100 |Dundee.
” ” |Linguist | 1601 | 100 |Liverpool.
Osborne, Graham & Co. |Lolland | 557 | 90 |Nakskov, Denmark.
” ” |Andes | 866 | 100 |Hull.
” ” |Alexandra | 797 | 90 |Newcastle.
Oswald and Co. |Idomene | 1424 | 100 |Liverpool.
” ” |Respigadera | 1629 | 100 |Liverpool
” ” |Foyle | 1662 | 100 |London.
” ” |Fitzclarence | 917 | 90 |Glasgow.
Pile, W., and Co. |Barossa | 1019 | 100 |London.
” ” |Rodney | 1519 | 100 |London.
” ” |Olive | 885 | 100 |London.
” ” |Plassey | 1764 | 100 |London.
Short Brothers |Arizona | 1288 | 100 |North Shields.
Simey, A., & Co. |Stag | 1048 | 90 |W. Hartlepool.
Thompson, J. L. |Florence Richards | 1051 | 90 |Maryport.
” |S. W. Kelly | 1064 | 100 |Cardiff.
” |Romulus | 1442 | 90 |Sunderland.
Thompson, J. L. |Remus | 1447 | 90 |Sunderland.
” |John Howard | 1237 | 100 |Cardiff.
Thompson, R., jun. |Lochnagar | 1597 | 90 |Aberdeen.
” |Theseus | 1041 | 100 |London.
” |Min | 1411 | 100 |London.
” |Rayner | 1155 | 90 |Newcastle.
Watson (creditors) |Ballochmyle | 1511 | 100 |Greenock.
” ” |Baron Aberdare | 1708 | 100 |London.
-----------------------+--------------------+------+-----+------------------
There are several large vessels at present fitting out, but as they
have not yet been classed, they are not included in Lloyd’s List for
this year.
_Classed at Lloyd’s only._
WOODEN SHIPS.
-----------------------+---------------------+------+-----+------------------
| | |Class|
Builders’ Names. | Ships’ Names. |Tons. | A 1.| Where sold to.
-----------------------+---------------------+------+-----+------------------
Crown, John |Unkomanzi | 333 | 11 |Aberdeen.
” |Robina Dunlop | 512 | 12 |Glasgow.
” |Transvaal | 384 | 12 |Aberdeen.
Gardner, James |Truth | 527 | 13 |Liverpool.
” |Campsie Glen | 510 | 12 |North Shields.
” |Aydon Forest | 522 | 12 |North Shields.
Gibbon, N. |Nancy Holt | 328 | 12 |Liverpool.
” |Lanercost | 562 | 12 |Sunderland.
” |Tonga | 314 | 12 |London.
” |Mary Frost | 325 | 12 |Liverpool.
” |Coomassie | 428 | 12 |South Shields.
” |Glen Ville | 325 | 12 |London.
Gibbon and Sons |Violet | 170 | 11 |Sunderland.
” ” |Emily McLaren | 445 | 12 |Greenock.
Gill, John |Zeeburg | 533 | 12 |Greenock.
Pickersgill, Wm. |Thomas C. Seed | 296 | 12 |Fleetwood.
” |Florence and Margaret| 302 | 12 |Fleetwood.
” |William D. Seed | 757 | 12 |Fleetwood.
” |Emma Crook | 305 | 12 |Fleetwood.
Richardson, W. |Pauline | 472 | 11 |Newcastle.
” |Swallow | 309 | 11 |Dartmouth.
” |Chittagong | 335 | 11 |London.
Thompson, Rich. |Adeliza | 297 | 11 |Fleetwood.
” |Silver Cloud | 304 | 12 |London.
” |Our Annie | 377 | 12 |Fleetwood.
-----------------------+---------------------+------+-----+------------------
_Ships building on the Wear, for the Quarter ending September 30,
1875._
Intended for classification in Lloyd’s Register of British and Foreign
Shipping.
WOODEN SHIPS.
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
Name of Builder. |Tons.| Progress. |Class A.
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
Crown, John | 700 |Planked and caulking | *13
Dunn, G. | 50 |Planked | 8
Gardner, J. | 650 |Nearly framed | 12
” | 100 |Planked | 10
Gibbon, N. | 340 | ” | 12
” | 300 |Laying down | 12
Gibbon, J., and Sons | 250 | ” | 12
Pickersgill, William | 300 |Launched | 12
” | 300 |Keel laid | *12
Richardson, W. | 280 |Fitting out | 12
Thompson, Richard | 330 |Nearly ready to launch | 12
” | 490 |Framed | 12
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
COMPOSITE SHIPS.
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
Name of Builder. |Tons.| Progress. |Class A.
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
Laing, James |1200 |Planked and decked | 16
Thompson, R., jun. | 800 |Keel laid | 16
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
IRON SHIPS.
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
Name of Builder. |Tons.| Progress. |Class A.
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+--------
Austin and Hunter | 900 |Launched | 100
” ” | 700 |Building frames | *100
” ” |1000 |Commencing | 100
Bartram, Haswell, and Co.| 900 |Launched | 100
” ” ” |1200 |Plated | 90
” ” ” | 800 |Framing | 100
” ” ” | 650 |Commencing | 100
Blumer, J., and Co. |1100 |Preparing to launch | 90
” ” | 500 |Plating | 100
Doxford, W., and Sons |2700 |Nearly ready to launch | 100
” ” |2700 |Plating | 100
” ” | 650 |Ready to launch | 100
” ” |1700 |Framing | 90
” ” | 700 |Not commenced | 100
Gulston, G. S. | 700 |Ready to launch | 90
Laing, James |2700 | Framed and standing | *100
” |2700 | Not commenced | *100
” |1400 | Ready for sea | 90
” | 620 | Not commenced | 100
Mounsey and Foster | 800 | Launched | 100
” ” | 800 | Plated | 100
” ” | 800 | Plated | 100
Osbourne, Graham, and Co.|1320 | Ready to launch | 100
” ” ” | 780 | In frame | 100
” ” ” |1340 | Laving down | 100
Oswald, T. R. |1470 | In frame | 100
” |1420 | Fitting out | 100
Short Brothers |1500 | Plating | 100
Simey and Co. | 875 | Finishing | 90
Thompson, Robert, jun. | 500 | Finishing | 100
Thompson, J. L., and Sons| 600 | Preparing material | 100
Watson, W. (creditors) |1600 | Framed | 100
-------------------------+-----+-----------------------+-----
Vessels sold 41
Vessels *unsold 5
--
Vessels building 46
Tonnage 44,115 tons
Total last quarter, 57 vessels, of 57,803 tons
LIVERPOOL UNDERWRITERS’ REGISTRY FOR IRON VESSELS.
_List of Vessels building on the Wear, for the Quarter ending September
30, 1875._
------------------------+------+-------+------------
Name of Builder. | Tons.| | Progress.
------------------------+------+-------+------------
Jas. Laing | 1164 | S.S. | Completing.
” | 1000 | S.S. | Completing.
” | 1250 | S.S. | Completing.
” | 900 | S.S. | Plating.
” | 900 | S.S. | Plating.
” | 800 | S.S. | Plating.
” | 600 | Barque| Commencing.
T. R. Oswald | 1900 | Ship | Fitting out.
” | 1830 | Ship | Completing.
” | 1630 | Ship | Plating.
Short Brothers | 1200 | S.S. | Completing.
Wm. Doxford and Sons | 1000 | Barque| Completing.
Mounsey and Foster | 900 | Barque| Completing.
Austin and Hunter | 900 | Barque| Completing.
Osborne, Graham, and Co.| 1200 | Ship | Commencing.
G. S. Gulstan | 900 | S.S. | Completing.
------------------------+------+-------+------------
The following table shows the number of ships built each year on the
Wear since 1858, with the aggregate and average tonnage.
-----+-----+---------+---------
Year.| No. | Tons. | Average
| | | Tons.
-----+-----+---------+---------
1858 | 110 | 42,003 | 381
1859 | 100 | 37,184 | 371
1860 | 112 | 40,201 | 358
1861 | 126 | 46,778 | 371
1862 | 160 | 56,921 | 355
1863 | 171 | 70,040 | 410
1864 | 153 | 71,987 | 470
1865 | 172 | 73,134 | 425
1866 | 145 | 62,719 | 432
1867 | 128 | 52,249 | 408
1868 | 138 | 70,302 | 509½
1869 | 122 | 72,420 | 585⅓
1870 | 103 | 70,084 | 680½
1871 | 97 | 81,903 | 844⅓
1872 | 122 | 131,825 | 1,080½
1873 | 96 | 100,324 | 1,045
1874 | 95 | 99,731 | 1,049¾
-----+-----+---------+---------
APPENDIX No. 6. VOL. iv., p. 96.
_Relative Weight and Strength of Wooden and Iron Ships._
Forty years ago the relative general difference between the weight of
wooden and iron vessels may be fairly taken as stated by Mr. Laird in
his evidence; but, inasmuch as iron ships have gone on since that date
increasing in length, and wooden ships rarely exceeded 5½ times their
beam, the weights relatively have increased, and may now be taken in a
vessel of the same tonnage as 6-10 against wooden ships of a high class
which would be built of timber of high specific gravity. As the weight
of timber varies from 45 to 64 lbs. per cubic foot, the weight of a
ship is consequently regulated by her class, as also by her length; and
as a ship of ten times her beam must necessarily be built of heavier
scantling than one of the same register tonnage, a long and high-class
ship will necessarily be of greater weight than a short vessel of
inferior description.
In an interesting paper on the strength of iron ships, by Mr. William
John, Assistant Surveyor of Lloyd’s Registry, which will be found among
the Transactions of the Institution of Naval Architects for 1874, that
gentleman gives the weight of iron ships of superior class, under 340
feet in length, and of 2500 tons burden, as 1596 tons.
APPENDIX No. 7. VOL. iv., p. 146.
_Description of Machinery and Boilers of the American coasting Steamers
“Bristol” and “Providence.”_
_Beam Engine._—Cylinder, 110 in. diameter, with a stroke of 12
ft. Balance, puppet valves, with adjustable drop cut off. Surface
condenser, with 8500 square ft. of tube surface. Bucket and plunger
circulating pump connected with beam.
_Paddle-Wheels._—Of iron, 39 ft. 6 in. diameter, with a face of 12 ft.
Wheel-shaft, 21 in. diameter.
_Boilers._—Three in number, extending fore and aft the vessel in the
hold. Fire-room, athwart ship. Boilers of the flue and tubular type;
with double tier of furnaces, one above the other, on the plan for
which the constructing engineer has a patent. Shell of boilers, back of
furnaces, circular. Extreme length, 35 ft. Diameter of round shell, 12
ft. 5 in. Width of furnace front, 12 ft. 7 in. Number of furnaces in
each boiler, four. Interior of boilers, flues below, and 5-in. tubes
above.
Total amount of fire-surface 13,800 square ft.
Grate-surface 510 square ft.
Pressure of steam carried, 25 lbs. to square inch.
Effective horse-power, 3000.
Speed, 18 to 20 miles per hour.
Engines and boilers designed by Erastus W. Smith of New York.
The engines of the _Bristol_ and _Providence_ are believed to be the
largest single marine engines afloat in any part of the world.
APPENDIX No. 8. VOL. iv., p. 219.
(TRANSATLANTIC STEAM.)
_Comparative Statement of average Sailings of Collins and Cunard Lines
for the second half of the Year 1851._
------------------------------------------------+--------------------------
The following is extracted from ‘The New | But the Cunard Company
York Courier and Engineer:’— | themselves give the
| following returns of the
Collins Line—14 trips, Liverpool to New York. | sailings of their steamers:—
| Days.| Hrs.| Min.|
Total time occupied | 158 | 21 | 15 |
Average time per trip | 11 | 8 | |
Quickest trip by “Baltic” | 9 | 13 | .. |
Longest trip by “Atlantic” | 13 | 17 | 30 |
|
Cunard Line—13 trips, Liverpool to New York. |
| Days.| Hrs.| Min.| | Days.| Hrs.| Min.|
Total time occupied | 161 | 4 | 15 | .. | 155 | 17 | 26 |
Average time per trip | 12 | 9 | .. | .. | 11 | 23 | 30 |
Quickest trip by “Africa” | 10 | 6 | .. | “Africa” | 10 | 10 | 50 |
Longest trip by “Europa” | 16 | 20 | .. | “Europa” | 17 | 2 | 50 |
|
Collins Line—13 trips, New York to Liverpool. |
| Days.| Hrs.| Min.|
Total time occupied | 142 | 10 | 45 |
Average time per trip | 10 | 23 | .. |
Quickest trip by “Baltic” | 10 | 4 | 45 |
Longest trip by “Baltic” | 12 | 9 | .. |
|
Cunard Line—14 trips, New York to Liverpool. |
| Days.| Hrs.| Min.| | Days.| Hrs.| Min.|
Total time occupied | 160 | 18 | 44 | .. | 147 | 18 | 1 |
Average time per trip | 11 | 11 | .. | .. | 10 | 13 | 17 |
Quickest trip by “Africa” | 10 | 9 | 20 | “Africa” | 10 | 5 | 35 |
Longest trip by “Europa” | 14 | 3 | .. | “Canada” | 12 | 21 | 20 |
The following are the names and voyages of the Cunard Steamers making
the above averages:—
| Days.| Hrs.| Min.| | Days.| Hrs.| Min.
Asia | 13 | 14 | 30 | Asia | 10 | 15 | 11
Africa | 14 | 13 | 55 | Africa | 10 | 17 | 28
Asia | 13 | 1 | 40 | Asia | 10 | 6 | 40
Africa | 12 | 1 | 45 | Africa | 10 | 8 | 50
Asia | 10 | 23 | 25 | Asia | 10 | 6 | ..
Europa | 11 | 19 | 49 | Europa | 10 | 19 | 37
Africa | 10 | 21 | 44 | Africa | 10 | 17 | 35
Asia | 10 | 21 | 15 | Asia | 10 | 2 | 47
Niagara | 12 | 22 | .. | Niagara | 10 | 21 | 50
Africa | 11 | 1 | 5 | Africa | 10 | 4 | 30
Asia | 11 | .. | 15 | Asia | 10 | 20 | 28
Niagara | 12 | 9 | 13 | Niagara | 10 | 20 | 40
Africa | 10 | 10 | 50 | Africa | 10 | 5 | 35
| | | | Asia | 10 | 18 | 50
+------+-----+-----+ +------+-----+----
155 | 17 | 26 | | 147 | 18 | 1
---------------+-----+-----+----------+------+-----+----
_Comparative Statement of average Sailings of Collins Line and Cunard
Line for the first half of the Year 1852._
-------------------------------------------------+------------------------------
The following is extracted from ‘Huntz’s | But the Cunard Company
Merchant’s Magazine,’ September 1852:— |themselves give the
|following returns of the
Collins Line—13 trips, Liverpool to New York. |sailings of their steamers:—
|Days.|Hrs.|Min. |
Total time occupied | 154 | 20 | 15 |
Average time per trip | 11 | 22 | .. |
Quickest trip by “Atlantic” | 10 | 3 | .. |
Longest trip by “Pacific” | 15 | 4 | 30 |
|
Cunard Line—13 trips, Liverpool to New York. |
|Days.|Hrs.|Min. | |Days.|Hrs.|Min.
Total time occupied | 170 | 15 | 45 | | 163 | 12 | 18
Average time per trip | 13 | 3 | 3 | | 12 | 13 | 52
Quickest trip by “Asia” | 10 | 19 | .. |“Asia” | 10 | 22 | 10
Longest trip by “Niagara” | 20 | 19 | .. |“Canada” | 17 | 22 | 30
|
Collins Line—13 trips, New York to Liverpool. |
|Days.|Hrs.|Min. |
Total time occupied | 143 | 17 | 50 |
Average time per trip | 11 | 1 | .. |
Quickest trip by “Arctic” | 9 | 13 | 30 |
Longest trip by “Baltic” | 12 | 21 | .. |
|
Cunard Line—13 trips, New York to Liverpool. |
|Days.|Hrs.|Min. | |Days.|Hrs.|Min.
Total time occupied | 145 | 13 | 30 | | 141 | 18 | 32
Average time per trip | 11 | 5 | .. | | 10 | 21 | 44
Quickest trip by “Asia” | 10 | 5 | 10 |“Asia” | 10 | .. | ..
Longest trip by “Asia” | 12 | 21 | 30 |“Asia” | 12 | 16 | 41
The following are the names and voyages of the Cunard steamers making
the above averages:—
|Days|Hrs.|Min.| |Days.|Hrs.|Min.
Asia | 13 | 12 | 50 | Asia | 10 | 5 | ..
Canada | 17 | 22 | 30 | Canada | 11 | 17 | ..
Africa | 14 | .. | 40 | Africa | 12 | 5 | 40
Asia | 12 | 23 | 50 | Asia | 12 | 16 | 41
Europa | 12 | 4 | 11 | Europa | 11 | 8 | ..
Africa | 11 | 10 | 45 | Africa | 10 | 14 | 40
Asia | 11 | 3 | 40 | Asia | 10 | .. | 40
Europa | 12 | 9 | 26 | Europa | 11 | 1 | 5
Africa | 11 | 23 | 30 | Africa | 10 | 4 | 45
Asia | 10 | 22 | 10 | Asia | 10 | 10 | 45
Europa | 11 | 8 | 20 | Europa | 10 | 20 | 3
Africa | 11 | 15 | 16 | Africa | 10 | 10 | 13
Asia | 11 | 20 | 10 | Asia | 10 | .. | ..
+----+----+----+ +-----+----+----
|163 | 12 | 18 | | 141 | 18 | 32
--------+----+----+----+------------+-----+----+----
APPENDIX No. 9. VOL. iv., p. 227.
_“Persia’s” Passages (out and home) Liverpool and New York._
------------+--------+---------+---------------------------+--------------
| | | | Consumption
| | | Detention at Queenstown, | of Coal per
Date. |Outward.|Homeward.| Bar, &c. | Indicated
| | | |H.P. per hour.
------------+--------+---------+---------------------------+--------------
1856. |D. H. M.| D. H. M.| | lbs.
Jan. 26 1|14 3 0| .. | .. | 3·47
Mar. 8 2|12 1 25| 9 12 7| |
Apr. 19 3|10 1 30| 9 8 50| |
July 12 4|10 19 13| 9 4 35| |
Aug. 23 5|10 22 7| 9 18 37| |
Oct. 4 6|10 2 32| 9 7 2| |
Nov. 15 7|10 3 0| 9 11 20| |
| | | |
1857. | | | |
Jan. 10 8|14 5 12| 9 6 20| |
Feb. 21 9|13 7 58| 10 16 0| |
June 13 10| 9 21 41| 9 2 55| |
July 25 11|11 1 0| 9 10 38| |
Sept. 5 12|10 2 6| 9 11 43| |
Oct. 17 13|11 7 15| 9 17 5| |
Dec. 12 14|12 21 40| 9 21 40| |
| | | |
1858. | | | |
Mar. 20 15|10 19 56| 9 17 15| |
May 1 16|10 7 0| 9 17 5| |
June 5 17|10 16 0| 9 6 28| | 3·47
July 24 18|10 6 20| 9 16 55| |
_For Newfoundland for “Europa” Passengers._
Sept. 4 19|12 9 0| 9 21 10| |
Oct. 16 20| 9 22 30| 10 8 22| |
Nov. 27 21|15 7 20| 9 19 0| |
| | | |
1859. | | | |
Mar. 19 22|11 4 30| 10 17 20| |
Apr. 30 23|11 4 47| 9 7 40| |
June 11 24|10 9 25| 9 4 30| |
July 23 25|10 21 50| 9 16 45| |
Sept. 3 26|15 18 10| 9 17 2| 3 Days—Broke crank-pin. |
Oct. 15 27|10 21 8| 9 11 49| |
Nov. 26 28|12 1 45| 9 20 12| |
| | | |
1860. | | | |
Mar. 31 29|11 17 45| 9 19 12| |
May 12 30|11 6 10| 9 15 43| |
June 23 31|12 6 18| 9 8 45| |
Aug. 4 32|11 1 35| 9 7 41| |
Sept. 15 33|12 8 13| 9 18 30| |
Oct. 27 34|10 18 30| 10 19 5| |
Dec. 8 35|12 3 10| 10 8 57| | 3·47
| | | |
1861. | | | |
Mar. 30 36|10 1 30| 9 17 50| |
May 11 37|10 13 50| 10 10 25| |
June 22 38|11 1 0| 9 18 5| |
Aug. 3 39|11 1 30| 10 12 27| Bell Buoy 12 hours. |
Sept. 14 40|10 22 0| 10 19 47| |
Oct. 26 41|10 3 13| 11 16 17| |
|Bic Bic to Halifax Halifax Home. |
Dec. 15 42|10 22 15| 2 23 55| 8 Days, 1 hour, 4 min. |
| | | |
1862. | | | |
Apr. 12 43|11 15 45| 9 17 17| Queenstown 10 hrs. out. |
May 24 44|11 19 8| 9 16 40| |
July 5 45|11 2 25| 9 19 33| |
Aug. 16 46|11 3 5| 10 4 35| Queenstown 6½ hrs. out. |
Sept. 27 47|12 8 53| 9 13 28| |
Nov. 8 48|12 14 5| 13 13 55| |
| | | |
1863. | | | |
Apr. 11 49|11 2 28| 10 5 45| |
May 23 50|10 23 45| 9 22 30| |
July 4 51|10 14 17| 10 0 55| |
| | | {Queenstown. |
Aug. 15 52|11 3 30| 10 11 45| { H. M. H. M. |
| | | {Out, 4 20. Home, 1 45. |
Sept. 26 53|11 5 5| 10 10 5| ” 5 53. ” ” |
Nov. 7 54|11 19 40| 9 22 2| |
| | | {Bar. } |
Dec. 19 55|11 22 44| 10 5 40| { H. M. H. M.} | 3·47
| | | {Out, 3 0. Home, 4 0.} |
1864. | | | |
Mar. 26 56|11 10 45| 10 1 20| Out, 7 5. |
| | | {Queenstown. |
May 7 57|11 10 | 10 10 50| { H. M. H. M. |
| | | {Out, 7 10. Home, 2 10. |
July 30 58|11 13 20| 9 20 15| |
| | | {Bar. |
Sept. 10 59|11 8 20| 10 8 30| { H. M. H. M. |
| | {Out, 4 15. Home, 9 40. |
| | | {Queenstown. |
Oct. 22 60|10 23 47| 9 20 0| { H. M. H. M. |
| | | {Out, 5 17. Home, 1 0. |
| | | |
1865. | | | |
Apr. 8 61|11 10 15| 10 4 45| ” 7 30. ” 1 25. |
May 20 62|11 10 40| 10 6 5| ” 3 10. ” 1 30. |
July 1 63|11 1 0| 10 5 8| ” 5 35. ” 1 20. |
Aug. 12 64|11 0 30| 9 21 10| ” 5 15. |
Sept. 23 65|10 18 45| 9 22 0| ” 7 0. ” 0 37. |
Nov. 4 66|10 23 0| 11 0 40| ” 7 30. |
| | | |
1866. | | | |
Apr. 7 67|12 12 20| 9 21 20| ” 6 17. |
May 19 68|10 11 55| 9 15 55| ” 7 0. | 3·47
June 30 69|12 3 35| 9 20 20| ” 6 45. |
Aug. 11 70|11 4 10| 9 18 20| ” 6 35. |
Sept. 22 71|13 11 55| 9 20 15| ” 8 25. |
Nov. 3 72|10 23 35| 9 21 55| ” 0 35. ” 1 5. |
Dec. 29 73|13 0 55| 10 5 0| ” 1 20. |
| | | |
1867. | | | |
Apr. 20 74|12 11 50| 11 19 55| ” 5 15. |
June 1 75|11 21 35| 10 4 25| ” 9 5. ” 1 7. |
July 13 76|10 23 25| 9 9 10| ” 0 55. ” 0 20. |
Aug. 24 77|11 2 55| 9 13 15| ” 2 30. |
Oct. 5 78|11 23 30| 10 12 20| ” 4 5. | 3·47
Nov. 16 79|10 4 25| 11 19 0| ” 7 15. |
Dec. 28 80|13 7 10| 10 17 25| ” 6 55. |
------------+--------+---------+---------------------------+--------------
APPENDIX No. 10. VOL. iv., p. 237.
_Account of Steamers belonging to the Cunard Company, in 1875._
(The vessels of this Company, which is a private undertaking,
belong solely to Messrs. Burns, Glasgow, Messrs. MacIver,
Liverpool, and Mr. William Cunard, London.)
BETWEEN LIVERPOOL AND UNITED STATES.
---+---------------------+------------+--------+--------+--------
| | Year Built.| Gross. | Nett. | H.P.
| +------------+--------+--------+--------
1 | Atlas | 1860 | 2,393 | 1,552 | 300
2 | Calabria | ” | 2,901 | 1,730 | 409
3 | Hecla | ” | 2,421 | 1,578 | 270
4 | Marathon | ” | 2,403 | 1,552 | 300
5 | Olympus | ” | 2,415 | 1,585 | 270
6 | Scotia | 1862 | 3,871 | 2,124 | 1,000
7 | China | ” | 2,638 | 1,613 | 420
8 | Cuba | 1864 | 2,668 | 1,534 | 560
9 | Aleppo | 1865 | 2,056 | 1,398 | 280
10 | Java | ” | 2,696 | 1,760 | 600
11 | Malta | ” | 2,132 | 1,449 | 280
12 | Tarifa | ” | 2,058 | 1,399 | 280
13 | Palmyra | 1866 | 2,043 | 1,389 | 260
14 | Russia | 1867 | 2,960 | 1,709 | 600
15 | Siberia | 1868 | 2,497 | 1,698 | 300
16 | Samaria | 1870 | 2,605 | 1,694 | 300
17 | Abyssinia | ” | 3,253 | 2,075 | 500
18 | Algeria | ” | 3,298 | 2,104 | 500
19 | Batavia | ” | 2,553 | 1,627 | 450
20 | Parthia | ” | 3,166 | 2,035 | 450
21 | Bothnia | ” | 4,535 | 2,923 | 600
22 | Scythia | 1874 | 4,557 | 2,923 | 600
23 | Saragossa | ” | 2,262 | 1,429 | 300
24 | Jackal (Tender) | 1853 | 180 | 111 | 100
25 | Satellite (Tender) | 1848 | 157 | 82 | 80
| | +--------+--------+--------
| | | 64,718 | 41,073 | 10,009
---+---------------------+------------+--------+--------+--------
BETWEEN LIVERPOOL, HAVRE, AND THE MEDITERRANEAN.
---+---------------+-------------+--------+--------+-------
| | Year Built. | Gross. | Nett. | H.P.
| +-------------+--------+--------+-------
1 | Balbec | 1853 | 774 | 484 | 130
2 | British Queen | ” | 763 | 565 | 150
3 | Stromboli | 1856 | 734 | 619 | 120
4 | Kedar | 1860 | 1,875 | 1,215 | 212
5 | Sidon | 1861 | 1,853 | 1,198 | 212
6 | Morocco | ” | 1,855 | 1,193 | 212
7 | Trinidad | 1872 | 1,899 | 1,228 | 300
8 | Demerara | ” | 1,904 | 1,231 | 300
9 | Nantes | 1873 | 1,472 | 949 | 160
10 | Brest | 1874 | 1,472 | 949 | 160
11 | Cherbourg | ” | 1,614 | 949 | 170
| | +--------+--------+--------
| | | 16,215 | 10,580 | 2,126
---+---------------+-------------+--------+--------+--------
HALIFAX AND BERMUDA TRADE.
---+---------------+-------------+--------+--------+--------
| | Year Built. | Gross. | Nett. | H.P.
| +-------------+--------+--------+--------
1 | Delta | 1854 | 644 | 428 | 120
2 | Alpha | 1863 | 653 | 513 | 112
3 | Beta | 1874 | 1,087 | 677 | 160
| | +--------+--------+--------
| | | 2,384 | 1,618 | 392
---+---------------+-------------+--------+--------+--------
GLASGOW AND LIVERPOOL.
---+---------------+-------------+--------+--------+--------
| | Year Built. | Gross. | Nett. | H.P.
| +-------------+--------+--------+--------
1 | Penguin | 1864 | 680 | 439 | 180
2 | Raven | 1869 | 778 | 490 | 150
3 | Owl | 1872 | 914 | 502 | 230
| | +--------+--------+--------
| | | 2,372 | 1,431 | 560
---+---------------+-------------+--------+--------+--------
GLASGOW AND BELFAST.
---+---------------------+------------+--------+-------+------
| | Year Built.| Gross. | Nett. | H.P.
| +------------+--------+-------+------
1 | Buffalo | 1865 | 686 | 391 | 280
2 | Llama | ” | 686 | 391 | 280
3 | Camel | 1866 | 691 | 393 | 280
4 | Racoon | 1868 | 831 | 479 | 300
5 | Hornet | 1874 | 548 | 322 | 100
6 | Wasp | ” | 550 | 320 | 100
| | +--------+-------+------
| | | 3,992 | 2,296 | 1,340
---+---------------------+------------+--------+-------+------
GLASGOW AND LONDONDERRY.
---+---------------------+------------+--------+-------+------
| | Year Built.| Gross. | Nett. | H.P.
| +------------+--------+-------+------
1 | Bear | 1870 | 691 | 331 | 150
---+---------------------+------------+--------+-------+------
SUMMARY.
--------------------------------------+-----------------+-------
| Tonnage. |
+--------+--------+ Horse
| Gross. | Nett. | Power.
+--------+--------+-------
Transatlantic | 64,718 | 41,073 | 10,009
Mediterranean and Havre | 16,215 | 10,580 | 2,126
Halifax and Bermuda | 2,384 | 1,618 | 392
Glasgow and Liverpool | 2,372 | 1,431 | 560
Glasgow and Belfast | 3,992 | 2,296 | 1,340
Glasgow and Londonderry | 691 | 331 | 150
+--------+--------+-------
49 vessels | 90,372 | 56,329 | 14,577
--------------------------------------+--------+--------+-------
APPENDIX NO. 11. VOL. iv., p. 238.
_Table showing the Progress of Improvement in the Cunard Steamers from
1840 to 1875._
PARTICULARS OF SHIP
---------+---------------------------------------------------------
|
Name +----------------------+-----+----------------------------
| | |
of | Built. | | Tonnage.
| |Wood |
Ship. +------+-----+---------+ +-----------+---------+------
|Where.|Year.| By whom.| or |Engine-room| |
| | | | |Allowance. |Register.|Gross.
| | | |Iron.| | |
| | | | | | |
---------+------+-----+---------+-----+-----------+---------+------
Acadia |Clyde |1840 | J. Wood | W | 524 | 615 | 1139
Britannia| ” | ” |R. Duncan| ” | ” | ” | ”
Caledonia| ” | ” | C. Wood | ” | ” | ” | ”
Columbia | ” | ” |R. Steel | ” | ” | ” | ”
Hibernia | ” |1843 | ” | ” | 631 | 791 | 1422
Cambria | ” |1845 | ” | ” | 662 | 760 | ”
America | ” |1848 | ” | ” | 841 | 984 | 1825
Niagara | ” | ” | ” | ” | 817 | 1008 | ”
Europa | ” | ” | J. Wood | ” | 824 | 1010 | 1834
Canada | ” | ” |R. Steel | ” | 830 | 1001 | 1831
Asia | ” |1850 | ” | ” | 1012 | 1214 | 2226
Africa | ” | ” | ” | ” | 1010 | 1216 | ”
Arabia | ” |1852 | ” | ” | 928 | 1474 | 2402
Persia | ” |1855 |R. Napier|Iron | 1221 | 2079 | 3300
Scotia | ” |1862 | ” | ” | 1746 | 2125 | 3871
China | ” | ” | ” | ” | 990 | 1539 | 2529
Cuba | ” |1864 | Tod & | ” | 1133 | 1534 | 2668
| | | McGregor| | | |
Java | ” |1865 | J. & G. | ” | 936 | 1760 | 2697
| | | Thomson | | | |
Russia | ” |1867 | ” | ” | 1250 | 1709 | 2959
Calabria | ” | -- | ” | ” | 1171 | 1731 | 2902
Abyssinia| ” |1870 | ” | ” | 1177 | 2076 | 3253
Algeria | ” | ” | ” | ” | 1193 | 2104 | ”
Bothnia | ” |1874 | ” | ” | 1612 | 2923 | 4556
Scythia | ” | ” | ” | ” | 1650 | 2906 | ”
---------+------+-----+---------+-----+-----------+---------+------
---------+----------+--------+-------+------------------------------
| | | |
Name | | | | When half coals are burnt.
| Length | | |
of | of Keel |Breadth | Depth +--------+--------+-------------
| and | of | of | Mean | Area, |
Ship. |Fore-rake.| Beam. | Hold. |Draught.| mid- |Displacement.
| | | | |section.|
| ft. |ft. in. |ft. in.|ft. in. |sq. ft. |
---------+----------+--------+-------+--------+--------+-------------
Acadia | 207 |34.2 | 22.4 | 16.10 | 520 | 2050
Britannia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Caledonia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Columbia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Hibernia | 219 |35.9 | 24.2 | 17. 3 | 549 | 2580
Cambria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
America | 251 |38.0 | 25.3 | 17. 9 | 576 | 3100
Niagara | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Europa | ” |38.2 | 25.4 | 17. 9 | 580 | ”
Canada | ” |38.0 | 25.7 | 17. 9 | 576 | ”
Asia | 266 |40.0 | 27.2 | 18. 9 | 657 | 3620
Africa | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Arabia | 285 |40.8 | 27.7 | 19. 0 | 686 | 3950
Persia | 376 |45.3 | 29.9 | 20. 0 | 828 | --
Scotia | 379 |47.8 | 30.5 | ” | -- | --
China | 326 |40.5½ | 27.7 | ” | 728 | --
Cuba | 338 |42.0 | ” | ” | 796 | 4100
Java | 337 |42.6 | ” | ” | 798 | 4120
Russia | 358 |42.6 | 28.0 | ” | ” | 4750
Calabria | 331 |42.0 | ” | 22. 0 | 796 | --
Abyssinia| 363 | ” | 34.0 | 20. 0 | ” | 4950
Algeria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Bothnia | 425 | ” | 35.0 | ” | ” | 6080
Scythia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
---------+----------+--------+-------+--------+--------+-------------
PARTICULARS OF ENGINES.
---------+-------+---------+------------------------+---------+-------
| | | Description of | |
Name |Paddle | Common +---------------+--------+Diameter |Length
| or | or | | | of | of
of |Screw. |Compound.| Engines. | Con- |Cylinder.|Stroke.
| | | |densers.| |
Ship. | | | | | inches. |inches.
---------+-------+---------+---------------+--------+---------+-------
Acadia |Paddle.| Common. | Side Lever. | Jet. | 72½ | 82
Britannia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Caledonia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Columbia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Hibernia | ” | ” | ” | ” | 77½ | 90
Cambria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
America | ” | ” | ” | ” | 72½ | 82
Niagara | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Europa | ” | ” | ” | ” | 90 | 96
Canada | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Asia | ” | ” | ” | ” | 96¼ | 108
Africa | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Arabia | ” | ” | ” | ” | 103 | 108
Persia | ” | ” | ” | ” | 100½ | 120
Scotia | ” | ” | ” | ” | 100 | 144
China |Screw. | ” |Oscill. geared.| Sur. | 80¼ | 66
Cuba | ” | ” | ” | ” | 82 | 72
Java | ” | ” | Inv. Direct. | ” | 85 | 42
Russia | ” | ” | ” | ” | 87 | 48
Calabria | ” | ” | ” | ” | 72 | 48
Abyssinia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Algeria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Bothnia | ” |Compound.| ” | ” | 104.60 | 54
Scythia | ” |Compound.| ” | ” | ” | ”
---------+-------+---------+---------------+--------+---------+-------
---------+--------------------------------------------
| Boilers and Furnaces.
Name +-----------+---+---------+----------+-------
|Description| | Number |Fire-grate|Heating
of | of |No.| of | Area. |Surface
| Boilers. | |Furnaces.| | Area.
Ship. | | | | feet. | feet.
---------+-----------+---+---------+----------+-------
Acadia | Flue. | 4 | 12 | 222 | 2698
Britannia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Caledonia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Columbia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Hibernia | ” | ” | 16 | 247 | 3788
Cambria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
America | ” | ” | ” | 300 | 4750
Niagara | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Europa | ” | ” | ” | 314 | 4796
Canada | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Asia | ” | ” | 20 | 417 | 7032
Africa | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Arabia | Tubular. | 4 | 24 | 642 | 16948
Persia | ” | 8 | 40 | 800 | 26080
Scotia | ” | ” | -- | -- | --
China | ” | 4 | 24 | 432 | 11920
Cuba | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Java | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Russia | ” | ” | 28 | 504 | 13910
Calabria | ” | ” | 24 | 432 | 11920
Abyssinia| ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Algeria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Bothnia | ” | 8 | ” | 444 | 11758
Scythia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
---------+-----------+---+---------+----------+-------
----------+-----------------+----------------------------
| Horse-power. | Coal Consumed.
Name +-------+---------+---------+---------+--------
|Nominal|Indicated|I. H. P. | |
of |Horse- | Horse- |per hour.|Per mile.|Per day.
|power. | power. | | |
Ship. | |(at sea.)| pounds. | cwts. | tons.
----------+-------+---------+---------+---------+--------
Acadia | 425 | 740 | 4.7 | 4. | 38
Britannia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Caledonia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Columbia | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Hibernia | 500 | 1040 | 4.3 | 4.2 | 44
Cambria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
America | 670½ | 1400 | 4. | 5. | 60
Niagara | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Europa | 689½ | 1450 | ” | ” | ”
Canada | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Asia | 824 | 1000 | 3.92 | 6.2 | 76
Africa | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Arabia | 938 | 3000 | 3.75 | 8.5 | 120
Persia | 917 | 3600 | 3.7 | 8.5 | 150
Scotia | 974½ | 4200 | 3.65 | 10. | 164
China | 484 | 2200 | 3.3 | 5.4 | 82
Cuba | 520 | 2300 | 3.3 | 5.5 | 83
Java | 465½ | 2440 | ” | ” | 85
Russia | 492 | 2800 | ” | ” | 90
Calabria | 350 | 2480 | 3.4 | 5.6 | 86
Abyssinia | ” | ” | 3.4 | ” | ”
Algeria | ” | ” | ” | ” | ”
Bothnia | 507 | 2780 | 2.2 | 4.1 | 63
Scythia | ” | ” | 2.2 | ” | ”
----------+-------+---------+---------+---------+--------
----------+--------------------------------------------
| GENERAL REMARKS.
Name +---------+---------+--------------+---------
| Bunker | Cargo | Cabin | Average
of |capacity.|capacity.|accommodation.| speed
| | | |per hour.
Ship. | | | Number |
| tons | tons | of |
| weight. | weight. | adults. | knots.
----------+---------+---------+--------------+---------
Acadia | 640 | 225 | 90 | 8.3
Britannia | ” | ” | ” | 8.4
Caledonia | ” | ” | ” | 8.7
Columbia | ” | ” | ” | 8.5
Hibernia | 740 | 300 | 110 | 8.9
Cambria | ” | ” | ” | 9.6
America | 840 | 450 | 140 | 10.1
Niagara | ” | ” | ” | ”
Europa | ” | ” | ” | 10.2
Canada | ” | ” | ” | 10.5
Asia | 930 | 500 | 160 | 12.3
Africa | ” | ” | ” | ”
Arabia | 1400 | ” | ” | 12.5
Persia | 1640 | 1100 | 180 | 12.9
Scotia | 1800 | 1400 | 240 | 13.
China | 1100 | 1050 | 160 | 12.9
Cuba | ” | 1100 | ” | 12.8
Java | ” | ” | ” | ”
Russia | 1180 | 1260 | 180 | 13.
Calabria | ” | 1100 | 150 | ”
Abyssinia | ” | 1600 | 180 | 12.5
Algeria | ” | ” | ” | ”
Bothnia | 940 | 3000 | 340 | 13.
Scythia | ” | ” | ” | ”
----------+---------+---------+--------------+---------
Though these celebrated steamers must have made, in the course of the
35 years, two or three thousand passages across the Atlantic, they
never lost a life nor a letter entrusted to their charge, through any
of the so-called ordinary disasters of the sea.—See _text_, p. 239.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “BRITANNIA” AND “BOTHNIA.”
--------------------+------------+----------------------+---------------------
|“Britannia.”| “Bothnia.” | Difference in favour
| | | of “Bothnia.”
+------------+----------------------+---------------------
Year Built | 1840. | 1874. |
| | |
Cargo Capacity | 225 Tons. | 3000 Tons. | 13·75 times more.
| | |
Passenger |90 Persons. | 340 Persons | 3·70 times more.
Accommodation | (1st Class)| (1st Class, not |
| | including steerage.) |
| | |
Average speed | 8·4 Knots. | 13 Knots. | 1·46 times faster.
per hour | | |
| | |
Consumption of fuel | 4·7 lbs. | 2·2 lbs. |Decrease of 2·5 lbs.,
per indicated horse| | | or more than one-half
power, per hour | | | saved.
Mr. McGregor Laird, in his remarkably prophetic letter on Transatlantic
steam voyages (see note, text, p. 171), which appeared under the
signature of “Chimera” in the _Liverpool Albion_, 28th December 1835,
estimated the consumption of coal at 9½ lbs. per horse per hour, but
considered that quantity could be reduced by working large engines
expansively. The first steamer of the Cunard Company in 1840 consumed
close upon 5 lbs.; the last a little over 2 lbs. If we can still only
convert one-sixth of the heat we create into steam (see text, p. 581),
we may hope to be able to reduce the consumption to ½ lb. of coal per
horse-power per hour.
_To face page 608._
APPENDIX No. 12. VOL. iv., p. 244.
_Rules for exercising Boats and Fire-Pumps, on board all Ships with
eight Boats in the Cunard Service._
1st. Every officer in charge of a boat shall be conversant with the
names and number of the crew thereof, and have a muster-roll of the
same; and in exercising boats when mustered at “boats’ stations,” shall
place his men, sailors forward, firemen amidships, stewards, &c., aft;
and shall see that his men wear the badge with the number of the boat.
2nd. Each officer shall place two of sailing department, who will
attend the outside chocks, gripes, and davit-lockings, lower the boat
when swung out, and remain to belay the falls, when hoisted up. No boat
to be lowered until the order is given, “lower away.”
3rd. Each officer shall station two of sailing department to take cover
off, and fore and aft spar out of the boat, and remain in her.
4th. In hoisting up, the crews of opposite boats assist each other, the
starboard boat taking the after falls on both sides, and the port the
forward.
FIRE STATIONS.
In case of fire the crew of No. 8 boat shall attend to the port-hose,
and No. 7 to the starboard: the crews of Nos. 5 and 6 working the
main-deck pump, Nos. 3 and 4 the pump on the saloon, assisted by Nos. 1
and 2.
The steward department to attend the fire-buckets and blankets; a
certain number to be told-off to each.
BILGE PUMPS.
The crew of No. 8 boat shall rig and man the bilge pumps on port-side,
forward, No. 7 taking the starboard forward, No. 6 the port amidships,
No. 5 the starboard amidships, and No. 3 the starboard after-pump.
WATER-TIGHT DOORS.
Carpenter to stand by to shut any water-tight doors which may be
required, and all water-tight doors must always be kept in perfect
order.
* * * * *
Every officer in the Cunard service is expected to know and act up to
these rules.
_Rules and Regulations of the Cunard Company (applicable to the Cabin)._
It being obvious that, on a passage of some days’ duration, the
comfort of a numerous body of passengers must very much depend upon
the manner in which they themselves assist in promoting it, a cheerful
acquiescence is expected in the following regulations and suggestions,
which, if in any instance at variance with the opinions, habits, or
inclinations of the few, are framed with a regard to the comfort of the
whole.
1.—In case of dissatisfaction with any of the servants, it is
requested that the head steward may be informed, and, if the
grievance be not immediately redressed, that the captain be
appealed to, and, if of a serious nature, that it be represented
in writing, in order that it may be brought before the agents at
the conclusion of the voyage.
2.—The stewards and boys are engaged on the express understanding
that at table they attend in becoming apparel.
3.—The state-rooms to be swept, and carpets to be taken out and
shaken, every morning after breakfast. To be washed once a week,
if the weather is dry.
4.—The saloon and ladies’ cabins to be swept every morning before
breakfast, beginning at 5 o’clock.
5.—Bedding to be turned over as soon as passengers quit their
cabins. Slops to be emptied and basins cleaned at the same time.
Beds to be made once a day only, except in cases of illness, &c.,
and within one hour after breakfast.
6.—Bed linen to be changed on the eighth day. Boots and shoes to
be cleaned and put back into the state-rooms every morning at 8
o’clock.
7.—Two towels to be hung up for each passenger, and to be changed
every other day, or as often as required.
8.—Passengers are requested not to open their scuttles when there
is a chance of their bedding being wetted. The head steward to see
that the scuttles are open when the weather will permit.
9.—The stewardess only is to enter the ladies’ cabin and
state-rooms, and to make the beds at the time before stated.
10.—The wine and spirit bar will be opened to passengers at 6
A.M., and closed at 11 P.M.
11.—Breakfast to be on the table at half-past 8, and cloths
removed by half-past 9.
12.—Luncheon to be on table from 12 to 1 o’clock.
13.—The before-dinner bell to be rung at half-past 3—dinner to
be on the table at 4—the cloths to be removed the instant it is
over.
14.—Tea to be on the table at half-past 7.
15.—Supper, if required and ordered, to be before 10 o’clock.
16.—Lights to be put out in the saloons at half-past 11, and in
the staterooms at 12.
17.—As the labour of the servants must be very great, and the
space required for a larger number absolutely preventing an
increase, the passengers are requested to spare them as much as
possible between the meal hours, and particularly preceding dinner.
18.—No passenger is allowed to change his state-room or berth
without the knowledge of the purser; and it is understood that the
passage tickets are to be given up to him before the termination
of the voyage.
19.—With or without their owners, _dogs_ are not allowed to come
abaft the foremast.
APPENDIX No. 13. VOL. iv., p. 259.
_Inman Company—Transatlantic Fleet, 1st Jan. 1875._
---------+-----------------+------+----------+---------+------
Number | Names. | Year |Gross Reg.|Nett Reg.| Horse
of Ships.| |built.| Tonnage. |Tonnage. |Power.
---------+-----------------+------+----------+---------+------
1 |Ajax | 1856 | 163 | 133 | 30
2 |Bosphorus | ” | 448 | 333 | 30
3 |Hercules | ” | 211 | 174 | 30
4 |City of Bristol | 1860 | 2655 | 1,805 | 350
5 |City of Limerick | 1863 | 2536 | 1,724 | 250
6 |City of London | ” | 2765 | 1,880 | 450
7 |City of Durham | 1865 | 697 | 538 | 120
8 |City of New York | ” | 3,499 | 2,380 | 350
9 |City of Paris | 1866 | 3,081 | 1,975 | 550
10 |City of Antwerp | 1867 | 2,391 | 1,626 | 350
11 |City of Brooklyn | 1869 | 2,911 | 1,980 | 450
12 |City of Brussels | ” | 3,747 | 2,323 | 600
13 |City of Montreal | 1872 | 4,451 | 3,027 | 600
14 |City of Chester | 1873 | 4,700 | 3,000 | 800
15 |City of Richmond | ” | 4,700 | 3,000 | 800
16 |City of Berlin | 1874 | 5,000 | 3,500 |1,000
| | +----------+---------+------
| Total | | 43,955 | 29,398 |6,760
---------+-----------------+------+----------+---------+------
_Abstract from the Log of the S.S. “City of Berlin,” from Queenstown
(Roche’s Point) to New York (Sandy Hook)._
7 Days, 18 Hours, 2 Minutes—Mean Time.
----------+---------+--------+--------+-----+------+-----------------------------
Date, | Wind. |Courses.|Distance|Lati-|Longi-|
September,| | |run from|tude.| tude.| REMARKS.
1875. | | | Queens-| | |
| | | town. | | |
----------+---------+--------+--------+-----+------+-----------------------------
Thursday, | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |9.20 p.m. left Liverpool Bar.
16 | | | | | |{11.30 a.m. arrived at
Friday, |Southerly|Channel | | N. | W. |{ Queenstown. 4.50 p.m.
17 | | | | | |{ left Queenstown.
Saturday, | Variable|S. 81 W.| 303 |50·45| 15·58|Calm.
18 | | | | | |
Sunday, | Easterly|S. 79 W.| 367 |49·37| 25·19|Light airs to light breeze.
19 | | | | | |
Monday, | Easterly|S. 77 W.| 376 |48·08| 34·35|Light airs to light breeze.
20 | | | | | |
Tuesday, | Easterly|S. 74 W.| 368 |46·18| 43·11|Light airs to light breeze.
21 | | | | | |
Wednesday,| N.E. |S. 70 W.| 380 |43·59| 51·34|Moderate breeze to calm.
22 | to S.W. | | | | |
Thursday, | Variable|S. 77 W.| 374 |42·37| 59·49|Light variable airs.
23 | | | | | |
Friday, | N.N.W. |S. 72 W.| 381 |50·52| 67·55|Light to moderate breeze.
24 | | | | | |
Saturday, | To Sandy Hook | 280 | .. | .. |{6.30 a.m. arrived at Sandy
25 | | | | |{ Hook (New York).
----------+------------------+--------+-----+------+-----------------------------
_Abstract from the Log of S.S. “City of Berlin”—Continued._
_From New York (Sandy Hook) to Queenstown (Roche’s Point)._
7 Days, 15 Hours, 28 Minutes—Mean Time.
----------+---------+--------+--------+-----+------+------------------------
Date, | Wind. |Courses.|Distance|Lati-|Longi-|
October, | | |run from|tude.| tude.| REMARKS.
1875. | | | Sandy | | |
| | | Hook. | | |
----------+---------+--------+--------+-----+------+------------------------
| | | | |{9.0 a.m. passed Sandy
Saturday, | Westerly| .. | .. | N. | W. |{ Hook (New York). 9.15
2 | | | | | |{ discharged pilot. 9.20
| | | | | |{ ahead full speed.
| | | | | |
Sunday, | Westerly|N. 80 E.| 388 |41·25|65·37 |Light breeze.
3 | | | | | |
Monday, | Variable|N. 74 E.| 362 42·55|57·45 |Calm to moderate breeze.
4 | | | | | |
Tuesday, | S.W. |N. 70 E.| 366 |44·57|49·51 |Light breeze throughout.
5 | | | | | | |
Wednesday,| S.W. |N. 68 E.| 361 |47·15|41·53 |Light breeze throughout.
6 | | | | | |
Thursday, | S.W. to |N. 71 E.| 381 |49·20|32·54 |Fresh breeze throughout.
7 |N.W. | | | | |
Friday, | North |N. 79 E.| 347 |50·23|24·06 |{Fresh gale and heavy
8 | | | | | |{ beam sea.
| | | | | |
Saturday, | North |N. 82 E.| 362 |51·17|14·43 |{Strong breeze and heavy
9 | | | | | |{ beam sea.
| | | | | |
| | | | | |{5.10 a.m. arrived at
| | | | | |{ Queenstown; 6.10 left
Sunday, | To Queenstown | 253 | .. | .. |{ Queenstown; 5 p.m.
10 | | | | | |{ Holyhead; 9.20 passed
| | | | | |{ Rock Light, Liverpool.
----------+---------+--------+--------+-----+------+------------------------
APPENDIX No. 14. VOL. iv., p. 262.
_Allan Line—Transatlantic Fleet, 1st Jan. 1875._
------------+--------+--------+-----------+----------------
Names. | Gross | Nett |Horse-power| Cabin
|Tonnage.|Tonnage.| Nominal. |accommodation for.
------------+--------+--------+-----------+----------------
Sardinian | 4,200 | 2,300 | 675 | 120
Polynesian | 3,983 | 2,023 | 675 | 120
Sarmatian | 3,911 | 2,175 | 650 | 100
Circassian | 3,200 | 1,845 | 550 | 100
Scandinavian| 2,840 | 1,811 | 500 | 100
Prussian | 2,794 | 1,776 | 500 | 90
Austrian | 2,458 | 1,650 | 450 | 115
Nestorian | 2,466 | 1,677 | 455 | 115
Moravian | 3,323 | 2,014 | 500 | 80
Peruvian | 3,038 | 1,845 | 500 | 100
Hibernian | 2,752 | 1,726 | 400 | 80
Nova Scotian| 3,305 | 2,082 | 400 | 80
Caspian | 2,728 | 1,788 | 400 | 80
Manitoban | 2,395 | 1,543 | 300 | 25
Canadian | 2,401 | 1,531 | 280 | 25
Corinthian | 1,517 | 959 | 170 | 40
Phœnician | 2,350 | 1,550 | 275 | 30
Waldensian | 2,300 | 1,500 | 275 | 30
Acadian | 931 | 596 | 100 | ..
Newfoundland| 900 | 550 | 100 | 40
Rocket | 350 | 175 | 100 | ..
Meteor | 250 | 150 | 75 | ..
Mersey | 227 | 51 | 20 | ..
+--------+--------+-----------+----------------
| 54,619 | 33,317 | 8,350 | 1,470
------------+--------+--------+-----------+----------------
APPENDIX No. 15. VOL. iv., p. 276.
_“White Star” Line of Steam Ships._
(Copy of Manuscript Letter of Special Instructions.)
CAPTAIN * * * * S.S. * * * *
DEAR SIR,
In the Book of Instructions handed to you some time ago, and with the
contents of which we do not doubt you have made yourself familiar,
we dwelt with particular emphasis upon the supreme importance which
we attached to the exercise of extreme and unvarying caution and
prudence in the navigation of the Company’s vessels. This subject has
so constantly impressed itself upon us, that we have determined to
address you again upon this most vital matter, and we shall be glad
to know whether, in your opinion, and suggested by your experience
of the steamers and their trade, there is any matter connected with
their outfit, appointments or discipline, which you conceive might be
supplemented or improved upon, in which case we shall gladly receive
and consider any suggestions which you may make.
The consideration of the subject generally has impressed us with a
deep sense of the injury which the interests of the Company would
sustain in the event of any misfortune attending the navigation of the
vessels:—First, from the blow which such would give to the reputation
of the line; Second, from the pecuniary loss which would accrue—the
Company being their own insurers to a very large extent; and, Third, to
the interruption of a weekly line, upon which much of the success of
the present organization must depend.
Under all these circumstances of paramount and engrossing interest to
the Company, whose property is under your charge, we invite you to
dismiss from your mind all idea of competitive passages with other
vessels, the advantage of success in which is merely transient,
concentrating your whole attention upon a _cautious_, _prudent_, and
_ever-watchful_ system of navigation—which shall lose time or suffer
any other temporary inconvenience, rather than run the slightest risk
which can be avoided.
We remain, yours faithfully,
ISMAY, IMRIE, & Co.
APPENDIX No. 16. VOL. iv., p. 279.
“WHITE STAR” LINE.
_Abstract of Log.—Screw Steam-Ship “Adriatic,” H. H. Perry, Commander.
From Liverpool, viâ Queenstown, towards New York. Voyage No. 10._
---------+-----+-----------+-------------+--------------------+---------
| No. | | Thermometer.| Winds. |
Date, | of | Barometer.+------+------+-----------+--------+ Weather.
1873. | days| | Dry. | Wet. | Direction.| Force |
| out.| | | | | 0 to 12|
---------+-----+-----------+------+------+-----------+--------+---------
April 3 | 2.50 p.m., weighed anchor. 3.18 p.m., Rock Light abeam.
| 4.0 p.m., off Bell Buoy.
” 4 | 2.20 a.m., off Tuskar. 8.25 a.m., abreast Roche’s Point.
| 8.40 a.m., anchored Queenstown Harbour. 10.20,
| received passengers. 0.30 p.m., weighed anchor and proceeded
| 0.50 p.m., Roche’s Point. 5.08 Fahr.
” 5 | 1 | S. | 53 | 52 | N. W. | 5 | C. B.
” 6 | 2 | S. | 54 | 52 | W. | 3 | C. B.
” 7 | 3 | F. | 55 | 53 | S. | 4 | M. O.
” 8 | 4 | F. | 47 | 53 | S. W. | 5 | P. D.
” 9 | 5 | R. | 32 | 34 | N. W. | 4 | P. O.
” 10 | 6 | R. | 31 | 34 | N. | 6 | C. B.
” 11 | 7 | F. R. | 43 | 41 | Var. | 4 | R. B.
” 12 | 8 | F. | 40 | 37 | do. | 4 | M.
| 5.05 p.m., anchored off Bar.
” 13 | 3.15 a.m., received pilot. 5.25 a.m., weighed anchor.
| 5.52 a.m, off Sandy Hook. 6.46., anchored, quarantine.
| 7.35 a.m., hove up anchor. 8.45 a.m., dock.
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------
---------+-----------+----------+-----------+---------
| | | | Distance
Date, | Courses. | Latitude.| Longitude.| run in
1873 | | | | Knots.
| | | |
---------+-----------+----------+-----------+---------
April 5 |S. 85·37 W.| 51·04 W. | 16·00 W. | 301
April 6 | 85·57 | 50·40 | 24·44 | 331
April 7 | 84·00 | 50·01 | 33·54 | 355
April 8 | 78·17 | 48·58 | 41·40 | 309
April 9 | 65·36 | 46·46 | 48·52 | 318
April 10 | 61·05 | 43·38 | 56·57 | 396
April 11 | 72·50 | 41·52 | 64·40 | 356
April 12 | 84·00 | 40·34 | 72·31 | 363
---------+-----------+----------+-----------+---------
(Signed) H. H. PERRY, _Commander_.[469]
EXPLANATION OF COLUMNS.
_Barometer._—Letters—R., rising; F., falling; and S., steady.
Extreme wind is the strongest wind experienced in past twenty-four
hours.
_Weather._—Beaufort scale is B., blue sky; C., detached clouds;
D., drizzling rain; F., fog; G., dark, gloomy; H., hail; L.,
lightning; M., misty, hazy; O., overcast; P., passing showers; Q.,
squally; R., rain; S., snow; T., thunder; U., ugly, threatening;
V. visibility; W. wet, dew.
But however great the speed of the _Adriatic_, the _regularity_ of the
passages of this ship is equally surprising; they are as follows:—
FROM SANDY HOOK (NEW YORK) TO QUEENSTOWN.
------------+--------------+----------
| | D. H. M.
Voy. No. 1 | April 1872| 8 21 58
” 2 | June ” | 8 12 3
” 3 | August ” | 8 3 18
” 4 | Sept. ” | 8 19 26
” 5 | October ” | 8 7 54
” 6 | November ” | 8 8 18
” 7 | December ” | 8 23 33
” 8 | Feb. 1873| 8 0 17
” 9 | March ” | 8 10 28
” 10 | April ” | 8 12 28
” 11 | May ” | 8 9 11
” 12 | June ” | 8 10 46
” 13 | August ” | 9 1 13
” 14 | Sept ” | 8 10 18
” 15 | October ” | 8 9 32
” 16 | November ” | 8 22 28
” 17 | December ” | 8 22 18
” 18 | January 1874 | 8 6 18
” 19 | March ” | 8 13 23
” 20 | April ” | 8 6 28
” 21 | May ” | 8 4 56
” 22 | June ” | 8 10 6
” 23 | July ” | 8 6 33
” 24 | October ” | 7 23 12
” 25 | January 1875 | 8 2 53
” 26 | February ” | 8 10 42
” 27 | April ” | 8 14 28
” 28 | May ” | 8 9 52
” 29 | June ” | 8 3 12
------------+--------------+-----------
Average—8 Days, 10 Hours, 57 Minutes.
But the _Adriatic_ has been surpassed by the _Germanic_, whose last log
is as follows:—
OUTWARDS.
---------+-------------+---------+------------+---------+----------+---------------
Date. | Winds. | Courses.| Distances. |Latitude.|Longitude.| Weather.
---------+-------------+---------+------------+---------+----------+---------------
1875. | | | | | |
July 29 | .. | .. | Left Liverpool 4.50 Bell Buoy, 6.42 p.m.
” 30 | .. | .. |{Left Queenstown 11.35 a.m. Roche’s
| | |{ point abeam.
| | S. W. | | North. | West. |
” 31 | Northerly | 87·34½ | 367 | 51· 9 | 17·46 | Fine.
Aug. 1 | Variable | 81·11 | 367 | 50·13 | 27·18 | Overcast.
” 2 | Variable | 77·00 | 360 | 48·52 | 36·19 |{Overcast, with
| | | | | |{ head sea.
” 3 | Westerly | 68·37 | 348 | 46·45 | 44·22 |{Cloudy, with
| | | | | |{ head sea.
” 4 | N. Westerly | 66·19 | 373 | 44·15 | 52·31 | Fine.
” 5 | S. W. | 72·52 | 364 | 42·29 | 60·29 | Cloudy.
” 6 | S. W. | 74·00 | 361 | 40·50 | 68·12 | Cloudy.
| | | | | |{Arrived off
” 7 | To S. Hook | .. | 260 | .. | .. |{ Sandy Hook.
| | | | | |{ 6.20 a.m.
---------+-------------+---------+------------+--------+-----------+---------------
Mean Time—7 Days, 23 Hours, 7 Minutes.
HOMEWARDS.
---------+-------------+----------+------------+---------+----------+-----------
Date. | Wind. | Courses. | Distances. |Latitude.|Longitude.| Weather.
---------+-------------+----------+------------+---------+----------+-----------
1875. | | | | | |
Aug. 14 | Left New York. Sandy Hook abeam 5.11 p.m. | |
| | N. E. | | North. | West. |
” 15 | Southerly. | 87·33 | 278 | 40·40 | 68·20 | Overcast.
” 16 | Southerly. | 69·00 | 343 | 42·24 | 61·12 | Overcast.
” 17 | Southerly. | 65·33 | 341 | 44·45 | 54·4 | Overcast.
” 18 | Southerly. | 65·23 | 341 | 47·7 | 46·39 | Overcast.
” 19 | S. W. | 68·18 | 357 | 49·19 | 38·21 | Overcast.
” 20 | Westerly. | 75·00 | 364 | 50·53 | 29·13 | Moderate.
” 21 | Westerly. | 84·48 | 342 | 51·24 | 20·10 | Fine.
” 22 | S. W. | 88·34 | 360 | 51·15 | 10·46 | Fine.
|To Queenstown. | 105 | | Arrived 7.41 p.m.
” 23 |In Channel Holyhead 8.22 a.m. | Liverpool 1.20 p.m.
| | | | | |
---------+-------------+----------+------------+---------+----------+-----------
Mean Time—7 Days, 22 Hours, 8 Minutes.
FOOTNOTES:
[469] As will be seen by the above abstract of log, the _Adriatic_
sailing west, made 396 knots, or 455 miles, in (calculating the actual
time) 24½ hours, or equal to 18·55 miles per hour; but on her return
passage on the same voyage (May 1872), she made (sailing _east_) 384
knots, or 441½ miles in 23½ hours actual time, which is equal to 18·9
miles per hour.
APPENDIX No. 17. VOL. iv., p. 286.
TABLE I.—OUTWARDS, 1873.—_Statement of Passages made to the
Westward during 1873 by Steamers of the White Star, Cunard, Inman,
National, and Guion Lines from Queenstown (2777 Miles), and of
Bremen (N. German Lloyd’s) Line from Southampton (2995 Miles), and
of Hamburg-American Line from Havre to Sandy Hook (N. Y.)._
----------------------------------++----------------------------------
“WHITE STAR” LINE. || “CUNARD” LINE.
----------+-----------+-----------++-----------+-----------+----------
Thursday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.|| Saturday | SAILED. |MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +-----------+-----------++ Steamers. +-----------+----------
| Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || | Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. | || | 1873. |
Celtic | 3 Jan. | 11 12 27 ||Calabria | 5 Jan. | 11 11 55
Atlantic | 10 ” | 11 22 2 ||Algeria | 12 ” | 13 1 52
Adriatic | 17 ” | 12 17 10 ||Cuba. | 19 ” |*17 5 12
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Parthia | 26 ” | 12 0 9
Baltic | 31 ” | 10 7 27 ||Java | 2 Feb. | 10 20 31
Celtic | 7 Feb. | 8 11 2 ||Abyssinia | 9 ” | 9 9 32
Atlantic | 14 ” | 12 14 13 ||Algeria | 16 ” | 10 17 27
Republic | 21 ” | 10 8 9 ||Calabria | 23 ” | 11 18 25
Adriatic | 28 ” | 10 8 14 ||Parthia | 2 Mar. | 12 10 1
Baltic | 7 Mar. | 10 19 22 ||Cuba | 9 ” | 11 0 54
Celtic | 14 ” | 9 2 2 ||Abyssinia | 16 ” | 9 14 2
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Algeria | 23 ” | 11 18 25
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 30 ” | 9 9 53
Adriatic | 4 Apr. | 8 8 37 ||Java | 6 Apr. | 9 5 10
Baltic | 11 ” | 8 7 36 ||Cuba | 13 ” | 9 6 37
Celtic | 18 ” | 9 0 1 ||Scotia | 20 ” | 9 17 8
Oceanic | 25 ” | 9 12 46 ||Algeria | 27 ” | 10 18 49
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 4 May | 10 3 56
Adriatic | 9 May | 8 17 41 ||Java | 11 ” | 9 3 56
Baltic | 16 ” | 8 21 15 ||Cuba | 18 ” | 10 12 27
Celtic | 23 ” | 9 13 17 ||Scotia | 25 ” | 9 9 17
Oceanic | 30 ” | 9 10 45 ||Algeria | 1 June | 9 10 5
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 8 ” | 9 22 15
Adriatic | 13 June | 9 2 49 ||Java | 15 ” | 9 20 43
Baltic | 20 ” | 9 10 39 ||Cuba | 22 ” | 10 8 20
Celtic | 27 ” | 9 9 47 ||Scotia | 29 ” | 9 17 12
Oceanic | 4 July | 10 1 18 ||Algeria | 6 July | 10 8 16
Gaelic | 11 ” | 11 5 47 ||Russia | 13 ” | 9 19 53
Adriatic | 18 ” | 9 12 38 ||Java | 20 ” | 9 15 58
Baltic | 25 ” | 8 22 47 ||Cuba | 27 ” | 9 22 39
Celtic | 1 Aug. | 9 9 32 ||Scotia | 3 Aug. | 9 18 43
Oceanic | 8 ” | 10 8 14 ||Algeria | 10 ” | 10 4 12
Republic | 15 ” | 9 18 0 ||Russia | 17 ” | 10 7 8
Adriatic | 22 ” | 9 0 57 ||Java | 24 ” | 9 17 55
Baltic | 29 ” | 9 3 42 ||Cuba | 31 ” | 9 12 24
Celtic | 5 Sept. | 8 14 22 ||Scotia | 7 Sept. | 9 17 40
Republic | 12 | 9 15 52 ||Algeria | 14 ” | 12 22 2
Gaelic | 20 ” | 10 5 4 ||Russia | 21 ” | 8 20 28
Adriatic | 26 ” | 8 5 39 ||Java | 28 ” | 8 22 32
Baltic | 3 Oct. | 8 17 24 ||Cuba | 5 Oct. | 11 4 10
Celtic | 10 ” | 9 8 37 ||Scotia | 12 ” | 10 5 47
Oceanic | 17 ” | 9 10 46 ||Algeria | 19 ” | 10 15 2
Republic | 24 ” | 9 9 30 ||Russia | 26 ” | 9 20 21
Adriatic | 31 ” | 10 17 29 ||Java | 2 Nov. | 10 22 24
Baltic | 7 Nov. | 9 1 37 ||Cuba | 9 ” | 11 7 34
Celtic | 14 ” | 8 22 47 ||Abyssinia | 16 ” | 11 0 57
Oceanic | 21 ” | 10 22 22 ||Algeria | 23 ” | 12 19 21
Republic | 28 ” | 10 13 22 ||Russia | 30 ” | 9 13 18
Adriatic | 5 Dec. | 9 14 53 ||Java | 7 Dec. | 11 20 28
Celtic | 12 ” | 10 7 53 ||Cuba | 14 ” | 11 20 26
Baltic | 19 ” | 10 15 38 ||Calabria | 21 ” | 14 5 42
Oceanic | 26 ” | 11 23 22 ||Algeria | 28 ” | 13 2 50
+-----------++ +----------
47 Sailings |461 18 53 || 52 Sailings |556 14 23
+-----------++ +----------
Average | 9 19 48 Average | 10 16 54
-------------------------------------------++--------------------------------------
“INMAN” LINE. || “GUION” LINE.
-----------------+-----------+-------------++-------------+-----------+-------------
Thursday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. || Wednesday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +-----------+-------------+| Steamers. +-----------+-------------
| Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || | Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. | || | 1873. |
City of Brussels | 3 Jan. | 11 18 56 || Idaho | 2 Jan. | *16 6 52
City of Antwerp | 10 ” | 15 1 42 || Minnesota | 9 ” | *17 22 30
City of London | 17 ” | *16 14 12 || Manhattan | 16 ” | *18 9 17
City of New York | 24 ” | 14 4 22 || Wisconsin | 23 ” | 12 14 42
City of Paris | 31 ” | 10 7 43 || Nevada | 30 ” | 13 20 22
City of Montreal | 7 Feb. | 9 15 17 || Wyoming | 6 Feb. | 9 21 22
City of Brooklyn | 14 ” | 11 20 20 || Idaho | 13 ” | 13 13 22
.. | .. | .. .. || Minnesota | 20 ” | 12 6 37
City of Antwerp | 28 ” | 14 2 34 || Manhattan | 28 ” | 15 14 22
City of New York | 8 Mar. | 15 2 7 || Wisconsin | 6 Mar. | 12 10 22
City of Paris | 14 ” | 9 17 55 || Nevada | 13 ” | 10 18 52
City of Montreal | 21 ” | 12 8 17 || Wyoming | 20 ” | 13 22 12
City of Brooklyn | 28 ” | 10 5 16 || Idaho | 27 ” | 11 3 37
City of Antwerp | 4 Apr. | 10 12 7 || Minnesota | 3 Apr. | 11 20 47
City of London | 11 ” | 10 15 36 || Manhattan | 10 ” | 11 8 42
City of Paris | 18 ” | 9 14 51 || Wisconsin | 17 ” | 10 4 2
City of Montreal | 25 ” | 10 2 39 || Nevada | 24 ” | 10 4 52
City of Brooklyn | 2 May | 10 16 42 || Wyoming | 1 May | 12 10 32
City of Antwerp | 9 ” | 10 8 7 || Idaho | 8 ” | 10 12 32
City of London | 16 ” | 10 10 38 || Minnesota | 15 ” | 11 21 42
City of Paris | 23 ” | 10 2 39 || Manhattan | 22 ” | 16 0 42
City of Montreal | 30 ” | 10 3 27 || Wisconsin | 29 ” | 9 20 37
City of Brooklyn | 6 June | 9 22 12 || Nevada | 5 June | 11 2 7
City of Antwerp | 13 ” | 10 16 43 || Wyoming | 12 ” | 10 21 52
City of Paris | 20 ” | 10 0 53 || Idaho | 19 ” | 11 10 7
City of London | 27 ” | 10 15 11 || Minnesota | 26 ” | 12 1 5
City of Montreal | 4 July | 12 8 7 || Wisconsin | 3 July | 11 5 42
City of Chester | 11 ” | 9 6 7 || Nevada | 11 ” | 11 17 52
City of Brooklyn | 18 ” | 10 21 37 || Manhattan | 17 ” | 12 19 57
City of Paris | 25 ” | 9 3 57 || Wyoming | 24 ” | 11 11 21
City of London | 1 Aug. | 11 4 45 || Idaho | 31 ” | 11 11 48
City of Montreal | 8 ” | 11 19 20 || Minnesota | 7 Aug. | 11 16 17
City of Chester | 15 ” | 9 4 11 || Wisconsin | 14 ” | 10 12 12
City of Brussels | 22 ” | 8 20 34 || Nevada | 21 ” | 10 4 52
City of Paris | 29 ” | 9 18 7 || Manhattan | 28 ” | 12 22 50
City of Richmond | 5 Sept. | 9 6 52 || Wyoming | 6 Sept. | 13 4 22
City of Montreal | 12 ” | 10 1 2 || Idaho | 13 ” | 12 12 2
City of Chester | 19 ” | 8 19 29 || Minnesota | 18 ” | 11 3 47
City of Brussels | 26 ” | 8 9 58 || Wisconsin | 25 ” | 9 21 22
City of Paris | 3 Oct. | 9 0 2 || Nevada | 2 Oct. | 10 13 22
City of Richmond | 10 ” | 9 13 30 || Manhattan | 10 ” | 12 23 7
City of Montreal | 17 ” | 10 7 2 || Wyoming | 17 ” | 10 14 37
City of Chester | 24 ” | 8 17 48 || Idaho | 24 ” | 11 9 52
City of Brussels | 31 ” | 10 12 51 || Minnesota | 30 ” | 14 5 48
City of Paris | 7 Nov. | 9 11 7 || Wisconsin | 6 Nov. | 10 13 34
City of Brooklyn | 15 ” | 10 4 3 || Nevada | 13 ” | 11 7 7
City of Montreal | 21 ” | *15 1 32 || Manhattan | 24 ” | *15 4 2
.. | .. | .. .. || Wyoming | 27 ” | 11 16 22
City of New York | 5 Dec. | 12 21 47 || Idaho | 4 Dec. | 11 3 42
City of Chester | 12 ” | 10 0 1 || Minnesota | 11 ” | 13 2 2
City of Antwerp | 19 ” | 13 21 36 || Wisconsin | 18 ” | 12 16 32
City of Brooklyn | 26 ” | 12 11 21 || Nevada | 25 ” | 13 14 22
| +-------------+ | +-------------
50 Sailings | 545 23 12 || 52 Sailings | 638 9 1
+-------------+ +-------------
Average | 10 22 4 || Average | 12 6 38
----------------------------------++----------------------------------
“NATIONAL” LINE. || “BREMEN” LINE.
----------+-----------+-----------++-----------+-----------+----------
Wednesday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.|| Tuesday | SAILED. |MEAN TIME.
Sailings. +-----------+-----------++ Steamers. +-----------+----------
| Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || | Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. | || | 1873. |
Spain | 4 Jan. | 12 1 52 || Mosel | 7 Jan. | 12 20 20
Italy | 10 ” |*15 2 37 || America | 14 ” |*22 22 50
Canada | 16 ” |*18 10 22 || Weser | 21 ” | 13 4 35
Greece | 23 ” | 15 4 42 || Bremen | 28 ” | 13 10 35
Egypt | 30 ” | 11 14 47 || Donau | 5 Feb. | 9 23 10
France | 6 Feb. | 11 1 2 || Main | 11 ” | 13 18 50
Spain | 15 ” | 12 7 7 || Hansa | 18 ” | 13 8 20
.. | .. | .. .. ||Deutschland| 25 ” | 13 16 50
Italy | 27 ” | 14 18 52 || Mosel | 5 Mar. | 11 2 50
Greece | 6 Mar. | 14 18 22 || Rhein | 11 ” | 10 10 35
Egypt | 14 ” | 11 8 2 || Weser | 18 ” | 10 18 50
Canada | 20 ” | 14 1 32 || Donau | 25 ” | 10 21 50
France | 27 ” | 11 16 37 || Main | 1 Apr. | 10 6 50
Spain | 3 Apr. | 10 2 52 ||Deutschland| 8 ” | 9 18 20
Italy | 10 ” | 11 3 37 || Mosel | 15 ” | 10 20 50
Greece | 17 ” | 11 12 27 || Rhein | 22 ” | 9 17 50
Egypt | 24 ” | 9 22 2 || Weser | 29 ” | 10 20 35
Canada | 1 May | 11 21 22 || Donau | 5 May | 10 12 50
Spain | 8 ” | 9 11 32 || Main | 13 ” | 9 16 50
Italy | 16 ” | 11 22 17 ||Deutschland| 20 ” | 11 18 20
Greece | 22 ” | 12 16 47 || Hermann | 27 ” | 10 19 20
Egypt | 30 ” | 9 14 12 || Mosel | 3 June | 9 22 50
Canada | 5 June | 10 21 22 || Rhein | 10 ” | 10 13 20
Spain | 12 ” | 10 1 42 || Donau | 17 ” | 10 8 50
France | 19 ” | 12 8 57 || Main | 24 ” | 10 11 20
Greece | 26 ” | 12 1 57 ||Deutschland| 1 July | 11 10 33
Egypt | 3 July | 10 19 47 || Hermann | 8 ” | 11 12 50
Canada | 9 ” | 11 23 42 || Mosel | 15 ” | 10 17 50
Spain | 17 ” | 10 6 7 || Rhein | 22 ” | 10 1 50
Italy | 24 ” | 11 0 42 || Weser | 29 ” | 10 21 20
Greece | 31 ” | 11 16 57 || Main | 5 Aug. | 10 1 50
Egypt | 7 Aug. | 10 3 32 ||Deutschland| 12 ” | 10 17 50
Canada | 14 ” | 11 14 57 || Hermann | 19 ” | 11 14 35
Spain | 21 ” | 9 19 7 || Mosel | 26 ” | 10 0 20
Italy | 28 ” | 11 3 49 || Rhein | 2 Sept. | 9 16 20
France | 4 Sept. | 11 11 2 || Weser | 9 ” | 10 13 50
Egypt | 11 ” | 10 10 32 || Main | 16 ” | 10 6 5
Greece | 18 ” | 10 16 27 ||Deutschland| 23 ” | 10 1 50
Spain | 25 ” | 9 1 17 || Donau | 30 ” | 9 16 50
Italy | 2 Oct. | 10 5 22 || Mosel | 7 Oct. | 11 18 50
France | 11 ” | 12 21 7 || Rhein | 14 ” | 9 20 50
Egypt | 16 ” | 9 21 57 || Weser | 21 ” | 11 4 50
Greece | 24 ” | 11 9 37 || Hansa | 28 ” | 14 21 20
Spain | 30 ” | 12 17 1 || Main | 4 Nov. | 10 17 50
Italy | 6 Nov. | 10 2 22 ||Deutschland| 8 ” | 10 8 50
France | 16 ” | 14 0 2 || Donau | 18 ” | 11 7 50
Egypt | 20 ” | 14 13 17 || Mosel | 26 ” | 12 6 50
Greece | 27 ” | 13 5 22 || Hermann | 2 Dec. | 10 19 0
.. | .. | .. .. || Rhein | 9 ” | 10 19 50
Italy | 11 Dec. | 12 18 2 || Weser | 16 ” | 11 19 50
Spain | 18 ” | 12 12 22 || New York | 23 ” | 15 13 50
Canada | 25 ” |*14 18 32 || Main | 30 ” | 12 2 50
+-----------++ | +----------
50 Sailings |595 8 21 || 52 Sailings |593 20 43
+-----------++ +----------
Average | 11 21 36 || Average | 11 10 5
-------------------------------------
“HAMBURG” LINE.
------------+----------+-------------
Saturday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+-------------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. |
Silesia | 4 Jan. | 12 17 26
Frisia | 11 ” | 13 9 56
Westphalia | 18 ” |*15 15 56
Thuringia | 25 ” | 12 17 56
Hammonia | 1 Feb. | 11 19 56
Cimbria | 9 ” | 10 10 56
Silesia | 15 ” | 11 13 56
Frisia | 22 ” | 12 6 26
Westphalia | 1 Mar. | 12 16 51
Thuringia | 8 ” | 11 14 56
Hammonia | 15 ” | 11 8 26
.. .. | .. | .. ..
Silesia | 29 ” | 10 9 56
Frisia | 5 Apr. | 10 0 56
Westphalia | 12 ” | 10 0 56
Thuringia | 19 ” | 10 14 41
Hammonia | 27 ” | 10 10 0
Holsatia | 3 May | 11 3 11
Silesia | 10 ” | 9 22 39
Frisia | 17 ” | 11 5 54
Westphalia | 24 ” | 10 21 14
Thuringia | 31 ” | 10 1 39
Cimbria | 7 June | 11 14 39
Hammonia | 14 ” | 11 1 41
Holsatia | 21 ” | 10 7 56
Silesia | 28 ” | 11 2 56
Frisia | 6 July | 10 2 26
Westphalia | 12 ” | 11 0 26
Thuringia | 19 ” | 10 21 56
Cimbria | 26 ” | 10 23 56
Hammonia | 2 Aug. | 12 13 26
Holsatia | 10 ” | 10 18 56
Silesia | 16 ” | 12 1 56
Frisia | 23 ” | 10 22 50
Westphalia | 30 ” | 10 16 20
Thuringia | 6 Sept. | 10 22 30
Cimbria | 13 ” | 12 2 20
Holsatia | 20 ” | 10 15 50
Silesia | 27 ” | 10 10 50
Frisia | 4 Oct. | 12 2 50
Westphalia | 11 ” | 11 2 56
Thuringia | 18 ” | 10 18 35
Cimbria | 26 ” | 10 14 50
Holsatia | 2 Nov. | 10 20 50
Silesia | 8 ” | 10 20 20
Frisia | 15 ” | 10 8 20
Westphalia | 23 ” | 12 18 20
Thuringia | 30 Nov. | 10 8 50
Pomerania | 6 Dec. | 11 13 56
Holsatia | 14 ” | 11 19 26
Cimbria | 20 ” | 13 8 56
Hammonia | 27 ” | 14 0 56
+-------------
51 Sailings |580 3 46
+-------------
Average | 11 9 1
-----------------------+-------------
---------------------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+------+-------
|White |Cunard| Inman |National|Guion|Bremen|Hamburg
LINE. | Star | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 8 and | 4 | .. | 1 | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 8½ days. | | | | | | |
Over 8½ and | 6 | 2 | 3 | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 9 days. | | | | | | |
Over 9 and | 13 | 7 | 6 | 2 | .. | .. | ..
under 9½ days. | | | | | | |
Over 9½ days and | 6 | 14 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 1
under 10 days. | | | | | | |
Over 10 and | 7 | 6 | 12 | 7 | 3 | 10 | 11
under 10½ days. | | | | | | |
Over 10½ and | 5 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 7 | 14 | 13
under 11 days. | | | | | | |
Over 11 and | 1 | 5 | 1 | 7 | 11 | 4 | 7
under 11½ days. | | | | | | |
Over 11½ and | 3 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6
under 12 days. | | | | | | |
Over 12 and | 2 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 10 | 3 | 9
under 13 days. | | | | | | |
Over 13 and | .. | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 2
under 14 days. | | | | | | |
Over 14 and | .. | 1 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1
under 15 days. | | | | | | |
Over 15 and | .. | .. | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1
under 16 days. | | | | | | |
Over 16 and | .. | .. | 1 | .. | 2 | .. | ..
under 17 days. | | | | | | |
Over 17 and | .. | 1 | .. | .. | 1 | .. | ..
under 18 days. | | | | | | |
Over 18 and | .. | .. | .. | 1 | 1 | .. | ..
under 19 days. | | | | | | |
Over 19 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 20 days. | | | | | | |
Over 20 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 21 days. | | | | | | |
Over 21 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 22 days. | | | | | | |
Over 22 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 1 | ..
under 23 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+------+-------
NO. OF SAILINGS IN | | | | | | |
1873. | 47 | 52 | 50 | 50 | 52 | 52 | 51
---------------------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+------+-------
DURATION. D. | 461 | 556 | 545 | 595 | 638 | 593 | 580
H. | 19 | 14 | 23 | 8 | 9 | 20 | 3
M. | 53 | 23 | 12 | 21 | 1 | 43 | 46
---------------------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+------+-------
AVERAGE. D. | 9 | 10 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 11 | 11
H. | 19 | 16 | 22 | 21 | 6 | 10 | 9
M. | 48 | 54 | 4 | 36 | 38 | 5 | 1
---------------------+------+------+-------+--------+-----+------+-------
TABLE II.—OUTWARDS, 1874.—_Statement of Passages made to the
Westward during 1874 by Steamers of the White Star, Cunard, Inman,
National, and Guion Lines, from Queenstown (2775 Miles), and of
Bremen (N. German Lloyd’s) Line from Southampton (2995 Miles), and
of Hamburg-American Line from Havre to Sandy Hook (N.Y.)_
----------------------------------++---------------------------------
“WHITE STAR” LINE. || “CUNARD” LINE.
----------+----------+------------++----------+----------+-----------
Thursday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. || Saturday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+----------- || Steamers.+----------+-----------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || |Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1874. | || | 1874. |
Republic | 2 Jan. | 10 13 11 ||Russia | 4 Jan. | 10 3 56
Adriatic | 9 ” | 9 17 32 ||Java | 11 ” | 11 23 56
Gaelic | 16 ” | 12 4 42 ||Abyssinia | 18 ” | 11 6 20
Baltic | 23 ” | 9 10 12 ||Calabria | 25 ” | 10 19 27
Oceanic | 30 ” | 11 10 11 ||Algeria | 1 Feb. | 11 15 7
Republic | 6 Feb. | 11 4 20 ||Russia | 8 ” | 11 12 44
Celtic | 13 ” | 10 12 22 ||Cuba | 15 ” | 11 15 50
Adriatic | 20 ” | 10 19 37 ||Abyssinia | 22 ” | 12 20 22
Baltic | 27 ” | 9 9 52 ||Calabria | 1 Mar. | 10 3 55
Oceanic | 6 Mar. | 10 8 6 ||Algeria | 8 ” | 10 2 26
Republic | 13 ” | 10 8 7 ||Java | 15 ” | 12 8 44
Celtic | 20 ” | 11 8 30 ||Cuba | 22 ” | 11 18 37
Adriatic | 27 ” | 12 5 39 ||Abyssinia | 29 ” | 14 1 17
Baltic | 3 Apr. | 11 3 27 ||Russia | 5 Apr. | 11 9 50
Oceanic | 10 ” | 11 16 13 ||Calabria | 12 ” | 12 13 12
Republic | 17 ” | 11 0 27 ||Scotia | 19 ” | 10 15 43
Celtic | 24 ” | 9 22 38 ||Cuba | 26 ” | 10 14 42
Adriatic | 1 May | 8 18 4 ||Abyssinia | 3 May | 9 15 42
Baltic | 8 ” | 10 7 59 ||Russia | 10 ” | 10 7 52
Oceanic | 15 ” | 9 7 2 ||Calabria | 17 ” | 9 16 35
Republic | 22 ” | 8 18 45 ||Scotia | 24 ” | 9 10 40
Celtic | 29 ” | 9 6 50 ||Cuba | 31 ” | 10 8 33
Adriatic | 5 June | 8 19 13 ||Abyssinia | 7 June | 10 5 17
.. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 14 ” | 8 22 35
Oceanic | 19 ” | 10 1 2 ||Calabria | 21 ” | 10 5 36
Britannic | 26 ” | 8 1 58 ||Scotia | 28 ” | 9 5 59
Celtic | 3 July | 9 4 23 ||Cuba | 5 July | 10 6 35
Adriatic | 10 ” | 9 2 2 ||Abyssinia | 12 ” | 9 19 5
Republic | 17 ” | 8 20 55 ||Russia | 19 ” | 9 8 17
Baltic | 24 ” | 8 22 39 ||Calabria | 26 ” | 10 18 15
Britannic | 31 ” | 10 13 35 ||Scotia | 2 Aug. | 10 5 32
Celtic | 7 Aug. | 9 1 1 ||Bothnia | 9 ” | 10 7 55
Oceanic | 14 ” | 9 10 43 ||Abyssinia | 16 ” | 9 9 29
Republic | 21 ” | 9 1 51 ||Russia | 23 ” | 9 2 5
Baltic | 28 ” | 9 1 42 ||Cuba | 30 ” | 10 19 22
Britannic | 4 Sept. | 9 21 7 ||Scotia | 6 Sept. | 9 22 42
Celtic | 11 ” | 8 20 17 ||Algeria | 13 ” | 9 4 2
Oceanic | 18 ” | 9 6 47 ||Abyssinia | 20 ” | 9 11 47
Republic | 25 ” | 10 0 44 ||Russia | 27 ” | 9 18 5
Baltic | 2 Oct. | 9 14 17 ||Bothnia | 4 Oct. | 11 3 55
Adriatic | 9 ” | 9 1 0 ||Cuba | 11 ” | 11 19 32
Celtic | 16 ” | 9 22 49 ||Algeria | 18 ” | 10 19 26
Oceanic | 23 ” | 9 22 27 ||Abyssinia | 25 ” | 10 1 2
Republic | 30 ” | 9 8 25 ||Russia | 1 Nov. | 10 1 22
Baltic | 6 Nov. | 8 23 39 ||Java | 8 ” | 9 10 30
.. | .. | .. .. ||Parthia | 15 ” | 12 1 7
Celtic | 20 ” | 9 21 21 ||Algeria | 22 ” | 11 7 51
Oceanic | 27 ” | 10 1 57 ||Abyssinia | 29 ” | 10 4 27
Republic | 4 Dec. | 9 19 27 ||Russia | 6 Dec. | 11 10 22
Baltic | 12 ” | 9 3 2 ||Java | 13 ” | 9 21 17
Adriatic | 18 ” | 9 16 7 ||Cuba | 20 ” | 12 21 42
Gaelic | 24 ” |*14 6 22 ||Algeria | 27 ” | 12 22 8
+------------++ +-----------
50 Sailings |497 16 38 || 52 Sailings |556 2 29
+------------++ +-----------
Average | 9 22 53 || Average | 10 16 40
-----------------------------------------++-----------------------------------
“INMAN” LINE. || “NATIONAL” LINE.
-----------------+----------+------------++------------+----------+-----------
Thursday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. || Wednesday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+------------++ Steamers. +----------+-----------
|Day. Mon.| D. H. M. || |Day. Mon.| D. H. M.
| 1874. | || | 1874. |
City of Brussels | 2 Jan. | 10 15 38 ||Egypt | 2 Jan. | 12 2 52
City of Montreal | 9 ” | 12 20 22 ||Greece | 8 ” | 12 15 22
City of Chester | 16 ” | 10 3 21 ||Italy | 15 ” | 13 15 12
City of New York | 23 ” | 12 5 2 ||Spain | 22 ” | 10 14 12
City of Antwerp | 30 ” |*14 3 53 ||Canada | 29 ” | 14 22 42
City of Brooklyn | 6 Feb. | 12 12 12 ||Egypt | 5 Feb. | 11 16 12
City of Brussels | 13 ” | 10 23 32 ||Greece | 13 ” | 15 8 32
City of Montreal | 20 ” | 14 18 47 ||Italy | 20 ” | 14 10 52
City of Baltimore| 27 ” | 11 2 57 ||Spain | 26 ” | 11 11 2
City of Richmond | 6 Mar. | 9 8 7 ||Canada | 8 Mar. | 12 8 22
City of Brooklyn | 13 ” | 12 15 22 ||Egypt | 12 ” | 11 8 52
City of Brussels | 20 ” | 11 14 51 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
City of Paris | 27 ” | 12 14 52 ||Greece | 26 ” | 18 6 32
City of Montreal | 4 Apr. | 14 7 42 ||Italy | 3 Apr. | 14 10 17
City of Richmond | 10 ” | 9 5 24 ||Spain | 9 ” | 11 4 7
City of Brooklyn | 17 ” | 11 19 25 ||Egypt | 16 ” | 12 22 12
City of Brussels | 24 ” | 10 16 38 ||The Queen | 23 ” | 11 12 7
City of Chester | 1 May | 8 9 32 ||Canada | 30 ” | 11 1 57
City of Richmond | 8 ” | 9 19 42 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
City of Paris | 15 ” | 9 4 52 ||Spain | 14 May | 10 8 22
City of Brooklyn | 22 ” | 9 18 26 ||Greece | 21 ” | 11 12 52
City of Brussels | 29 ” | 10 2 56 ||Egypt | 28 ” | 11 5 28
City of Chester | 5 June | 8 13 37 ||The Queen | 4 June | 10 17 57
City of Richmond | 12 ” | 8 14 34 ||Italy | 11 ” | 10 22 47
City of Paris | 19 ” | 9 11 17 ||Spain | 19 ” | 11 6 32
City of Montreal | 26 ” | 10 7 42 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
City of Brooklyn | 3 July | 11 3 3 ||Greece | 2 July | 13 16 7
City of Chester | 10 ” | 8 15 9 ||Egypt | 9 ” | 10 9 27
City of Richmond | 17 ” | 8 11 12 ||The Queen | 16 ” | 9 20 42
City of Paris | 24 ” | 9 22 47 ||Italy | 23 ” | 11 22 22
City of Montreal | 31 ” | 10 19 12 ||Spain | 30 ” | 10 23 57
City of Brussels | 7 Aug. | 9 11 51 ||Canada | 6 Aug. | 12 22 7
City of Chester | 14 ” | 8 17 22 ||Egypt | 13 ” | 10 6 22
City of Richmond | 21 ” | 8 14 13 ||The Queen | 20 ” | 10 7 22
City of Paris | 28 ” | 10 16 37 ||England | 27 ” | 11 14 52
City of Montreal | 4 Sept. | 10 17 17 ||Spain | 3 Sept.| 11 8 42
City of Brussels | 11 ” | 9 0 40 ||Erin | 10 ” | 10 22 47
City of Chester | 18 ” | 8 16 52 ||Egypt | 17 ” | 10 3 7
City of Richmond | 25 ” | 9 0 39 ||The Queen | 25 ” | 11 2 51
City of Paris | 2 Oct. | 10 20 22 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
City of Montreal | 9 ” | 11 21 42 ||England | 10 Oct. | 12 5 22
City of Antwerp | 16 ” | 13 0 14 ||Spain | 15 ” | 11 6 57
City of Brooklyn | 23 ” | 10 10 40 ||Erin | 25 ” | 10 18 22
City of New York | 30 ” | 11 18 46 ||Egypt | 29 ” | 10 8 37
City of London | 6 Nov. | 11 20 50 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
City of Montreal | 13 ” | 12 3 47 ||England | 14 Nov. | 13 17 2
City of Antwerp | 20 ” | 12 2 49 ||Spain | 19 ” | 12 4 12
City of Brooklyn | 27 ” | 10 9 42 ||Helvetia | 26 ” | 12 2 32
City of New York | 4 Dec. | 13 13 2 ||Erin | 3 Dec. | 14 1 17
.. .. .. | .. | .. .. ||Italy | 12 ” | 13 13 22
City of Montreal | 18 ” | 13 13 12 ||The Queen | 17 ” | 13 5 52
City of Antwerp | 25 ” |*15 6 17 ||Denmark | 24 ” |*19 16 37
+------------++------------+----------+-----------
51 Sailings |556 19 0 || 47 Sailings |574 18 19
+------------++ +-----------
Average | 10 22 1 || Average | 12 5 30
----------------------------------++-----------------------------------
“GUION” LINE. || “BREMEN” LINE”.
----------+----------+------------++------------+----------+-----------
Wednesday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. || Tuesday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+------------++ Steamers. +----------+-----------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || |Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1874. | || | 1874. |
Wyoming | 3 Jan. | 11 18 22 ||Donau | 6 Jan. | 10 19 50
Idaho | 9 ” | 12 1 22 ||Mosel | 13 ” | 11 17 50
Manhattan | 15 ” | 14 15 37 ||Hermann | 20 ” | 12 6 5
Minnesota | 22 ” | 12 1 22 ||Hansa | 27 ” | 13 13 50
Wisconsin | 29 ” | 11 14 47 ||Weser | 3 Feb. | 11 23 5
Nevada | 5 Feb. | 13 11 22 ||Rhein | 10 ” | 11 11 50
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Main | 17 ” | 12 18 50
Idaho | 19 ” |*14 8 22 ||Donau | 24 ” | 12 9 50
Manhattan | 27 ” | 13 22 52 ||Mosel | 3 Mar. | 10 17 50
Minnesota | 6 Mar. | 13 0 2 ||America | 10 ” | 11 3 50
Wyoming | 12 ” | 11 3 37 ||Hansa | 17 ” | 15 10 5
Nevada | 19 ” | 14 17 42 ||Weser | 24 ” | 11 21 20
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Rhein | 31 ” | 13 1 35
Idaho | 3 Apr. |*14 3 4 ||Main | 7 Apr. | 11 13 50
Wisconsin | 10 ” | 11 6 17 ||Donau | 14 ” | 12 9 35
Minnesota | 16 ” | 13 20 37 ||Neckar | 21 ” | 11 15 25
Wyoming | 23 ” | 11 11 52 ||Mosel | 28 ” | 10 10 40
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Weser | 5 May | 11 2 20
Nevada | 7 May | 13 15 22 ||Rhein | 12 ” | 10 14 50
Idaho | 14 | 11 8 22 ||Main | 19 ” | 9 20 50
Wisconsin | 21 ” | 10 5 2 ||Oder | 26 ” | 12 4 20
Minnesota | 28 ” | 12 15 12 ||Neckar | 2 June | 10 8 50
Wyoming | 4 June | 10 17 22 ||Mosel | 9 ” | 9 20 50
Nevada | 12 ” | 9 20 52 ||America | 16 ” | 10 22 50
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Rhein | 23 ” | 10 7 45
Idaho | 25 | 10 17 42 ||Main | 1 July | 10 18 40
Wisconsin | 2 July |*15 7 42 ||Oder | 7 ” | 11 7 50
Minnesota | 9 ” | 11 15 2 ||Neckar | 14 ” | 10 2 10
Wyoming | 16 ” | 9 17 32 ||Mosel | 21 ” | 10 9 36
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||America | 28 ” | 12 0 50
Nevada | 30 ” | 11 15 52 ||Deutschland | 4 Aug. | 11 3 45
Idaho | 6 Aug. | 11 9 45 ||Weser | 11 ” | 10 19 35
Wisconsin | 13 ” | 10 12 32 ||Main | 18 ” | 9 14 20
Minnesota | 20 ” | 11 2 45 ||Neckar | 25 ” | 10 16 5
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Donau | 1 Sept. | 10 13 50
Wyoming | 3 Sept. | 10 20 32 ||Mosel | 8 ” | 11 0 20
Nevada | 10 ” | 10 12 17 ||Hermann | 15 ” | 11 3 20
Idaho | 17 ” | 10 16 12 ||Rhein | 23 ” | 9 19 20
Wisconsin | 25 ” | 10 14 42 ||Main | 29 ” | 9 22 50
Minnesota | 1 Oct. | 13 21 22 ||Oder | 6 Oct. | 11 0 50
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Neckar | 13 ” | 11 4 0
Wyoming | 15 ” | 11 5 2 ||Donau | 20 ” | 10 19 10
Nevada | 23 ” | 10 22 22 ||Hohenstaufen| 27 ” | 12 11 30
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||America | 3 Nov. | 11 18 55
Wisconsin | 5 Nov. | 10 21 2 ||Hermann | 10 ” | 11 12 20
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Deutschland | 17 ” | 11 20 45
Minnesota | 19 ” | 13 18 7 ||Hansa | 24 ” | 14 17 5
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Oder | 1 Dec. | 10 6 20
Wyoming | 3 Dec. | 12 3 10 ||Neckar | 9 ” | 12 0 20
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Hohenzollern| 15 ” | 12 20 50
Wisconsin | 17 ” | 13 6 7 ||Hohenstaufen| 23 ” |*15 19 55
Idaho | 24 ” | 15 3 22 ||America | 29 ” | 13 18 50
+------------++ +-----------
41 Sailings |497 23 8 || 52 Sailings |600 3 16
+------------++ +-----------
Average | 12 3 29 || Average. | 11 13 O
---------------------------------
“HAMBURG” LINE.
----------+----------+-----------
Saturday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+-----------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1874 |
Silesia | 3 Jan. | 11 13 16
Frisia | 10 ” | 11 3 56
Westphalia| 17 ” | 12 12 36
Thuringia | 24 ” | 10 16 56
Pomerania | 31 ” | 11 1 56
Holsatia | 7 Feb. | 11 22 56
Hammonia |*14 ” | 14 6 56
.. .. | .. | .. ..
Frisia | 28 ” | 11 3 56
Thuringia | 7 Mar. | 10 9 56
Westphalia| 14 ” | 11 16 56
Silesia | 24 ” | 12 12 56
Holsatia | 28 ” | 13 5 50
Hammonia | 4 Apr. | 12 11 56
Frisia | 11 ” | 12 3 56
Thuringia | 18 ” | 11 17 26
Westphalia| 25 ” | 11 3 56
Pomerania | 2 May | 10 8 56
Holsatia | 9 ” | 11 7 56
Silesia | 16 ” | 10 3 56
Frisia | 23 ” | 11 2 56
Thuringia | 30 ” | 11 7 56
Westphalia| 6 June | 11 3 56
Pomerania | 13 ” | 10 9 56
Holsatia | 20 ” | 11 3 56
Silesia | 27 ” | 11 5 56
Hammonia | 4 July | 12 7 56
Frisia | 12 ” | 10 0 56
Thuringia | 18 ” | 10 13 56
Westphalia| 25 ” | 11 7 36
Pomerania | 1 Aug. | 11 2 56
Holsatia | 8 ” | 11 4 56
Cimbria | 15 ” | 12 0 0
Hammonia | 22 ” | 11 0 26
Frisia | 29 ” | 11 1 56
Thuringia | 5 Sept. | 10 22 56
Pomerania | 12 ” | 10 4 41
Silesia | 19 ” | 9 21 56
Holsatia | 26 ” | 10 18 26
Cimbria | 3 Oct. | 12 2 21
Frisia | 10 ” | 11 19 56
Thuringia | 17 ” | 11 12 56
Suevia | 25 ” | 11 15 56
Westphalia| 1 Nov. | 12 8 56
Pomerania | 7 ” | 10 2 56
Silesia | 14 ” | 11 17 56
Holsatia | 21 ” | 11 0 0
Cimbria | 30 ” | 11 11 56
Frisia | 5 Dec. | 12 5 11
Westphalia| 12 ” | 11 14 56
Suevia | 19 ” |*15 20 56
Pomerania | 26 ” | 12 3 56
+-----------
51 Sailings |586 11 13
+-----------
Average | 11 12 0
---------------------+-----------
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
| White|Cunard|Inman|National|Guion|Bremen|Hamburg
LINE. | Star | | | | | |
| Line | | | | | |
=====================+======+======+=====+========+=====+======+=======
Over 8 and | 1 | .. | 2 | .. | .. | .. | ..
Under 8½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 8½ and | 7 | 1 | 6 | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 9 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 9 and | 14 | 8 | 7 | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 9½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 9½ days and | 9 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 1
under 10 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 10 and | 6 | 13 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 7
under 10½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 10½ and | 4 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 4
under 11 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 11 and | 5 | 5 | 2 | 9 | 7 | 9 | 17
under 11½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 11½ and | 1 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 9
under 12 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 12 and | 2 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 9 | 10
under 13 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 13 and | .. | .. | 3 | 5 | 8 | 3 | 1
under 14 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 14 and | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1
under 15 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 15 and | .. | .. | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1
under 16 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 16 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 17 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 17 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 18 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 18 and | .. | .. | .. | 1 | .. | .. | ..
under 19 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 19 and | .. | .. | .. | . | .. | .. | ..
under 20 days. | | | | | | |
=====================+======+======+=====+========+=====+======+=======
NO. OF SAILINGS | 50 | 52 | 51 | 47 | 41 | 52 | 51
IN 1874. | | | | | | |
=====================+======+======+=====+========+=====+======+=======
DURATION. D. | 497 | 556 |556 | 574 | 497 | 600 | 586
H. | 16 | 2 | 19 | 18 | 23 | 3 | 11
M. | 38 | 29 | 0 | 19 | 8 | 16 | 13
=====================+======+======+=====+========+=====+======+=======
AVERAGE. D. | 9 | 10 | 10 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 11
H. | 22 | 16 | 22 | 5 | 3 | 13 | 12
M. | 58 | 40 | 1 | 30 | 29 | 0 | 0
---------------------+------+------+-----+--------+-----+------+-------
TABLE III.—HOMEWARDS, 1873.—_Statement of Passages made to the
Eastward during 1873 by Steamers of the White Star, Cunard, Inman,
National, and Guion Lines, to Queenstown (2777 Miles), and of
Bremen (N. German Lloyd’s Line to Southampton (2995 Miles), and of
Hamburg-American Line to Plymouth, all from Sandy Hook (N.Y.)._
----------------------------------++---------------------------------
“WHITE STAR” LINE. || “CUNARD” LINE.
----------+----------+------------++----------+----------+-----------
Saturday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. || Wednesday| SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+------------++ Steamers.+----------+-----------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || |Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. | || | 1873. |
Oceanic | 4 Jan. | 10 14 47 ||Cuba | 4 Jan. | 9 9 53
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Parthia | 8 ” | 9 12 8
Baltic | 11 ” | 7 20 9 ||Java | 15 ” | 8 19 58
Celtic | 19 ” | 8 17 38 ||Calabria | 22 ” | 10 17 28
Atlantic | 25 ” | 9 10 44 ||Algeria | 29 ” | 9 3 0
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Cuba | 8 Feb. | 9 6 46
Adriatic | 8 Feb. | 8 0 17 ||Parthia | 13 ” | 11 10 26
Baltic | 16 ” | 9 3 38 ||Java | 19 ” | 8 21 1
Celtic | 23 ” | 9 0 13 ||Abyssinia | 26 ” | 8 18 9
Atlantic | 2 Mar. | 9 8 33 ||Algeria | 5 Mar. | 9 4 22
Republic | 8 ” | 9 3 7 ||Calabria | 12 ” | 9 4 53
Adriatic | 15 ” | 8 10 28 ||Parthia | 20 ” | 10 7 56
Baltic | 22 ” | 8 5 21 ||Cuba | 26 ” | 8 17 6
Celtic | 29 ” | 8 22 28 ||Abyssinia | 2 Apr. | 9 1 30
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Algeria | 10 ” | 9 15 51
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 16 ” | 9 4 4
Adriatic | 19 Apr. | 8 12 28 ||Java | 23 ” | 8 17 49
Baltic | 26 ” | 8 13 3 ||Cuba | 30 ” | 8 21 43
Celtic | 3 May | 9 5 33 ||Scotia | 7 May | 8 22 23
Oceanic | 12 ” | 9 0 58 ||Algeria | 14 ” | 9 0 31
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 21 ” | 8 9 45
Adriatic | 24 ” | 8 9 11 ||Java | 28 ” | 9 4 5
Baltic | 31 ” | 8 12 42 ||Cuba | 4 June | 9 6 43
Celtic | 7 June | 8 18 36 ||Scotia | 11 ” | 8 18 51
Oceanic | 14 ” | 8 23 34 ||Algeria | 18 ” | 8 21 26
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 25 ” | 8 17 0
Adriatic | 28 ” | 8 10 46 ||Java | 3 July | 8 19 18
Baltic | 5 July | 8 15 10 ||Cuba | 9 ” | 9 0 33
Celtic | 12 ” | 8 17 18 ||Scotia | 16 ” | 9 0 23
Oceanic | 19 ” | 9 10 48 ||Algeria | 23 ” | 9 6 53
Gaelic | 26 ” | 9 19 38 ||Russia | 30 ” | 8 18 14
Adriatic | 2 Aug. | 9 1 13 ||Java | 6 Aug. | 8 20 25
Baltic | 9 ” | 8 11 11 ||Cuba | 13 ” | 10 0 6
Celtic | 16 ” | 9 2 30 ||Scotia | 20 ” | 9 5 48
Oceanic | 23 ” | 10 0 42 ||Algeria | 27 ” | 9 14 56
Republic | 30 ” | 8 15 49 ||Russia | 3 Sept. | 8 11 50
Adriatic | 6 Sept. | 8 10 18 ||Java | 10 ” | 9 5 38
Baltic | 13 ” | 8 12 28 ||Cuba | 17 ” | 9 18 38
Celtic | 20 ” | 10 0 40 ||Scotia | 24 ” | 9 15 28
Republic | 27 ” | 8 23 45 ||Algeria | 1 Oct. | 10 4 18
Gaelic | 4 Oct. | 10 15 58 ||Russia | 8 ” | 10 0 33
Adriatic | 11 ” | 8 9 32 ||Java | 15 ” | 9 5 49
Baltic | 18 ” | 8 19 56 ||Cuba | 22 ” | 9 10 58
Celtic | 25 ” | 8 15 58 ||Scotia | 29 ” | 9 20 58
Oceanic | 1 Nov. | 9 4 53 ||Algeria | 5 Nov. | 10 2 3
Republic | 8 ” | 9 7 48 ||Russia | 12 ” | 9 10 37
Adriatic | 15 ” | 8 22 28 ||Java | 19 ” | 9 8 58
Baltic | 22 ” | 8 18 38 ||Cuba | 26 ” | 9 5 13
Celtic | 29 ” | 8 18 41 ||Abyssinia | 4 Dec. | 10 11 35
Oceanic | 6 Dec. | 9 5 7 ||Algeria | 10 ” | 9 9 10
Republic | 14 ” | 8 17 14 ||Russia | 18 ” | 9 5 3
Adriatic | 21 ” | 8 22 18 ||Java | 24 ” | 9 8 37
Celtic | 27 ” | 8 16 28 ||Cuba | 31 ” | 9 9 10
.. .. | .. | .. .. || .. .. | .. | .. ..
+------------++ +-----------
47 Sailings |420 8 43 || 53 Sailings |494 13 59
+------------++ +-----------
Average | 8 22 39 || Average | 9 7 57
------------------------------------------++-----------------------------------
“INMAN” LINE. || “NATIONAL” LINE.
------------------+----------+------------++------------+----------+-----------
Saturday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. || Saturday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+------------++ Steamers. +------------+-----------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || |Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. | || | 1873. |
City of New York | 6 Jan. | 10 7 8 ||Greece | 2 Jan. | 10 10 8
” Brooklyn | 11 ” | 8 19 28 ||Egypt | 8 ” | 9 4 18
” Washington| 19 ” | 10 14 25 ||France | 17 ” | 11 9 18
” Brussels | 25 ” | 8 20 8 ||Spain | 23 ” | 10 7 23
” Antwerp | 1 Feb. | 10 5 42 ||Italy | 31 ” | 10 23 3
” London | 8 ” | 9 6 47 ||Canada | 7 Feb. | 10 12 38
” New York | 15 ” | 11 14 55 ||Greece | 13 ” | 12 14 18
” Paris | 22 ” | 12 16 14 ||Egypt | 19 ” | 9 3 1
” Montreal | 1 Mar. | 9 9 38 ||The Queen | 23 ” | 13 0 38
” Brooklyn | 8 ” | 9 7 8 ||France | 28 ” | 10 11 43
” Antwerp | 18 ” | 10 5 0 ||Spain | 5 Mar. | 9 15 58
” New York | 27 ” | 10 13 53 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
” Paris | 29 ” | 9 2 8 ||Italy | 20 ” | 10 14 8
” Montreal | 6 Apr | 11 12 47 ||Egypt | 29 ” | 10 4 21
” Brooklyn | 12 ” | 10 1 3 ||Canada | 8 Apr. | 11 5 48
” Antwerp | 19 ” | 9 23 1 ||France | 14 ” | 11 17 58
” London | 26 ” | 9 15 28 ||Spain | 19 ” | 9 22 23
” Paris | 3 May | 8 19 8 ||Italy | 26 ” | 10 17 3
” Montreal | 10 ” | 9 20 33 ||Greece | 3 May | 10 15 28
” Brooklyn | 17 ” | 9 20 23 ||Egypt | 10 ” | 9 12 38
” Antwerp | 24 ” | 10 1 25 ||Canada | 17 ” | 10 13 8
” London | 31 ” | 9 12 54 ||Spain | 24 ” | 10 9 18
” Paris | 7 June | 9 2 18 ||Italy | 31 ” | 10 20 8
” Montreal | 14 ” | 10 7 15 ||Greece | 7 June | 10 17 8
” Brooklyn | 21 ” | 9 14 28 ||Egypt | 14 ” | 9 19 58
” Antwerp | 28 ” | 9 18 50 ||Canada | 21 ” | 10 19 23
” Paris | 5 July | 9 9 39 ||Spain | 28 ” | 8 19 53
” London | 12 ” | 9 23 22 ||France | 5 July | 11 3 45
” Montreal | 20 ” | 10 20 1 ||Greece | 12 ” | 10 9 58
” Chester | 26 ” | 8 9 38 ||Egypt | 19 ” | 9 18 48
” Brooklyn | 2 Aug. | 9 18 38 ||Canada | 26 ” | 10 4 28
” Paris | 9 ” | 8 22 50 ||Spain | 2 Aug. | 9 12 23
” London | 16 ” | 10 11 13 ||Italy | 9 ” | 10 10 58
” Montreal | 23 ” | 11 9 13 ||Greece | 16 ” | 11 3 13
” Chester | 30 ” | 8 2 28 ||Egypt | 23 ” | 9 18 13
” Brussels | 6 Sept. | 10 23 28 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
” Paris | 13 ” | 9 14 9 ||Spain | 6 Sept.| 9 4 58
” Richmond | 20 ” | 10 2 32 ||Italy | 13 ” | 10 23 3
” Montreal | 27 ” | 9 21 33 ||France | 20 ” | 13 20 58
” Chester | 4 Oct. | 8 15 18 ||Egypt | 27 ” | 9 20 48
” Brussels | 11 ” | 8 19 58 ||Greece | 4 Oct. | 11 6 38
” Paris | 18 ” | 9 14 53 ||Spain | 11 ” | 9 7 58
” Richmond | 25 ” |*20 2 45 ||Italy | 18 ” | 10 19 13
” Montreal | 1 Nov. | 12 20 5 ||France | 28 ” | 12 3 8
” Chester | 8 ” | 9 3 28 ||Egypt | 1 Nov. | 10 10 18
” Brussels | 15 ” | 9 5 42 ||Greece | 8 ” | 11 6 13
” Paris | 22 ” | 8 20 23 ||Spain | 15 ” | 10 9 26
” Brooklyn | 29 ” | 9 5 9 ||Italy | 22 ” | 10 4 5
” London | 6 Dec. | 10 3 21 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
” Brussels | 13 ” | 8 9 10 ||Canada | 3 Dec. | 11 22 58
” Montreal | 20 ” | 10 8 37 ||Egypt | 10 ” | 9 21 43
” Chester | 27 ” | 8 1 35 ||Greece | 18 ” | 10 21 8
.. .. .. | .. | .. .. || .. .. | .. | .. ..
.. .. .. | .. | .. .. ||Italy | 28 ” | 10 15 39
+------------++ +-----------
52 Sailings |520 7 15 || 50 Sailings |529 17 9
+------------++ +-----------
Average | 10 0 3 || Average | 10 14 16
---------------------------------------++-----------------------------------
“GUION” LINE. || “HAMBURG” LINE.
---------------+----------+------------++------------+----------+-----------
Wednesday | SAILED | MEAN TIME. || Thursday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+------------++ Steamers. +----------+-----------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || |Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. | || | 1873. |
Wisconsin | 2 Jan. | 10 5 38 ||Hammonia | 9 Jan. | 10 12 51
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Cimbria | 16 ” | 9 20 21
Nevada | 8 ” | 10 5 8 ||Silesia | 23 ” | 11 2 1
Wyoming | 15 ” | 10 5 8 ||Frisia | 30 ” | 9 20 51
Idaho | 22 ” | 11 16 23 ||Westphalia | 6 Feb. | 10 14 1
Minnesota | 29 ” | 11 5 28 ||Thuringia | 13 ” | 10 6 51
Manhattan | 7 Feb. | 12 21 38 ||Hammonia | 20 ” | 10 6 46
Wisconsin | 13 ” | 10 2 34 ||Cimbria | 28 ” | 10 1 6
Nevada | 19 ” | 10 16 28 ||Silesia | 6 Mar. | 10 6 51
Wyoming | 26 ” | 10 16 13 ||Frisia | 13 ” | 9 21 36
Idaho | 5 Mar. | 11 16 53 ||Westphalia | 21 ” | 9 16 26
Minnesota | 12 ” | 11 11 53 ||Thuringia | 27 ” | 9 14 21
Manhattan | 19 ” | 11 14 53 ||Hammonia | 3 Apr. | 11 15 21
Wisconsin | 26 ” | 9 0 58 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
Nevada | 2 Apr. | 10 20 18 ||Silesia | 18 ” | 9 19 21
Wyoming | 10 ” | 10 20 53 ||Frisia | 24 ” | 9 20 21
Idaho | 16 ” | 12 14 8 ||Westphalia | 1 May | 9 17 56
Minnesota | 23 ” | 11 5 38 ||Thuringia | 8 ” | 10 4 21
Manhattan | 30 ” | 11 11 8 ||Hammonia | 15 ” | 10 5 1
Wisconsin | 7 May | 10 8 53 ||Holsatia | 22 ” | 9 13 41
Nevada | 14 ” | 9 18 23 ||Silesia | 29 ” | 9 21 21
Wyoming | 21 ” | 10 22 8 ||Frisia | 5 June | 10 5 1
Idaho | 28 ” | 10 0 58 ||Westphalia | 12 ” | 10 19 31
Minnesota | 4 June | 11 11 48 ||Thuringia | 19 ” | 10 0 51
Manhattan | 11 ” | 11 3 28 ||Cimbria | 26 ” | 10 8 21
Wisconsin | 18 ” | 9 8 48 ||Hammonia | 3 July | 9 21 41
Nevada | 25 ” | 10 0 8 ||Holsatia | 10 ” | 9 12 21
Wyoming | 2 July | 9 1 38 ||Silesia | 13 ” | 10 5 51
Idaho | 9 ” | 10 6 8 ||Frisia | 24 ” | 9 17 51
Minnesota | 16 ” | 11 10 23 ||Westphalia | 31 ” | 9 14 31
Wisconsin | 23 ” | 10 15 38 ||Thuringia | 7 Aug. | 9 12 51
Nevada | 30 ” | 9 22 13 ||Cimbria | 14 ” | 10 5 6
Manhattan | 6 Aug. | 11 1 28 ||Hammonia | 21 ” | 12 5 51
Wyoming | 13 ” | 10 18 8 ||Holsatia | 28 ” | 9 10 51
Idaho | 20 ” | 10 13 30 ||Silesia | 4 Sept. | 9 23 51
Minnesota | 27 ” | 11 15 38 ||Frisia | 11 ” | 10 0 31
Wisconsin | 3 Sept. | 9 15 23 ||Westphalia | 18 ” | 10 9 31
Nevada | 10 ” | 10 7 23 ||Thuringia | 25 ” | 9 21 36
Manhattan | 17 ” | 12 6 58 ||Cimbria | 2 Oct. | 10 3 41
Wyoming | 28 ” | 10 22 38 ||Holsatia | 9 ” | 10 3 51
Idaho | 1 Oct. | 10 14 18 ||Silesia | 16 ” | 10 5 59
Minnesota | 8 ” | 12 9 33 ||Frisia | 23 ” | 9 17 1
Wisconsin | 15 ” | 10 1 38 ||Westphalia | 30 ” | 10 7 31
Nevada | 22 ” | 10 9 38 ||Thuringia | 6 Nov. | 10 13 21
Manhattan | 29 ” |*15 8 53 ||Cimbria | 13 ” | 10 13 51
Wyoming | 5 Nov. | 10 23 8 ||Holsatia | 20 ” | 9 6 11
Idaho | 12 ” | 10 11 8 ||Silesia | 27 ” | 9 17 51
Minnesota | 19 ” | 10 6 38 ||Frisia | 4 Dec. | 10 10 21
Wisconsin | 26 ” | 9 18 58 ||Westphalia | 11 ” | 9 20 1
Nevada | 4 Dec. | 10 10 28 ||Thuringia | 18 ” | 9 14 21
Manhattan | 14 ” | 12 21 13 ||Pomerania | 25 ” | 9 10 1
Wyoming | 18 ” | 9 17 58 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
Idaho | 24 ” | 10 10 38 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
Minnesota | 31 ” | 10 12 53 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
+------------++ +-----------
53 Sailings |574 20 2 || 50 Sailings |505 10 33
+------------++ +-----------
Average | 10 20 18 || Average | 10 2 37
------------------------------------
“BREMEN” LINE.
-----------+-----------+------------
Saturday | |
Steamers. | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
-----------+-----------+------------
| Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1873. |
Bremen | 4 Jan. | 10 8 40
| |
Rhein | 11 ” | 9 8 30
Main | 19 ” | 10 7 40
Hausa | 25 ” | 10 4 10
Mosel | 1 Feb. | 10 21 55
Weser | 8 ” | 9 19 20
America | 15 ” | 12 0 40
Bremen | 22 ” | 10 15 30
Donau | 1 Mar. | 9 17 5
Main | 8 ” | 10 23 10
Deutschland| 15 ” | 10 10 30
Mosel | 22 ” | 9 21 50
Rhein | 29 ” | 9 21 50
Weser | 5 Apr. | 10 18 50
Donau. | 12 ” | 10 10 20
Main | 19 ” | 9 18 10
Deutschland| 26 ” | 10 2 40
Mosel | 3 May | 9 23 45
Rhein | 10 ” | 9 18 50
Weser | 17 ” | 9 22 10
Donau | 24 ” | 10 0 25
Main | 31 ” | 9 13 40
Deutschland| 7 June | 10 2 35
Hermann | 14 ” | 10 10 40
Mosel | 21 ” | 9 19 0
Rhein | 28 ” | 9 8 10
Donau | 5 July | 9 9 10
Main | 12 ” | 9 17 55
Deutschland| 19 ” | 10 10 40
Hermann | 26 ” | 10 18 0
Mosel | 2 Aug. | 10 5 10
Rhein | 9 ” | 9 13 55
Weser | 16 ” | 10 10 20
Main | 23 ” | 9 19 55
Deutschland| 30 ” | 10 9 40
Hermann | 6 Sept. | 10 7 25
Mosel | 13 ” | 10 15 35
Rhein | 20 ” | 11 13 30
Weser | 27 ” | 10 1 0
Main | 4 Oct. | 9 17 25
Deutschland| 11 ” | 10 16 55
Donau | 18 ” | 10 7 20
Mosel | 25 ” | 11 1 10
Hermann | 1 Nov. | 11 7 40
Rhein | 8 ” | 10 8 20
Weser | 15 ” | 10 5 10
Hansa | 22 ” | 11 1 0
Main | 29 ” | 9 20 20
Deutschland| 6 Dec. | 10 15 40
Donau | 13 ” | 9 13 10
Mosel | 20 ” | 10 11 25
Hermann | 28 ” | 10 7 50
| +------------
52 Sailings | 533 11 45
+------------
Average | 10 6 14
-----------------------+------------
LINE.
+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
| White Star | Cunard | Inman | National | Guion | Hamburg | Bremen
| Line | Line | Line | Line | Line | Line | Line
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 7½ and | 1 | | | | | |
under 8 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 8 and | 8 | 2 | 4 | | | |
under 8½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 8½ and | 20 | 13 | 7 | | | |
under 9 days. | | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 9 and | 13 | 24 | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 3
under 9½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 9½ and | 1 | 6 | 12 | 9 | 5 | 22 | 16
under 10 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 10 and | 2 | 6 | 10 | 11 | 15 | 18 | 20
under 10½ days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 10½ and | 2 | 1 | 4 | 13 | 12 | 5 | 8
under 11 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 11 and | | 1 | 1 | 6 | 8 | 1 | 3
under 11½ days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 11½ and | | | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1
under 12 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 12 and | | | 2 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 1
under 13 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 13 and | | | | 2 | | |
under 14 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 14 and | | | | | | |
under 15 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 15 and | | | | | 1 | |
under 16 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 16 and | | | | | | |
under 17 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 17 and | | | | | | |
under 18 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 18 and | | | | | | |
under 19 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 19 and | | | | | | |
under 20 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 20 and | | | 1 | | | |
under 21 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 21 and | | | | | | |
under 22 days.| | | | | | |
---------------+------------+--------+-------+----------+-------+---------+--------
Over 22 and | | | | | | |
under 23 days.| | | | | | |
===============+============+========+=======+==========+=======+=========+========
NO. OF VOYAGES.| 47 | 53 | 52 | 50 | 53 | 50 | 52
===============+============+========+=======+==========+=======+=========+========
DURATION.
---------------+------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+---------+--------
D. 420 | 494 | 520 | 529 | 574 | 505 | 533
H. 8 | 13 | 7 | 17 | 20 | 10 | 11
M. 43 | 59 | 15 | 9 | 12 | 33 | 45
============================+========+========+=========+=======+=========+========
AVERAGE.
----------------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+---------+--------+
D. 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
H. 22 | 7 | 0 | 14 | 20 | 2 | 6 |
M. 39 | 59 | 3 | 16 | 18 | 37 | 14 |
----------------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+---------+--------+
TABLE IV.—HOMEWARDS, 1874.—_Statement of Passages made to the
Eastward during 1874 by Steamers of the White Star, Cunard, Inman,
National, and Guion Lines to Queenstown (2777 Miles), and of
Bremen (N. German Lloyd’s) Line to Southampton (2995 Miles), and
of Hamburg-American Line to Plymouth, all from Sandy Hook (N.Y.)._
(_See footnote, page 286._)
---------------------------------++-----------------------------------
“WHITE STAR” LINE. || “CUNARD” LINE.
----------+-----------+----------++-----------+-----------+----------
Saturday | SAILED. |MEAN TIME.|| Wednesday | SAILED. |MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +-----------+----------++ Steamers. +-----------+----------
| Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || | Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1874. | || | 1874. |
Baltic | 4 Jan. | 8 12 13 ||Calabria | 8 Jan. | 9 6 28
Oceanic | 10 ” | 9 12 48 ||Algeria | 14 ” | 9 6 0
Republic | 17 ” | 9 11 16 ||Russia | 21 ” | 8 22 2
Adriatic | 24 ” | 8 6 18 ||Java | 28 ” | 9 6 45
.. | .. | .. .. ||Abyssinia | 4 Feb. | 8 17 53
Baltic | 7 Feb. | 8 1 48 ||Calabria | 11 ” | 8 23 30
Oceanic | 14 ” | 9 12 38 ||Algeria | 18 ” | 9 15 31
Republic | 22 ” | 9 12 8 ||Russia | 26 ” | 10 2 5
Celtic | 28 ” | 9 4 33 ||Cuba | 4 Mar. | 10 1 53
Adriatic | 7 Mar. | 8 13 23 ||Abyssinia | 11 ” | 8 19 56
Baltic | 14 ” | 8 15 8 ||Calabria | 20 ” | 9 1 31
Oceanic | 21 ” | 9 7 4 ||Algeria | 25 ” | 9 10 11
Republic | 28 ” | 8 22 12 ||Java | 1 Apr. | 8 16 48
Celtic | 5 Apr. | 9 2 58 ||Cuba | 8 ” | 9 3 38
Adriatic | 11 ” | 8 6 28 ||Abyssinia | 15 ” | 9 11 28
Baltic | 19 ” | 9 9 48 ||Russia | 22 ” | 9 5 14
Oceanic | 26 ” | 9 6 18 ||Calabria | 29 ” | 9 4 25
Republic | 2 May | 9 6 58 ||Scotia | 6 May | 8 19 3
Celtic | 9 ” | 8 15 50 ||Cuba | 13 ” | 9 14 38
Adriatic | 16 ” | 8 4 56 ||Abyssinia | 20 ” | 9 9 13
Baltic | 23 ” | 8 4 17 ||Russia | 27 ” | 8 21 38
Oceanic | 31 ” | 9 12 13 ||Calabria | 4 June | 9 9 58
Republic | 6 June | 8 13 30 ||Scotia | 10 ” | 8 22 23
Celtic | 13 ” | 8 15 11 ||Cuba | 17 ” | 9 10 24
Adriatic | 20 ” | 8 10 6 ||Abyssinia | 24 ” | 9 1 45
.. | .. | .. .. ||Russia | 1 July | 9 0 51
Oceanic | 4 July | 9 12 14 ||Calabria | 8 ” | 9 3 48
Britannic | 11 ” | 8 18 21 ||Scotia | 15 ” | 8 19 18
Celtic | 18 ” | 8 4 46 ||Cuba | 22 ” | 9 6 34
Adriatic | 25 ” | 8 6 33 ||Abyssinia | 29 ” | 9 2 0
Republic | 1 Aug. | 8 12 57 ||Russia | 5 Aug. | 8 23 6
Baltic | 8 ” | 8 4 23 ||Calabria | 12 ” | 9 15 2
Britannic | 15 ” | 9 2 19 ||Scotia | 19 ” | 8 15 58
Celtic | 22 ” | 8 14 28 ||Bothnia | 26 ” | 9 7 47
Oceanic | 29 ” | 9 5 53 ||Abyssinia | 2 Sept. | 8 23 43
Republic | 5 Sept. | 8 22 38 ||Russia | 9 ” | 8 15 19
Baltic | 12 ” | 8 8 18 ||Cuba | 16 ” | 10 2 31
Britannic | 19 ” | 8 17 28 ||Scotia | 23 ” | 10 15 13
Celtic | 26 ” | 8 17 58 ||Algeria | 30 ” | 8 23 58
Oceanic | 3 Oct. | 9 8 43 ||Abyssinia | 7 Oct. | 9 11 43
Republic | 10 ” | 9 2 56 ||Russia | 14 ” | 8 15 56
Baltic | 17 ” | 8 6 38 ||Bothnia | 21 ” | 9 3 3
Adriatic | 28 ” | 7 23 12 ||Cuba | 28 ” | 9 7 6
Celtic | 31 ” | 8 15 42 ||Algeria | 4 Nov. | 10 3 33
Oceanic | 7 Nov. | 9 2 46 ||Abyssinia | 11 ” | 9 4 43
Republic | 14 ” | 8 22 23 ||Russia | 18 ” | 8 19 8
Baltic | 21 ” | 8 10 21 ||Java | 25 ” | 9 4 52
Gaelic | 29 ” | 10 3 11 ||Parthia | 2 Dec. | 10 10 3
Celtic | 5 Dec. | 8 12 43 ||Algeria | 9 ” | 9 12 18
Oceanic | 12 ” | 9 8 53 ||Abyssinia | 16 ” | 9 1 23
Republic | 19 ” | 8 23 48 ||Russia | 23 ” | 8 17 55
Belgic | 25 ” | 10 1 33 ||Java | 30 ” | 9 3 23
| | || | |
| +----------++ | +----------
50 Sailings |443 3 7 || 52 Sailings |480 22 34
+----------++ +----------
Average | 8 20 42 || Average | 9 5 46
--------------------------------------++--------------------------------
“INMAN” LINE. || “NATIONAL” LINE.
----------------+---------+-----------++-----------+---------+----------
Saturday | Sailed. | Mean Time.|| Saturday | SAILED. |MEAN TIME.
Steamers. | | || Steamers. | |
+---------+-----------++ +---------+----------
|Day. Mon.| D. H. M. || |Day. Mon.| D. H. M.
| 1874. | || | 1874. |
City of New York| 4 Jan. | 10 5 31 || Spain | 4 Jan. | 9 17 38
” Antwerp | 10 ” | 10 8 49 || Canada | 13 ” | 11 2 48
” Brooklyn | 17 ” | 10 9 56 || Egypt | 17 ” | 10 1 8
” Brussels | 24 ” | 8 16 33 || Greece | 24 ” | 10 22 8
” Montreal | 31 ” | 12 0 26 || Italy | 31 ” | 12 8 8
” Chester | 7 Feb. | 8 5 58 || Spain | 7 Feb. | 9 9 41
” New York | 14 ” | 10 3 58 || Canada | 17 ” | 12 0 38
” Brooklyn | 22 ” | 9 14 36 || Egypt | 21 ” | 9 8 38
” Brussels | 28 ” | 9 17 0 || Greece | 6 Mar. | 11 7 28
” Montreal | 12 Mar. | 11 8 28 || Italy | 11 ” | 11 2 8
” Baltimore| 14 ” | 9 21 31 || Spain | 15 ” | 10 8 8
” Richmond | 21 ” | 8 12 17 || Canada | 26 ” | 12 3 58
” Brooklyn | 28 ” | 9 9 53 || Egypt | 28 ” | 9 22 53
” Brussels | 5 Apr. | 9 6 10 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
” Paris | 11 ” | 9 2 8 || Greece | 18 Apr. | 11 20 18
” Montreal | 23 ” | 10 20 43 || Italy | 23 ” | 11 17 53
” Richmond | 26 ” | 8 2 38 || Spain | 26 ” | 9 21 38
” Brooklyn | 2 May | 9 15 43 || Egypt | 2 May | 9 11 38
” Brussels | 9 ” | 9 3 38 || The Queen | 9 ” | 10 4 28
” Chester | 16 ” | 8 11 28 || Canada | 16 ” | 10 14 58
” Richmond | 23 ” | 8 9 43 || .. .. | .. | .. ..
” Paris | 31 ” | 9 0 13 || Spain | 31 ” | 10 9 13
” Brooklyn | 6 June | 9 13 4 || Greece | 7 June | 10 15 38
” Brussels | 13 ” | 9 4 41 || Egypt | 13 ” | 9 22 38
” Chester | 20 ” | 8 1 58 || The Queen | 20 ” | 9 22 53
” Richmond | 27 ” | 8 18 23 || Italy | 27 ” | 11 2 23
” Paris | 4 July | 9 4 38 || Spain | 4 July | 10 7 13
” Montreal | 11 ” | 9 15 58 || Canada | 11 ” | 11 0 48
” Brooklyn | 18 ” | 9 19 5 || Greece | 19 ” | 11 7 38
” Chester | 25 ” | 8 4 33 || Egypt | 25 ” | 9 10 18
” Richmond | 3 Aug. | 8 7 23 || The Queen | 1 Aug. | 9 23 2
” Paris | 8 ” | 9 6 8 || Italy | 8 ” | 10 23 58
” Montreal | 15 ” | 9 15 13 || Spain | 15 ” | 10 3 13
” Brussels | 22 ” | 8 21 20 || Canada | 22 ” | 11 3 38
” Chester | 29 ” | 8 5 38 || Egypt | 29 ” | 9 17 43
” Richmond | 5 Sept.| 8 22 38 || The Queen | 5 Sept.| 10 2 28
” Paris | 12 ” | 9 12 8 || England | 12 ” | 11 12 13
” Montreal | 19 ” | 10 4 33 || Spain | 19 ” | 10 8 23
” Brussels | 26 ” | 8 23 1 || Erin | 26 ” | 10 16 8
” Chester | 3 Oct. | 8 8 38 || Egypt | 3 Oct. | 9 12 38
” Richmond | 10 ” | 8 3 1 || The Queen | 10 ” | 10 4 53
” Paris | 17 ” | 9 10 5 || Denmark | 21 ” | 12 2 58
” Montreal | 24 ” | 10 14 43 || England | 27 ” | 10 13 26
” Antwerp | 31 ” | 10 5 22 || Spain | 31 ” | 9 17 8
” Brooklyn | 7 Nov. | 9 1 21 || Erin | 11 Nov. | 10 21 8
” New York | 14 ” | 10 11 31 || Egypt | 14 ” | 9 21 28
” London | 22 ” | 11 11 13 || Italy | 21 ” | 11 19 43
” Montreal | 3 Dec. | 9 21 25 || The Queen | 29 ” | 9 23 5
” Antwerp | 8 ” | 9 23 48 || England | 10 Dec. | 10 20 43
” Brooklyn | 12 ” | 9 6 28 || Spain | 12 ” | 10 10 8
” New York | 22 ” | 10 3 14 || Helvetia | 19 ” | 11 1 3
.. .. | .. | .. .. || Erin | 26 ” | 10 19 13
.. .. | .. | .. .. || .. .. | .. | .. ..
+-----------++ +----------
51 Sailings | 482 0 31 || 50 Sailings | 530 3 17
+-----------++ +----------
Average | 9 10 50 || Average | 10 14 28
---------------------------------------++------------------------------------
“GUION” LINE. || “BREMEN” LINE.
---------------+----------+------------++-------------+----------+-----------
Tuesday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. || Thursday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME.
Steamers. +----------+------------++ Steamers. +----------+-----------
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M. || |Day. Mon. | D. H. M.
| 1874. | || | 1874. |
Wisconsin | 6 Jan. | 9 13 48 ||Rhein | 4 Jan. | 9 12 20
Nevada | 13 ” | 9 19 23 ||Weser | 10 ” | 9 17 55
Wyoming | 20 ” | 9 21 8 ||New York | 17 ” | 12 5 25
Idaho | 27 ” | 10 19 43 ||Main | 24 ” | 9 18 0
Manhattan | 4 Feb. | 10 11 13 ||Donau | 31 ” | 12 11 5
Minnesota | 10 ” | 10 2 18 ||Mosel | 7 Feb. | 9 18 40
Wisconsin | 17 ” |*21 4 3 ||Hermann | 14 ” | 10 13 0
Nevada | 24 ” | 11 1 38 ||Hansa | 21 ” | 11 6 50
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Weser | 18 ” | 10 20 25
Idaho | 10 Mar. | 9 23 38 ||Rhein | 7 Mar. | 10 7 40
Manhattan | 18 ” | 11 9 28 ||Main | 14 ” | 9 22 55
Minnesota | 24 ” | 10 8 53 ||Donau | 21 ” | 9 22 25
Wyoming | 31 ” | 9 11 8 ||Mosel | 28 ” | 10 5 0
Nevada | 8 Apr. | 10 20 38 ||Hermann | 4 Apr. | 10 13 35
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Weser | 11 ” | 10 5 40
Idaho | 21 ” | 11 2 38 ||Rhein | 18 ” | 10 10 40
Wisconsin | 28 ” | 9 14 38 ||Main | 26 ” | 9 20 40
Minnesota | 6 May | 10 22 38 ||Donau | 2 May | 9 18 35
Wyoming | 12 ” | 10 15 58 ||Neckar | 9 ” | 10 3 10
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Mosel | 16 ” | 9 19 40
Nevada | 26 ” | 10 8 38 ||Weser | 23 ” | 9 21 10
Idaho | 2 June | 10 6 38 ||Rhein | 30 ” | 10 0 55
Wisconsin | 9 ” | 10 12 8 ||Main | 7 June | 10 19 40
Minnesota | 16 ” | 11 4 8 ||Oder | 13 ” | 10 0 0
Wyoming | 23 ” | 9 20 28 ||Neckar | 20 ” | 10 4 10
Nevada | 30 ” | 11 13 38 ||Mosel | 27 ” | 9 8 50
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||America | 4 July | 11 23 45
Idaho | 14 July | 10 16 8 ||Rhein | 11 ” | 10 1 45
Wisconsin | 22 ” | 11 4 8 ||Main | 18 ” | 10 5 0
Minnesota | 28 ” | 10 14 38 ||Oder | 25 ” | 10 8 5
Wyoming | 4 Aug. | 9 21 18 ||Neckar | 1 Aug. | 10 7 40
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Mosel | 8 ” | 9 20 55
Nevada | 18 ” | 10 3 38 ||America | 15 ” | 10 20 55
Idaho | 25 ” | 10 21 13 ||Deutschland | 22 ” | 10 5 10
Wisconsin | 1 Sept. | 9 12 38 ||Weser | 29 ” | 10 5 50
Minnesota | 8 ” | 10 13 38 ||Main | 5 Sept. | 9 21 10
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Neckar | 12 ” | 10 2 50
Wyoming | 22 ” | 9 23 38 ||Donau | 19 ” | 9 17 30
Nevada | 30 ” | 9 16 8 ||Hohenstauffen| 26 ” | 11 3 35
Idaho | 6 Oct. | 10 19 38 ||America | 3 Oct. | 10 23 20
Wisconsin | 13 ” | 9 18 38 ||Hermann | 10 ” | 11 0 0
Minnesota | 20 ” | 11 3 38 ||Rhein | 17 ” | 9 23 40
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Main | 24 ” | 10 8 0
Wyoming | 3 Nov. | 10 2 28 ||Oder | 31 ” | 9 12 10
Nevada | 12 ” | 10 16 23 ||Necker | 7 Nov. | 9 17 50
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Donau | 14 ” | 9 18 30
Wisconsin | 25 ” | 9 20 38 ||Hohenstauffen| 21 ” | 11 20 45
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||America | 29 ” | 11 1 10
Minnesota | 10 Dec. | 10 15 33 ||Hermann | 5 Dec. | 10 5 40
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Deutschland | 12 ” | 9 22 20
Wyoming | 22 ” | 9 15 58 ||Hansa | 19 ” | 12 0 25
.. .. | .. | .. .. ||Oder | 26 ” | 9 15 30
.. .. | .. | .. .. || .. .. | .. | .. ..
+------------++ +-----------
41 Sailings |457 13 28 || 52 Sailings |539 10 35
+------------++ +-----------
Average | 10 16 8 || Average | 10 8 58
------------------------------------------++
“HAMBURG” LINE. ||
------------------+----------+------------++
Saturday | SAILED. | MEAN TIME. ||
Steamers. +----------+------------++
|Day. Mon. | D. H. M. ||
| 1874. | ||
Holsatia | 1 Jan. | 9 14 51 ||
Cimbria | 8 ” | 10 9 1 ||
Hammonia | 15 ” | 9 20 56 ||
Silesia | 22 ” | 9 17 21 ||
Frisia | 29 ” | 9 7 6 ||
Westphalia | 5 Feb. | 9 8 51 ||
Thuringia | 12 ” | 9 10 11 ||
Pomerania | 19 ” | 9 20 21 ||
Holsatia | 26 ” | 9 21 21 ||
Hammonia | 5 Mar. | 10 16 51 ||
.. .. | .. .. | .. .. ||
Frisia | 20 ” | 9 15 21 ||
Thuringia | 26 ” | 9 19 21 ||
Westphalia | 2 Apr. | 9 16 46 ||
Silesia | 11 ” | 10 0 0 ||
Holsatia | 16 ” | 9 19 3 ||
Hammonia | 23 ” | 10 17 51 ||
Frisia | 30 ” | 9 18 51 ||
Thuringia | 7 May | 10 0 17 ||
Westphalia | 14 ” | 10 4 6 ||
Pomerania | 21 ” | 9 18 51 ||
Holsatia | 28 ” | 9 9 31 ||
Silesia | 4 June | 10 1 51 ||
Frisia | 11 ” | 9 16 51 ||
Thuringia | 18 ” | 9 15 54 ||
Westphalia | 25 ” | 10 8 36 ||
Pomerania | 2 July | 10 0 21 ||
Holsatia | 9 ” | 9 12 11 ||
Silesia | 16 ” | 10 3 6 ||
Hammonia | 23 ” | 10 3 11 ||
Frisia | 30 ” | 9 17 6 ||
Thuringia | 6 Aug. | 9 17 51 ||
Westphalia | 13 ” | 13 0 0 ||
Pomerania | 20 ” | 10 0 51 ||
Holsatia | 27 ” | 10 0 56 ||
Cimbria | 3 Sept. | 10 17 21 ||
Hammonia | 10 ” | 9 22 16 ||
Frisia | 17 ” | 10 11 21 ||
Thuringia | 24 ” | 9 23 51 ||
Pomerania | 1 Oct. | 9 12 50 ||
Silesia | 8 ” | 9 15 31 ||
Holsatia | 15 ” | 9 12 6 ||
Cimbria | 22 ” | 10 0 0 ||
Frisia | 29 ” | 10 0 0 ||
Thuringia | 5 Nov. | 10 13 41 ||
Suevia | 12 ” | 11 3 36 ||
Westphalia | 19 ” | 9 18 24 ||
Pomerania | 26 ” | 10 12 21 ||
Silesia | 3 Dec. | 9 15 36 ||
Holsatia | 10 ” | 9 10 58 ||
Cimbria | 17 ” | 9 21 21 ||
Frisia | 24 ” | 9 15 6 ||
Westphalia | 31 ” | 10 22 36 ||
| +------------++
52 Sailings |521 3 8 ||
+------------++
Average | 10 0 31 ||
-----------------------------+------------++
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
| White|Cunard| Inman|National|Guion|Bremen|Hamburg
LINE. | Star | | | | | |
=====================+======+======+======+========+=====+======+=======
Over 7½ and | 1 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 8 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 8 and | 12 | .. | 10 | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 8½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 8½ and | 17 | 17 | 6 | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 9 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 9 and | 13 | 25 | 11 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 5
under 9½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 9½ days and | 5 | 4 | 11 | 11 | 13 | 19 | 25
under 10 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 10 and | 2 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 7 | 17 | 14
under 10½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 10½ and | .. | 1 | 2 | 9 | 12 | 6 | 6
under 11 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 11 and | .. | .. | 2 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 1
under 11½ days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 11½ and | .. | .. | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 | ..
under 12 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 12 and | .. | .. | .. | 4 | .. | 3 | ..
under 13 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 13 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 1
under 14 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 14 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 15 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 15 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 16 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 16 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 17 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 17 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 18 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 18 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 19 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 19 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 20 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 20 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | ..
under 21 days. | | | | | | |
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
Over 21 and | .. | .. | .. | .. | 1 | .. | ..
under 22 days. | | | | | | |
=====================+======+======+======+========+=====+======+=======
NO. OF SAILINGS | 50 | 52 | 51 | 50 | 41 | 52 | 52
IN 1874. | | | | | | |
=====================+======+======+======+========+=====+======+=======
DURATION. D. | 443 | 480 | 482 | 530 | 437 | 539 | 521
H. | 3 | 22 | 0 | 3 | 13 | 10 | 3
M. | 7 | 34 | 31 | 17 | 28 | 35 | 8
=====================+======+======+======+========+=====+======+=======
AVERAGE. D. | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10
H. | 20 | 5 | 10 | 14 | 16 | 8 | 0
M. | 42 | 46 | 50 | 28 | 8 | 58 | 31
---------------------+------+------+------+--------+-----+------+-------
APPENDIX No. 18. VOL. iv., p. 287
_Particulars of the “Anchor” Line of Steamers._
-----------------+---------------+--------------------------------+-------
| Tonnage. | Dimensions. | Horse
Screw Steamships.+---------------+--------+--------+--------------+ Power.
| Gross.| Nett. |Length. |Breadth.| Depth. |
-----------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------------+-------
Acadia | 1,081 | 697 | 264·8 | 26·4 | 20·2 | 200
Alexandria | 1,629 | 1,055 | 300·5 | 33·2·5 | 22·6 | 424
Alsatia | 2,820 | 2,024 | 355· | 36· | 22⨉29 | 800
Anchoria | 4,206 | 2,880 | 408· | 40· | 26⨉34 | 1,120
Anglia | 2,253 | 1,412 | 325·3 | 35· | 22·5 | 400
Assyria | 1,623 | 1,052 | 300·5 | 33·2·5 | 22·6 | 424
Australia | 2,243 | 1,384 | 324·6 | 35·2 | 22·5 | 400
Bolivia | 4,050 | 2,625 | 400· | 40· | 25·1·5⨉33 | 1,120
Caledonia | 2,125 | 1,595 | 310·6 | 33·3 | 21·4·5 | 424
California | 3,287 | 2,096 | 361·5 | 40·5 | 24·2·5⨉31·6 | 1,047
Castalia | 2,200 | 1,660 | 306·6 | 34·6 | 21·8⨉29·2 | 424
Columbia | 1,697 | 1,367 | 283·3 | 33·6·5 | 22·2·5 | 400
Concordia | 4,206 | 2,880 | 408· | 40· | 26⨉34 | 1,120
Dorian | 1,038 | 667 | 237·5 | 30·2 | 19·9 | 100
Elysia | 2,733 | 1,753 | 351· | 35·0·5 | 22·1⨉29·7 | 678
Ethiopia | 4,004 | 2,604 | 402· | 40·2 | 24·8·5⨉33·0·5| 1,120
Europa | 2,277 | 1,737 | 338·5 | 33·7·5 | 22·1·5⨉29 | 424
India | 2,289 | 1,444 | 311·6 | 36·7 | 23·6 | 500
Italia | 2,245 | 1·451 | 306· | 34·4 | 21·9⨉29·1·1 | 424
Macedonia | 2,272 | 1·452 | 315· | 34· | 24⨉31·2 | 486
Napoli | 843 | 672 | 252·4 | 25·2·5 | 16·5·5 | 100
Nubia | 4,206 | 2,880 | 408· | 40· | 26⨉34 | 1,120
Olympia | 2,050 | 1,527 | 307·1 | 34·6 | 21·8⨉29 | 424
Scandinavian | 1,135 | 918 | 258·2 | 26·1 | 15·9⨉23·5·5 | 96
Scotia | 1,103 | 844 | 261·1 | 26·2 | 20·7 | 120
Sidonia | 1,235 | 799 | 258· | 32· | 21· | 203
Trinacria | 2,107 | 1,342 | 306· | 34·4 | 22⨉29 | 424
Tyrian | 1,038 | 667 | 237·5 | 30·2 | 19·9 | 100
Utopia | 2,731 | 1,753 | 350·2·5| 35·2 | 2·2⨉29·5 | 678
Victoria | 3,242 | 2,081 | 360· | 40·1 | 24·0·2⨉31·9·1| 1,047
Dispatch | 167 | 106 | 119· | 21·1 | 10·6 | 70
Sailing Ship} | 1,193 | .. | 187·5 | 37· | 24·2 | ..
Shamrock } | | | | | |
+-------+-------+ | | +-------
Totals |71,328 |47,474 | | | |15,417
-----------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------------+-------
APPENDIX No. 19. VOL. iv., p. 312.
_The following is a List of the Fleet of the Royal Mail West India
Steam-Packet Company, 1st January, 1875._
Name. Reg. Ton. H.P.
1. Shannon 3,472 800
2. Boyne (screw) 3,318 500
3. Tagus (screw) 3,252 600
4. Moselle (screw) 3,252 600
5. Elbe (screw) 3,063 600
6. Neva (screw) 2,999 600
7. Nile (screw) 2,994 600
8. Tasmanian (screw) 2,956 600
9. Douro (screw) 2,824 500
10. Mondego (screw) 2,564 450
11. Minho (screw) 2,540 450
12. Tyne (paddle) 1,916 400
13. Dee 1,857 220
14. Essequibo (screw) 1,817 170
15. Severn (screw) 1,736 220
16. Larne (screw) 1,664 180
17. Tiber (screw) 1,591 350
18. Eider (paddle) 1,564 300
19. Ebro (screw) 1,509 350
20. Corsica (screw) 1,134 200
21. Arno (paddle) 1,038 250
22. Belize (screw) 1,015 160
23. Mersey (paddle) 1,001 250
------ -----
51,076 9,350
------ -----
24. Parana (coal-hulk) 2,730
APPENDIX No. 20. VOL. iv., p. 342.
PACIFIC STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY. LIST OF THE COMPANY’S FLEET.
_Steamers employed on Liverpool, Valparaiso, and Callao Line._
(_The whole Fleet on the 1st January, 1875, consisted of 54 Steamers of
119·870 aggregate Tons and 21·395 H.P._)
-------------+-------------------+-----------------------+-------------
| Tonnage. | Dimensions. |
+---------+---------+---------+-------------+
Name. | Gross | Net | Length | | | Date
|Register.|Register.| between | | | of Contract.
| | |Perpendi-|Beam. |Depth.|
| | | culars. | | |
-------------+---------+---------+---------+------+------+-------------
Magellan | 2,856 | 1,791 | 343·6 | 41 | 26·1 | Jan. 1868
Patagonia | 2,866 | 1,798 | 343·6 | 41 | 26·5 | Jan. 1868
Araucania | 2,877 | 1,806 | 343·6 | 41 | 26 | April, 1868
Cordillera | 2,860 | 1,791 | 343·6 | 41 | 26 | April, 1868
Chimborazo | 3,847 | 2,443 | 370 | 41 | 35 | Mar. 1870
Cuzco | 3,845 | 2,436 | 370 | 41 | 35 | Mar. 1870
Garonne | 3,871 | 2,464 | 370 | 41 | 35·5 | Apr. 1870
John Elder | 3,832 | 2,430 | 370 | 41·5 | 35·2 | Oct. 1869
_Lengthened_| 4,151 | 2,650 | 406·4 | 41·5 | 35·2 | ..
Lusitania | 3,825 | 2,420 | 370 | 41 | 35·6 | Apr. 1870
Aconcagua | 4,105 | 2,639 | 404 | 41 | 35·3 | Mar. 1870
Sorata | 4,013 | 2,573 | 390 | 42·8 | 34 | May, 1871
Illimani | 4,022 | 2,579 | 390 | 42·8 | 34 | May, 1871
Cotopaxi | 4,022 | 2,579 | 390 | 42·8 | 34 | May, 1871
Galicia | 3,829 | 2,449 | 375 | 43 | 33·6 | Dec. 1871
Corcovado | 3,805 | 2,405 | 375 | 43 | 33 | Nov. 1871
Puno | 3,805 | 2,405 | 375 | 43 | 33 | Nov. 1871
Potosi | 4,218 | 2,703 | 411 | 43 | 33·6 | Nov. 1871
Valparaiso | 3,575 | 2,284 | 370 | 42 | 33·4 | Aug. 1872
Britannia | 4,081 | 2,700 | 399 | 43 | 33 | Feb. 1872
Iberia | 4,671 | 2,982 | 425 | 44·5 | 37 | Jan. 1873
Liguria | .. | .. | 425 | 44·5 | 37 | Jan. 1873
-----------+----------------------+-------+------------------+--------+---------
| | | Capacity. | |
| | +------------------+Consump-|Displace-
Name. | | Total | | | tion | ment
| Builders. | Price.| | | per | at
| | | Cargo.| Coal. |hour. | 20 feet.
| | | | | |
-----------+----------------------+-------+------------------+--------+---------
| | £. | | | Cwts. |
Magellan |Randolph, Elder, & Co.| 81,628| 93,100| 25,877 | 32¾ | 4,795
Patagonia | ” ” | 81,778| 93,100| 25,877 | 34½ | 4,795
Araucania | ” ” | 81,301| 93,100| 25,877 | 34 | 4,795
Cordillera | ” ” | 80,977| 93,100| 25,877 | 31¼ | 4,795
Chimborazo |J. Elder and Co. | 91,210|137,850| 48,805 | 45¼ | 4,996
Cuzco | ” ” | 93,838|137,850| 48,805 | 40 | 4,996
Garonne |Napier and Sons | 92,765|137,850| 48,805 | 41¼ | 4,965
John Elder |J. Elder and Co. |113,038|139,730| 38,346 | 47¼ | 4,996
Lengthened| .. .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 5,464
Lusitania |Laird Brothers | 91,852|137,850| 48,805 | 42¾ | 5,004
Aconcagua |J. Elder and Co. |103,558|136,496| 40,347 | 49 | 5,459
Sorata | ” ” |108,055|134,790| 34,959 | 48¾ | 5,415
Illimani | ” ” |109,026|134,790| 34,959 | 56¼ | 5,415
Cotopaxi | ” ” |108,898|134,790| 34,959 | 52 | 5,415
Galicia |Napier and Sons. |119,971|127,417| 38,852 | 37½ | 5,140
Corcovado |Laird Brothers |119,712|129,050| 38,700 | 49¼ | 5,150
Puno | ” ” |119,651|129,050| 38,700 | 47¾ | 5,150
Potosi |J. Elder and Co. |135,209|153,100| 894 tons.| 49½ | 5,791
Valparaiso | ” ” |130,496|130,396| 31,863 | 48½ | 4,927
Britannia |Laird Brothers |142,520|146,460| 39,732 | 51½ | 5,613
Iberia |J. Elder and Co. |152,815| .. | .. | .. | 5,938
Liguria | ” ” |151,565| .. | .. | .. | 5,938
_Steamers employed on West Coast Line._
-------------+-------------------+-----------------------+-------------
| Tonnage. | Dimensions. |
Name. +---------+---------+---------+------+------+ Date
| Gross. | Nett. | Length. |Beam. |Depth.| of Contract.
-------------+---------+---------+---------+------+------+-------------
Callao | 1,062 | 840 | 235 | 29 | 16 | .. ..
Chile | 1,671 | 1,173 | 274 | 36 | 15 | Nov. 1862
Guayaquil | 660 | 449 | 208 | 30 | 18 | .. ..
Huacho | 329 | 249 | 149 | 25 | 11 | Feb. 1870
Limena | 1,622 | 1,162 | 267 | 40 | 17 | June, 1864
Pacific | 1,630 | 1,174 | 267 | 40 | 17 | April, 1864
Panama | 1,642 | 1,177 | 267 | 40 | 17 | Aug. 1865
Payta | 1,344 | 996 | 268 | 38 | 14 | July, 1863
Peru | 1,307 | 904 | 260 | 32 | 15 | Jan. 1861
Peruano | 629 | 404 | 181 | 29 | 11 | Bought
Quito | 743 | 468 | 204 | 30 | 14 | Nov. 1862
San Carlos | 652 | 443 | 199 | 30 | 18 | June, 1859
Supe | 298 | 230 | 145 | 25 | 10 | Sept. 1866
Talca | 707 | 469 | 194 | 30 | 16 | Mar. 1861
Arequipa | 1,065 | 662 | 231 | 35 | 14 | Mar. 1869
Atacama | 1,821 | 1,131 | 291 | 38 | 22 | Nov. 1869
Valdivia | 1,860 | 1,153 | 301 | 38 | 22 | Nov. 1869
Coquimbo | 1,820 | 1,130 | 290 | 38 | 22 | Jan. 1870
Caldera | 1,740 | 1,051 | 282 | 34 | 17 | Bought
Eten | 1,853 | 1,135 | 305 | 38 | 21 | Mar. 1871
Iquique | 323 | 194 | 149 | 25 | 11 | Sept 1870
Ilo | 1,794 | 1,129 | 303 | 38 | 21 | Mar. 1871
Santa Rosa | 1,816 | 1,250 | 320 | 38 | 21 | Jan. 1872
Santiago | 1,451 | 979 | 266 | 35 | 14 | Nov. 1870
Truxillo | 1,449 | 978 | 266 | 35 | 14 | Nov. 1870
Colombia | 1,850 | 1,250 | 320 | 38 | 20 | Jan. 1872
Islay | 1,577 | 1,099 | 270 | 35 | 15 | Nov. 1871
Oroya | 1,577 | 1,099 | 270 | 35 | 15 | Nov. 1871
Ayacucho | 1,915 | 1,208 | 321 | 38 | 21 | Jan. 1873
Lima | 1,803 | 1,132 | 300 | 38 | 21 | April, 1872
Tacna | 612 | 322 | 219 | 26 | 13 | May, 1872
Tabouguilla | 154 | 85 | 115 | 21 | 7·9 | Nov. 1870
Bolivia | 1,925 | 1,215 | 321 | 38 | 21 | Jan. 1873
-------------+----------------------+-------+------------------+-----------
| | | Capacity. |Consumption
Name. + | Total +-------+----------+ per hour.
| Builders. | Price.| Cargo.| Coal. |
-------------+----------------------+-------+-------+----------+-----------
| | £. | | | Cwts.
Callao |John Reid and Co. | 35,689| .. | 450 | 28
Chile |R. Elder and Co. | 54,071| 270 | 1,412 | 22
Guayaquil |Lawrence Hill and Co. | 18,878| .. | .. | 12
Huacho |T. Royden and Sons | 6,448| .. | 378 | 7
Limena |R. Elder and Co. | 62,011| 307 | 1,520 | 27
Pacific | ” ” | 61,855| 307 | 1,520 | 27
Panama | ” ” | 62,779| 307 | 1,550 | 27
Payta | ” ” | 54,004| 295 | 1,300 | 18
Peru |John Reid and Co. | 44,916| .. | 800 | 39
Peruano | .. .. | 20,637| .. | .. | 9
Quito |R. Elder and Co. | 32,379| 120 | 593 | 11
San Carlos |W. Simonds | 18,837| .. | .. | 12
Supe |R. Elder and Co. | 8,114| 44 | 375 | 3
Talca | ” ” | 23,234| 90 | 410 | 9
Arequipa | ” ” | 39,705| 180 | 755 | 13
Atacama | ” ” | 40,880| 271 | 2,185 | 22
Valdivia |R. Napier and Sons | 40,777| 246 | 2,195 | 17
Coquimbo |J. Elder and Co. | 44,024| 271 | 2,185 | 16
Caldera |Denny Brothers | 37,009| 394 | 1,131 | 17½
Eten |Laird Brothers | 47,753| 256 | 2,017 | 16
Iquique |T. Royden and Sons | 9,728| .. | 375 | 7
Ilo |J. Elder and Co. | 48,518| 250 | 2,017 | 12
Santa Rosa |Laird Brothers | 69,781| 300 | 1,460 | 16
Santiago |J. Elder and Co. | 45,475| 210 | 823 | 12
Truxillo | ” ” | 45,295| 210 | 823 | 12
Colombia |Laird Brothers | 70,249| 300 | 1,460 | 17
Islay |J. Elder and Co. | 59,149| 210 | 847 | 15
Oroya | ” ” | 57,444| 210 | 847 | 16
Ayacucho |T. Wingate and Co. | 70,083| 340 | 1,792 | 24
Lima | ” ” | 72,140| 311 | .. | 25
Tacna |Bowdler, Chaffer, and | 30,600| 120 | 325 | 9
| Co. | | | |
Tabouguilla | ” ” | 5,850| ..| .. | ..
Bolivia |T. Wingate and Co. | 67,000| 340 | 1,792 | 24
APPENDIX No. 21. VOL. iv., p. 333.
_Liverpool, Brazil and River Plate Steam Navigation Company (Limited),
1875._
------------+------------------
| Register Tonnage.
Steamers. +--------+---------
| Nett. | Gross.
------------+--------+---------
Kepler | 1,759 | 2,257
Newton | 839 | 1,324
Ptolemy | 758 | 1,115
Halley | 994 | 1,347
Humboldt | 994 | 1,346
Copernicus | 950 | 1,397
Memnon | 822 | 1,209
Rubens | 1,266 | 1,707
Teniers | 1,017 | 1,597
Vandyck | 1,098 | 1,686
Memling | 632 | 1,007
Maraldi | 638 | 1,002
Lalande | 678 | 1,047
Laplace | 901 | 1,409
Donati | 946 | 1,392
Pascal | 1,415 | 1,876
Tycho Brahe | 1,256 | 1,848
Hipparchus | 1,251 | 1,840
Biela | 1,401 | 2,169
Olbers | 1,388 | 2,161
Galileo | 1,445 | 2,262
Leibnitz | 1,445 | 2,280
Gassendi | 800 | 1,249
Delambre | 988 | 1,308
Thales | 964 | 1,487
Hevelius | 1,681 | 2,610
Maskelyne | 1,677 | 2,605
Camoens | 659 | 1,053
Calderon | 659 | 1,053
Cervantes | 698 | 1,131
Archimedes | 966 | 1,520
+--------+---------
|32,995 | 49,294
------------+--------+---------
APPENDIX No. 22. VOL. iv., p. 413.
_Abstract of Log of the P. & O. Ship “Khedive” on her Voyage from
Alexandria to Southampton.—October, 1873._
--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+----------+--------------+--
Date. | Winds. |Courses. |Distance.|Latitude.|Longitude.| Total. |
| | | Miles. | | |--------------+--
| | | | | |Miles.|Hrs. M.|
--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+----------+------+-------+--
| | | | N. | E. | | |
Oct. 5 | N.W. |Various | 10 | 31·15 | 29·45} | | |
” 6 | ” |N. 66° W.| 254 | 32·57 | 5·11} | | |1.
” 7 | ” |N. 74° W.| 254 | 34·28 | 20·02} | 823 | 77·30 |
” 8 |N.N.W. |N. 70° W.| 270 | 35·47 | 15·11} | | |
” 8 | N.W. |Various | 35 | At Malta. } | | |2.
--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+----------+------+-------+--
| | | | N. | E. | | |
Oct. 9 | S.E. |Various | 153 | 37·00 | 11·04} | | |1.
” 10 | N.W. | ” | 234 | 37·31 | 6·59} | | |
” 11 |Variable|S. 82° W.| 251 | 36·55 | 1·40} | 989 | 93·55 |
” 12 | ” |S. 85° W.| 260 | 36·32 | West} | | |
” 12 | ” |Various | 291 | .. | 3·30} | | |2.
” 13 | E. |Various | 135 | 36·37 | 7·54{ | | |3.
” 14 | N. | ” | 210 | 39·32 | 9·46{ | | |4.
” 15 | N.E. |N. 5° W. | 138 | 42·25 | 10·03{ |1170 |127·55 |5.
” 16 | ” |Various | 209 | 44·57 | 8·12{ | | |
| | | | | | | |6.
” 17 | E. |N. 32° E.| 252 | 48·35 | 5·10{ | | |7.
” 18 | Calm |Various | 226 | | { | | |2.
--------+--------+---------+---------+---------+----------+------+-------+--
|2982 |299·20 |
+------+-------+--
Or at the average rate of about 10 knots an hour.
Sailed from Alexandria, October 5th, 10.25 a.m.
Arrived at Malta ” 8th, 3.55 p.m.
” Gibraltar ” 12th, 8.8 p.m.
” Southampton ” 18th, 7.45 a.m.
REMARKS:
1. Moderate winds and weather throughout.
2. (Date of arrival.)
3. Light winds and fine.
4. Strong head winds at sea.
5. Strong head gale and sea.
6. Same weather.
7. Light winds.
_Abstract of Log of the P. & O. Company’s Ship “Khedive” on her Voyage
from Southampton to Alexandria.—October, 1873._
-------+-------+------------+---------+---------+----------+------------------+----
| | | | | | Total. |
Date. | Winds.| Courses. |Distance.|Latitude.|Longitude.+--------+---------+
| | | Miles. | | | Miles. | Hrs. M. |
-------+-------+------------+---------+---------+----------+--------+---------+----
| | | | N. | W. | | |
Oct. 31| S.W. | Various | 210 | 48·44 | 5·22 |} | |{1.
Nov. 1| W. | S. 17° W. | 233 | 45·01 | 7·02 |} | |{2.
” 2| N.W. | Various | 240 | 41·59 | 9·59 |} 1174 | 111. 45 |{3.
” 3| ” | S. 7½° E | 273 | 37·30 | 9·10 |} | |{4.
” 4| ” | Various | 218 | ” | ” |} | |{5.
-------+-------+------------+---------+---------+----------+--------+---------+----
| | | | N. | W./ | | |
Nov. 4| Wly. | Various | 17 | 36·09 | E. |} | |{6.
” 5| ” | N. 81½° W.| 294 | 36·52 | 0·53 |} | |{7.
” 6|S.-Wly.| N. 82° E. | 293 | 37·32 | 7·04 |} | |{7.
” 7|Sothly.| Various | 276 | 36·44 | 12·38 |}987¾ | 83. 45 |{8.
” 8| ” | ” | 107¾ | | |} | |{9.
-------+-------+------------+---------+---------+----------+--------+---------+----
| | | | N. | E. | | |
Nov. 8| S.W. | Various | 46 | 35·44 | 15·22 |} | |{10.
” 9| E.N.E.| S. 72° E. | 255 | 34·26 | 20·23 |}825½ | 75. 50 |{11.
” 10| Calm | S. 68° E. | 267 | 32·46 | 25·20 |} | |{12.
” 11| E. | Various | 257½ | | |} | |{13.
-------+-------+------------+---------+---------+----------+--------+---------+----
|2987¼ | 271·20 |
+--------+---------+----
Or at the average rate of about 11 knots an hour.
REMARKS:
1. Left Southampton at 3 p.m. Oct. 30.
2. Moderate gale-squalls
3. Stong breeze and fine.
4. Moderate and fine.
5. Arrived at Gibraltar at 7 a.m.
6. Left Gibraltar at 10 a.m.
7. Fresh breeze and fine
8. Light breeze and fine.
9. Arrived at Malta at 9.45 p.m.
10. Left Malta at 7.10 a.m.
11. Moderate breeze and fine.
12. Calm and fine.
13. Arrived at Alexandria at 11 a.m.
APPENDIX No. 23. VOL. iv., 394.
_Fleet of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, with
Particulars of their Employment, January 1875._
---+----------------------------+----------+---------+------------------
| | | Horse |
No.| Names of Vessels. | Tonnage. | Power | REMARKS.
| | | Nominal.|
---+----------------------------+----------+---------+------------------
1 | Australia | 3,663 | 600 |}
2 | Avoca | 1,482 | 250 |}
3 | Bangalore | 2,063 | 500 |}
4 | Baroda | 1,874 | 400 |}
5 | Bokhara | 2,932 | 450 |}
6 | Cathay | 2,982 | 450 |}
7 | Delhi | 2,178 | 400 |}
8 | Geelong | 1,834 | 250 |}
9 | Golconda | 1,909 | 450 |}
10 | Gwalior | 2,725 | 450 |}
11 | Hindostan | 3,113 | 600 |}
12 | Hydaspes | 2,984 | 450 |}
13 | Indus | 3,470 | 500 |}
14 | Kashgar | 2,621 | 450 |}
15 | Khedive | 3,742 | 600 |}
16 | Khiva | 2,609 | 450 |} Mediterranean,
17 | Lombardy | 2,723 | 450 |} Adriatic, India,
18 | Malta | 1,942 | 500 |} and China
19 | Malwa | 2,933 | 450 |} Services.
20 | Mirzapore | 3,763 | 600 |}
21 | Mongolia | 2,833 | 530 |}
22 | Mooltan | 2,257 | 450 |}
23 | Nizam | 2,725 | 450 |}
24 | Pekin | 3,777 | 600 |}
25 | Peshawur | 3,781 | 600 |}
26 | Simla | 2,441 | 630 |}
27 | Sumatra | 2,488 | 450 |}
28 | Surat | 3,141 | 530 |}
29 | Tanjore | 2,245 | 400 |}
30 | Teheran | 2,589 | 400 |}
31 | Thibet | 2,593 | 400 |}
32 | Travancore | 1,900 | 400 |}
33 | Venetia | 2,726 | 450 |}
34 | Zambesi | 2,431 | 370 |}
35 | Ceylon | 2,111 | 450 | }
36 | Nubia | 2,096 | 450 | }
37 | Pera | 2,119 | 450 | } Australian
38 | Ellora {between Melbourne} | 1,727 | 300 | } Service.
| { and Sydney. } | | | }
39 | Behar | 1,723 | 300 |}
40 | Bombay | 1,327 | 275 |} China and Japan
41 | Malacca | 1,709 | 300 |} local Service.
42 | Massilia | 1,640 | 400 |}
43 | Orissa | 1,647 | 300 |}
44 |Adria | 1,225 | 110 |} Cargo Vessels.
45 |Columbian | 2,283 | 500 |}
| | | |[
46 |Sunda | 1,682 | 300 |}
47 |Poonah | 2,152 | 600 |} Under
48 |Deccan | 3,128 | 600 |} alterations and
49 |China | 2,010 | 400 |} re-fitting.
| | | |
50 |Candia | 1,982 | 450 | Laid-up.
+----------+---------+
| 122,030 | 22,095 |
+----------+---------+
STEAM-TUGS.
51 |Ansari | 146 | 40 |}
52 |Gabari | 34 | 20 |} Egypt.
53 |Timsah | 271 | 120 |}
54 |Pauline | 20 | 14 |}
55 |Sirsar | 55 | 30 | Aden.
56 |Parell | 24 | 12 |}
57 |Colaba | 145 | 60 |}
58 |Howrah | 70 | 25 |} Bombay.
59 |Bandora | 128 | 20 |}
60 |Sewree | 128 | 20 |}
61 |Säada | 99 | 60 | Hong Kong.
62 |Dragon | 89 | 24 | Shanghai.
63 |Stork | 31 | 15 | Yokohama.
+----------+---------+
| 1,240 | 460 |
+----------+---------+
CARGO AND COAL HULKS.
64 |Fort William | 1,800 | Hong Kong.
65 |Larkins | 1,000 | King George’s Sound.
66 |Tiptree | 1,617 | Yokohama.
+----------+
| 4,417 |
+----------+
APPENDIX No. 24. VOL. iv., p. 425.
_Fleet of the Messageries Maritimes Company, January 1875._
INDIA, CHINA, JAPAN, BATAVIA, AND MAURITIUS LINES.
-------------------+--------+--------
| Gross |
|Tonnage.| H. P.
|English.|Nominal.
-------------------+--------+--------
Anadyr screw | 3671 | 600
Iraouaddy ” | 3471 | 600
Hooghly ” | 2820 | 500
Tigre ” | 3017 | 500
Provence ” | 2524 | 500
Donnaï ” | 2524 | 500
Peï-ho ” | 3050 | 500
Ava ” | 3050 | 500
Meikong ” | 3050 | 500
Sindh ” | 3005 | 500
Amozone ” | 3005 | 500
Meinan ” | 1380 | 280
Menzaleh ” | 1592 | 280
Tanaïs ” | 1584 | 280
Dupleix ” | 1380 | 280
Volga ” | 1502 | 280
Godavery ” | 1423 | 280
Newa ” | 1035 | 370
-------------------+--------+--------
RIVER PLATE AND BRAZIL LINES.
-------------------+--------+--------
| Gross |
|Tonnage.| H. P.
-------------------+--------+--------
Niger screw | 3417 | 600
Sénégal ” | 3417 | 600
Gironde ” | 2981 | 500
Rio Grande ” | 2739 | 500
Mendoza ” | 2735 | 500
Érymanthe ” | 2015 | 400
-------------------+--------+--------
MEDITERRANEAN AND BLACK SEA LINES.
-------------------+--------+--------
| Gross |
|Tonnage.| H. P.
-------------------+--------+--------
Cambodge screw | 2524 | 500
Amérique ” | 1697 | 450
Péluse ” | 1750 | 400
Mœris ” | 1750 | 400
Saïd ” | 1750 | 400
Alphée ” | 1725 | 400
Cydnus ” | 1196 | 370
Danube ” | 1186 | 370
Phase ” | 1200 | 370
Scamandre ” | 1761 | 300
La Bourdonnais ” | 1632 | 280
Niémen ” | 1584 | 280
Tibre ” | 1729 | 280
Eridan ” | 1584 | 280
Tage ” | 1691 | 280
Èbre ” | 1701 | 280
Aréthuse ” | 1121 | 250
Méandre ” | 969 | 500
Hermus ” | 778 | 240
Ilissus ” | 1587 | 240
Simoïs ” | 970 | 240
Mersey ” | 886 | 240
Emirne ” | 1000 | 240
Mozambique ” | 1000 | 240
Tamise ” | 729 | 200
Clyde ” | 749 | 200
Copernic ” | 1217 | 200
Cheliff ” | 992 | 180
Delta ” | 932 | 150
Sinaï paddle | 888 | 370
Carmel ” | 958 | 370
Aunis ” | 1025 | 250
Saintonge ” | 1025 | 250
Balkan ” | 430 | 160
Taurus ” | 497 | 160
-------------------+--------+---------
LONDON AND MARSEILLES LINE.
Gross Tonnage. H. P.
Euphrate 1507 250 compound.
Indus 1523 250 do.
Gange 1446 250 do.
BUILDING.
-------------------+--------+---------
| Gross |
|Tonnage.| H. P.
-------------------+--------+---------
Djemnah screw | 4000 | 600
Orenoque ” | 4000 | 600
Equateur ” | 4000 | 600
* * * ” | 4000 | 600
-------------------+--------+---------
APPENDIX No. 25. VOL. iv., p. 444.
_Statement of the Number of Vessels, with their Tonnage, that have
passed through the Suez Canal._
--------------+------------------+------------------+------------------
| Year 1870. | Year 1871. | Year 1872.
Nationalities.+--------+---------+--------+---------+--------+---------
| Number.| Tons. | Number.| Tons. | Number.| Tons.
--------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+--------+---------
Great Britain | 314 | 289,234 | 502 | 546,453 | 761 |1,059,926
France | 75 | 84,657 | 66 | 89,076 | 80 | 162,621
Austria | 26 | 19,382 | 63 | 38,728 | 61 | 53,066
Italy | 10 | 5,795 | 47 | 27,413 | 66 | 48,001
Holland | 2 | 313 | 5 | 6,714 | 13 | 26,420
Turkey | 17 | 10,996 | 32 | 18,229 | 33 | 32,697
Germany | | | 7 | 2,069 | 16 | 12,181
Spain | 3 | 732 | 5 | 3,158 | 8 | 7,769
Russia | 1 | 480 | 5 | 4,820 | 10 | 13,134
Egypt | 33 | 22,053 | 22 | 13,334 | 13 | 7,919
Denmark | 1 | 660 | 1 | 660 | 1 | 570
Norway | | | 1 | 1,316 | 6 | 4,000
Sweden | | | | | 1 | 532
Belgium | | | 4 | 4,400 | |
Portugal | 1 | 371 | 2 | 920 | 10 | 8,366
Japan | | | | | |
United States | 1 | 306 | 3 | 4,171 | 2 | 1,245
Burmah | | | | | |
Greece | 1 | 48 | | | |
Peru | | | | | |
Zanzibar | 1 | 881 | | | |
Tunis | | | | | 1 | 726
+--------+---------+--------+---------+--------+---------
Totals | 486 | 435,908 | 765 | 761,461 | 1,082 |1,439,167
--------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+--------+---------
--------------+------------------+------------------
| Year 1873. | Year 1874.
Nationalities.+--------+---------+--------+---------
| Number.| Tons. | Number.| Tons.
--------------+--------+---------+--------+---------
Great Britain | 813 |1,499,791| 898 |1,797,494
France | 83 | 221,810| 87 | 222,945
Austria | 70 | 90,967| 61 | 84,159
Italy | 58 | 59,121| 52 | 63,498
Holland | 36 | 72,592| 53 | 106,422
Turkey | 26 | 20,116| 15 | 13,792
Germany | 28 | 35,619| 31 | 39,841
Spain | 17 | 31,299| 27 | 50,417
Russia | 9 | 14,361| 7 | 11,977
Egypt | 7 | 6,246| 8 | 6,461
Denmark | 5 | 6,438| 1 | 1,094
Norway | 5 | 9,298| 8 | 13,489
Sweden | 4 | 4,304| 6 | 6,559
Belgium | 4 | 6,911| 1 | 908
Portugal | 2 | 753| 3 | 2,618
Japan | 2 | 1,004| 1 | 1,010
United States | 1 | 2,211| |
Burmah | 1 | 677| |
Greece | 1 | 208| 5 | 984
Peru | 1 | 1,299| |
Zanzibar | | | |
Tunis | | | |
+--------+---------+--------+---------
Totals | 1173 |2,085,065| 1,264 |2,423,668
--------------+--------+---------+--------+---------
APPENDIX No. 26. VOL., p. 554.
_Average Time of Passages of the Four Mail Packets between
Kingstown and Holyhead (Distance 56 Knots, or 65½ Statute Miles),
for 14 Years, ending 30th September, 1874._
------+--------------+--------------+--------------+---------------+---------------
| Ulster. | Munster. | Leinster. | Connaught. | Four Packets.
+------+-------+------+-------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------
|Trips | Time |Trips | Time |Trips | Time | Trips | Time | Trips | Time
| | H. M. | | H. M. | | H. M. | | H. M. | | H. M.
Winter| 2631 | 4 1·6| 2240 | 3 59·1| 2387 | 3 57·6| 2939 | 3 56·0|10,197 | 3 58·5
Half | | | | | | | | | |
Years | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Summer| 2379 | 3 56·0| 2667 | 3 52·8| 2719 | 3 53·0| 2478 | 3 52·2|10,243 | 3 53·7
Half | | | | | | | | | |
Years | | | | | | | | | |
------+------+-------+------+-------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------
Whole | 5010 | 3 58·9| 4907 | 3 55·6| 5106 | 3 55·1| 5417 | 3 54·3|20,440 | 3 56·1
Years | | | | | | | | | |
------+-------+------+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------
NOTE.—When two of the vessels, the _Leinster_ and the _Ulster_,
were completed and ready for duty, it was thought advisable to
make a trial with them, by way of practice, in the performance
of the old contract. Each performed the distance between the
lighthouse on Kingston Pier to the lighthouse at Holyhead, upwards
of 65½ statute miles, in nearly the same time on the average,
namely, the _Leinster_, in three hours and thirty-one minutes,
and the _Ulster_ in three hours and thirty-two minutes, being
respectively thirteen and twelve minutes less than the shortest
monthly average of the _Banshee_ in 1848-49, and twenty and
nineteen minutes less than the _Llewellyn_, when the distance
between the lights was one mile less than in 1860—the Holyhead
breakwater not having been then in existence. The gain in speed
realized by the new vessels was therefore at the rate of from 1·2
to 1·7 mile per hour.
The shortest passage of the _Leinster_ was made in three hours and
twenty minutes; that of the _Ulster_ in three hours and eighteen
minutes, and of the _Munster_ in three hours and twenty-six
minutes. But the average performance of the vessels for the first
two years and five months during which they had been on service
was still closer. Inclusive of all passages made in fogs, gales,
&c.,
H. M.
The _Connaught_ made 1,064 passages in the average time of 3 51·5
The _Leinster_ made 919 passages in the average time of 3 52·5
The _Ulster_ made 925 passages in the average time of 3 55
And the _Munster_ made 920 passages in the average time of 3 58·1
So close a performance by four vessels, not identical and not all
from the same builders and engineers, could scarcely have been
anticipated. The longest passage made in the severest gales had
to that time not exceeded five hours and forty minutes, and one
vessel only had been that length of time on but two occasions.
Nearly 4000 passages have been already made without collision,
except on one occasion, which happily was not attended with very
serious consequences. Experienced naval officers anticipated
frequent and serious disasters, but the rate of speed, 16 miles
an hour, though high for night-work, does not appear to have been
too high for safety. The sense of greater responsibility, and the
larger number of men engaged in the navigation and management
of the vessels, must naturally induce additional precaution, as
well as afford the means of guarding against danger. The facility
with which these large vessels are handled and brought alongside
the jetties is remarkable. The practised skill of the officers,
and the quickness with which the engines are managed, frequently
succeed in getting the vessels alongside, in making them fast,
establishing the means of communication with the shore, and in
landing the mails, in three or four minutes.
The consumption of coal in the first few months was considerably
in excess of the quantity originally estimated. Steam of from 25
lbs. to 28 lbs. pressure was then used, which not only required
much extra coal, but severely taxed the durability of the boilers.
Arrangements were therefore made to reduce the consumption to the
amount stated in the estimates submitted to Government, on which
the contract was founded. The result has been satisfactory, while
the additional time occupied on the passages is but a few minutes,
and they are still made on the average within the time allocated
to the sea service by the proposal of Government.
APPENDIX No. 27. VOL. iv., p. 583.
_Number and Tonnage of Iron Steam Vessels built and first registered in
the United Kingdom in each Year, from 1861 to 1874._
+-------------+-----------+-----------+
| Years. | Number. | Tonnage. |
+-------------+-----------+-----------+
| 1861 | 159 | 68,368 |
| 1862 | 181 | 76,303 |
| 1863 | 240 | 105,837 |
| 1864 | 342 | 156,981 |
| 1865 | 344 | 177,382 |
| 1866 | 299 | 129,653 |
| 1867 | 224 | 90,823 |
| 1868 | 188 | 75,109 |
| 1869 | 238 | 118,421 |
| 1870 | 382 | 222,922 |
| 1871[470] | 416 | 295,109 |
| 1872[470] | 446 | 335,750 |
| 1873[470] | 335 | 279,088 |
| 1874[470] | 393 | 328,094 |
+-------------+-----------+-----------+
_Total Tonnage (distinguishing sailing and steam) belonging to the
United Kingdom, British Possessions, United States, France, Holland and
Norway, in each of the Years 1850, 1860, 1870, 1871, 1872, 1873 and
1874 (so far as the same can be given)._
SAILING:
------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
| British Empire. | United States. | | |
+---------+---------+---------+---------+ | |
| United | British | | Enrolled| France. |Holland| Norway.
Years.| Kingdom.| Posses- | Regis- | and | | |
| | sions. | tered. |Licensed.| | |
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
| Tons. | Tons. | Tons. | Tons. | Tons. | Tons. | Tons.
------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
1850 |3,337,546| 707,785|1,540,769|1,468,739| 690,111|393,750|Not dist-
1860 |4,134,390|1,076,434|2,448,941|2,036,990| 915,971|543,320|inguished
1870 |4,506,318|1,440,682|1,324,256|1,795,389| 917,633|474,463|1,008,800
1871 |4,305,112|1,425,976|1,244,228|1,898,551| 917,133|458,274|1,042,259
1872 |4,145,888|1,427,302|1,232,982|2,037,422| 911,613|449,717|1,090,006
1873 |4,024,581|1,443,911|1,229,865|2,252,895| 882,866|438,031|1,205,998
1874 |4,043,955|1,502,302| | | |440,879|
------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
STEAM:
------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
1850 | 167,398| 20,233| 44,942| 81,004| 13,925| 3,762|Not dist-
1860 | 452,352| 47,792| 97,296| 770,641| 68,025| 12,990|inguished
1870 |1,111,375| 90,759| 192,544| 882,551| 154,415| 24,942| 13,715
1871 |1,317,548| 94,255| 180,914| 906,723| 160,478| 34,629| 20,015
1872 |1,536,075| 104,564| 177,666| 933,887| 177,462| 43,820| 303,082
1873 |1,711,787| 113,951| 193,423| 963,020| 185,165| 57,254| 39,295
1874 |1,868,359| 118,876| | | | 71,101|
------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
TOTAL:
------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
1850 |3,504,944| 728,018|1,585,711|1,949,743| 704,036|397,422| 281,377
1860 |4,586,742|1,124,226|2,546,237|2,807,631| 983,996|556,310| 558,928
1870 |5,617,693|1,531,441|1,516,800|2,677,940|1,072,048|499,405|1,022,515
1871 |5,622,660|1,520,231|1,425,142|2,805,274|1,077,611|492,903|1,062,274
1872 |5,681,963|1,531,866|1,410,648|2,971,309|1,089,075|493,537|1,120,388
1873 |5,736,368|1,557,862|1,423,288|3,215,915|1,068,031|495,285|1,245,293
1874 |5,912,314|1,621,178| | | |511,980|
------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------+---------
FOOTNOTES:
[470] Number and tonnage of vessels of which the building was completed
within the year.
INDEX.
_Achilles, The S.S., belonging to Mr. Holt_, from Foochow, by Cape,
made passage to London, 13,552 miles, in 58 days 9 hours, Sept.
1869, p. 435, _note_
_Admiralty, The Lords of_, slow to construct ships of iron, p. 97
—— secure nearly a million for the reconstruction of a _wooden_
navy in 1861, p. 98
—— object to screw-propeller, as likely to cause loss of
mechanical power, p. 106
_Adriatic, The_, purchased by Galway Co. from Collins Co., very fast
passage of, p. 268
——, of the “White Star Line,” accomplishes 455 miles in 24 hours,
p. 279
_Africa, The_, details of the construction of, pp. 217-8
_Agamemnon, The_ (Mr. Holt’s ship), beats the mails from Shanghai to
London by nine days, July 1873, p. 436, _note_
_Allan, J._ (in 1722), proposes to navigate a ship “by forcing water
through the stern,” p. 26
_Allan, Mr. Alex._, sketch of life of, pp. 260-1, _note_
_Allan_, or _Montreal Line_, starts April 1862, p. 262
—— now maintains a regular weekly service, _ibid._
—— deservedly famous for the speed of many of its vessels, such as
the _Polynesian_, _Hungarian_, and _Peruvian_, p. 263
——, steamers of, 1875, Append. p. 612
_Allan, Mr. James_, ultimately one of the Managing Directors of P.
and O. Co., a sketch of his early history, pp. 380-1, _note_
_Amazon, The_, launched June 28, 1851, various details of, p. 305,
_note_, and p. 306
——, dreadful destruction of, by fire, pp. 307-8
_America_, sketch of lakes in, pp. 122-3, _note_
——, the first vessel of, on the western waters, the brig _Dean_
launched at Alleghany in 1806, p. 123, _note_
—— has now navigable communication throughout of more than 3000
miles, _ibid._
——, chief navigable rivers, bays, roadsteads, and harbours of, pp.
125-8
——, great dangers in the navigation of the Western rivers of, as
shown by the loss of sixty-six vessels in 1832-4; while no less
than 233 steamers blown up, between 1816 and 1848, with the
loss of 2563 people killed, and 2097 wounded, pp. 134-40, and
_note_
——, Atlantic steamboats of, generally with low-pressure engines,
working at 18 to 20 lbs. on the square inch, with a difference
of rating as compared with English vessels, p. 141
——, river boats of, sustain an average speed of 20 miles an hour,
p. 144
——, their peculiar construction, p. 149
—— still retains the whole of her river, lake, and coasting trade,
p. 164
—— determines on subsidizing a fleet of steamers to provide for
the protection of “American rights,” p. 197
——, merchants of (at Boston, Philadelphia, &c.), complain of the
monopoly of Transatlantic Trade, at New York, p. 228
——, wooden clippers of, no chance against the iron screws of
England, but, for a time, probably as remunerative, p. 270
_American Government_, for a while, subsidize vessels for the
carrying of their mails, and, especially, the “Collins Line,”
p. 197
——, wherein they take a natural pride, p. 215
_American Line of Steamers_, from New York to Bremen, calling at
Southampton, 1847, p. 195
_American Steamers, Bristol and Providence_, dimensions of, Append.
p. 600
_American Sailing-Vessels_, do more with twenty hands than the
English with thirty, p. 167
_Americans_, we owe to them the modifications of Watt’s engine, still
in use, p. 122
——, the first to improve steam-vessels by substituting a fine
entrance and a clear run for round and bluff bows, _ibid._
—— send the first trading steamer across the Atlantic in 1819, p.
167
—— resolve to compete with the Cunard Line, by subsidized vessels
of their own, p. 199
—— prefer to “skim” the water rather than to force the ship
through, p. 582
_Amherst, Lord_ (as Governor General), warmly approves of Steam
Navigation with India, p. 339
—— offers a premium to any Company or person who will establish a
steam service to India by the end of 1825, p. 339
_Anchor Line_, started from the Clyde, in 1856, by Messrs. Handyside
and Henderson, with lines to Quebec and the Mediterranean, pp.
287-90
—— start fortnightly service between Glasgow and New York in 1865,
p. 287
—— now owns 71,328 tons of steam-ships, their Mediterranean
vessels connecting with India by Suez Canal, pp. 287-9
——, their steam-ship _Victoria_ an excellent specimen of a
“business” ship, p. 289
——, particulars of line of steamers, Append. p. 633
_Anderson, Arthur_, sketch of his life, p. 379, _note_
_Anthemius_, account of (from Gibbon, c. xl.), how he avenged himself
on the philosopher Zeno, p. 8, _note_
_Aquatic animals_, as whelks, cuttle fish, &c., exhibit many types of
machinery, p. 2
_Arago, M._, in his “Éloge de James Watt,” speaks highly of the
invention of Solomon de Caus, p. 16
_Archimedes, The_, screw steam-ship, of Mr. T. P. Smith, her trials
with the _Widgeon_, Oct. 14, 1839, between Dover and Calais,
pp. 107-8
——, important as settling satisfactorily the value of the “screw,”
pp. 108-10
_Arctic, The_, commonly called the “clipper of the seas,” details of,
pp. 204-7
——, collision of, with the _Vesta_, and dreadful loss of life,
Sept. 27, 1854, pp. 222-4
_Arsenals_, extensive, established by Chinese Government at Nankin,
Foochow, &c., p. 473, _note_
_Atherton, Mr. Charles_, views of, with regard to the speed of
steam-vessels when greatly increased, pp. 491-2
—— thinks the views of the Directors of the Eastern Steam
Navigation Company are not supported by their data, pp. 495-6
_Atlantic Steam Navigation_, not the idea of any one man, but of many
working together, p. 178
_Australia_, details of routes to, considered by Committee of House
of Commons, pp. 390-1, _note_
——, stringent penalties enforced by Government for failure in
conveying the mails to, p. 433
——, anecdote, with reference to the penalties to be imposed on
failure in the mail service to, p. 433, _note_
_Australian Mail Service_, proposal for independent line, May 1856,
p. 396
——, peculiar conditions of the contracts for carrying the mails to,
pp. 431-2
_Austrian Lloyd’s Company_, and other shrewd persons, question the
commercial plans of the Eastern Steam Navigation Company, p. 491
_Auxiliary Screws_, presumed advantage of, fallacious, as the
machinery takes up too much room, pp. 428-9
_Bacon (Roger)_ describes a boat capable of obtaining greater speed
than the “London pinnaces,” A.D. 1214-1296, p. 15
_Baltimore Clippers and “American Liners,”_ the result of the efforts
towards improvement by American shipbuilders, p. 166
_Batture_, the name technically applied to the alluvial soil of the
Mississippi at New Orleans, p. 137
_Bavarian, The_, fine steam-ship belonging to Messrs. Leyland,
employed in Mediterranean, p. 421
_Bayard, Mr._, absurd notions of, with reference to high speed, p. 214
_Bell, Henry_, lays before the English and other Governments his plan
for the improvement of Steam Navigation in 1800, p. 62
—— gives, in letter to Mr. Miller, 1816, an account of his steamer
the _Comet_, pp. 63-4
——, no more than Fulton, can claim to be the _inventor_ of the
present system of Steam Navigation, p. 64
_Bell, Mr. Lothian_, estimate of the amount of pit coal in America,
p. 139
_Bentinck, Lord W._, arrives at Calcutta on July 3, 1838, and at once
takes up the cause of Steam-vessels on Indian rivers, pp. 449-50
_Bergenroth, M._, gives a list of the letters of Blasco de Garay,
found by him at Simancas, pp. 14-15, _notes_.
_Berlin, The City of_, splendid ship belonging to the Inman Company,
1875, p. 259, _note_
_Bessemer, The_, built by Mr. E. J. Reed, details of her
construction, pp. 563-6
——, the “swinging saloon” of, her most important feature, not
available on her first trial, May 8, 1875, p. 566, _note_
_Bessori, J._, describes a vessel with two prows (not unlike the
_Castalia_), (1582), p. 15
_Black Ball Line, Old_, ultimately merged in the Guion Line of
sailing-ships, p. 273
——, still, as of old, a line of sailing-packets, so called, but
under the management of Marshall and Co., p. 273, _note_.
_Boilers, Marine_, of which, now, four different patents, hard to
make strong enough to withstand the great pressure required, p.
580
_Bombay Government_, letter approving of Mr. Taylor’s plan for Steam
communication with India, p. 350
_Boston, Shipowners of_, complain that individual enterprise is
paralysed by the unfair giving of Government patronage, p. 200
——, and, therefore, protest against the adoption, by the American
Government, of a protective system, _ibid._
_Bothnia_ and _Scythia, The_, magnificent steamers built for Cunard
Line, 1874, by Messrs. J. and G. Thompson of Glasgow, pp. 232-7
and _note_
——, of 1874, compared with the _Britannia_ of 1840, p. 238
_Bougner, M._, in 1746, uses “revolving arms, like the vanes of a
mill,” to propel vessels, p. 101
_Bourne, W._, proposes a “boate without oares or sayle” (1578), p. 15
_Bramah, Joseph_ (the inventor of the hydraulic press), invents also
(in 1785) the “screw-propeller,” pp. 31-2, _note_
——, in 1798, tests the application of the screw to a boat, pp. 101-2
_Branca, G._, applies steam to blow against vanes attached to the external
rim of a wheel (1629), p. 16
_Bright, John, The_, Parsee trader between Bombay, Calcutta, and China, p.
455 and _note_
_Britannia, The_, one of the four first ships of the “Cunard Line;”
details of her construction, p. 183, _note_
_Britannic, The_, one of the “White Star Line,” engines of, by
Maudslay, Sons, and Field, p. 279;
further details of, p. 279, _note_
_British and Indian Steam Navigation Company_, originally, and till
1862, called the Calcutta and Birmah Steam Navigation Company,
p. 455
—— now own 42 iron screw-steamers, p. 456 and _note_
——, vessels of, now traverse 1,100,000 miles annually, p. 459
——, and is now the most important of all the Indian Companies, pp.
455-60
_Brunel, Mr. I. K._, proposes to Eastern Steam Navigation Company the
building of a ship of enormous dimensions, p. 487
_Builder’s Measurement_, meaning and mode of calculating the old and
the new, p. 173, _note_
_Burhampooter, The_, and the _Hooghly_ sent to India in 1828; details
of the, p. 449 and _note_
_Burns, Mr. John_, valuable table provided by, of the work done by
all the Cunard vessels, p. 238, _note_
_Burns, Mr. George_, and _Mr. MacIver_, sketch of their commercial
history, p. 179, _note_
_Busterich_, an early Teutonic god, noticed by Arago in his “Éloge de
James Watt,” p. 8, _note_
_Calcutta, Meeting at_, Dec. 17, 1823, to promote Steam Navigation
with India, p. 339
_Canadian Government_ contracts with Messrs. McKean & Co. for line
between Canada and England, 1853, p. 261
_Cape Route to India_, at first proposed for steam in 1822, p. 339
_Carrying Trade, Transatlantic_, great struggle between England and
the United states to secure, pp. 163-7
_Castalia, The_, plans and details of, pp. 561-3, and _note_.
_Caus, Solomon de_, shows clearly in 1635 his acquaintance with the
“motive” power of steam, p. 16
_Chabert, M._ (in 1710), describes a paddle-wheel vessel, p. 25
_Chain cables of iron_, used by the ancient Tyrians, p. 1
_Charlwood, E. F., R.N., Capt._, evidence in favour of iron ships as
splintering less when struck by shot, p. 98, _note_
_Chesney, Col._, makes an elaborate survey and report of the
Euphrates Route, p. 358, _note_
_Chicago_, sketch of the history of, p. 123, _note_
——, first steamer to, in 1832, p. 132
_Chimborazo, The_, launched in 1871 from the yard of J. Elder & Co.,
for Pacific Company, p. 325
_China_, character of the country and of the inhabitants of the
interior of, p. 465
——, tea-boats of, on Canton River and Yang-tse, p. 481
_Chinese Merchants_, Steam Navigation Company established under the
Chinese flag, pp. 472-3
_Cigar Ships, The_, of Messrs. Winans, built at Baltimore, 1858, and
on the Thames in 1864, pp. 567-70
_Clermont, The_, built by Mr. Fulton for Mr. Livingston, p. 52
_Clyde_, the mechanics on the, at Glasgow, take the lead in the
construction of marine engines, p. 61
——, remarkable improvements in the navigation of, pp. 68-9, _note_
——, return of the number of ships built on its banks between 1868
and 1873 inclusive, p. 70, _note_
——, dredging machines on, Append. p. 591
——, ships launched on, 1863-4, _ibid._, p. 593
——, shipbuilders on, 1871, _ibid._, p. 594
_Coal_, the carrying of, for long voyages, commercially, a mistake,
p. 494, _note_
_Collins, Mr. E. K._, undertakes to establish the well known “Collins
Line” between New York and Liverpool, p. 202
—— arranges for the construction of the _Arctic_, _Baltic_,
_Atlantic_, and _Pacific_ steamers for the “Collins Line,” p.
203
“_Collins Line_,” details of the steamers of, p. 204
——, enormous cost of the ships on the, p. 211
——, finally started in 1850, just ten years after the Cunard had
commenced, p. 214
—— at length relinquished, 1858, pp. 228-9
_Colquhoun, Sir Patrick_, idea of, that guilds (a form of trades’
unions) came from the East, p. 479, _note_
_Comet, The_, (Henry Bell’s steamer), completed in Jan. 1812; details
of, pp. 64-7, and _notes_
—— not remunerative to her enterprising owner, p. 67
——, original engine of, now in Patent Museum, p. 67, _note_, and p.
574
_Compound Engines_, introduced in order to utilise steam at high
pressures, p. 577
——, principle of the construction of, pp. 577-8
——, how distinguished from simple, pp. 578-9
——, much more economical than simple, pp. 579-80
_Condensing Engine_, distinguishing characteristics of, p. 576
_Coolie Chinese Emigration_ (as conducted by the Portuguese from
Macao), no better than a slave-trade, pp. 469-70, _note_
_Cram, Capt._ (1860, July 11), points out the advantages of the
“Truss” plan on which Mr. Randall’s steamer was to have been
built, p. 159, _note_
_Cunard, Mr. Samuel_, so early as 1830, contemplates the
establishment of mail steamers between Liverpool and Halifax,
p. 178
—— obtains the contract for the conveyance of the mails between
England and America, p. 180
—— commences a regular service between Liverpool, Halifax, and
Boston in 1840, p. 183
—— adds, in 1844, the _Cambria_ and _Hibernia_, p. 184
_Cunard Line_, all the first ships built on the Clyde, with engines
by Mr. Robert Napier, p. 181
——, vessels of, clearly shown to be superior in many respects to
any others, p. 185, _note_
——, but, at first, slightly beaten in speed, by the Collins Line,
p. 219
—— now (1875) own 90,208 tons of shipping, p. 237
——, comparative statement of the consumption of coals in, p. 237,
_note_
——, in _thirty-five_ years, have _never lost one life or one letter
entrusted to their charge_, p. 239
——, chief reasons of this remarkable success, pp. 240-4
——, strict regulations on board, and special orders for the course
to be taken by the ships of, according to the season of the
year, pp. 242-5
——, ships of Burns, MacIver, and Co., Append. p. 606
_Cunard Company_, a striking example of what can be done, p. 248
——, regulations of, Append. p. 609
_Cunard and Collins Lines_, comparison of, Append. p. 601
_Cunard Steamer, the Persia_, passages of 1856-1868, _ibid._, p. 603
_Cunard Steamers_, progress of, 1840-1875, _ibid._, p. 608
_Curaçoa, The_, crosses the Atlantic, several times in 1829, between
Holland and the Dutch West Indies, p. 170
_Darien Expedition_, illustrates the difficulty of trade with Central
America, p. 330
_Denny, W._, the builder of the _Rob Roy_, and of the first steamers
of “Allan Line;” sketch of the life of, with account of his
firm, p. 79, _note_
_Diana, The_, second steamer in India, takes Mr. Crauford, the
Resident, up to Amarapura, p. 448
_Dicey, Capt._, plans the new Channel steamer _Castalia_, p. 561
_Ditchburn and Mare, Messrs._, build the _Fairy_, the tender to yacht
of H.M. the Queen, p. 87
_Drew, Daniel, The_, surpasses even the _New World_ in speed, and
attains 25 miles per hour, p. 150
_Dublin and Holyhead Line of Steam-packets_, first started in 1819,
p. 551
——, early success on, of the _Meteor_, _Banshee_, and _Llewellyn_,
p. 552
——, splendid new steamers of, the _Connaught_, _Ulster_, _Munster_,
and _Leinster_, built 1860, pp. 552-5
——, details of the construction of the new steamers for, pp. 552-5,
and _note_
_Dundas, Lord_, his vessel, the _Charlotte Dundas_ (fitted with
engine by Symington), “_the first practical steamboat_,” p. 37
_Dundas, Charlotte_, the machinery of, mechanically superior to that
of either the _Clermont_ or the _Comet_, p. 64
_Duquet, M._, invents a kind of screw-propeller, in 1729, p. 100
_Eastern Steam Navigation Company_, proposed in reply to circular
from the Admiralty after Lord Jocelyn’s Company, of 1851, p. 486
_East India Company_, Directors of, establish a Tátar post between
Constantinople and Baghdad, p. 338
—— take no interest in steam to India, p. 351
—— are compelled at length to act on the Report of the Committee
of 1834, p. 358
—— for years insist on carrying the mails in their own vessels,
between Bombay and Suez, p. 387
_Economy, Political_, erroneous reasoning about, in America, p. 215
_Elder, John, and Company_, details of the vast shipbuilding
business, conducted by, pp. 71-2, _note_
_Elevator, The_, a peculiar machine invented by M. de Lesseps, during
the making of the Suez Canal, p. 372
_Elizabeth, during Reign of_, and some time after, English merchants
trade by Syria, with Baghdad and India, p. 337
_Elphinstone, Hon. Mount-Stuart_, as Governor of Bombay, in 1823,
recommends steam communication with England, p. 344
——, to prove his views, returns to England, viâ Isthmus of Suez, in
1827, p. 345
_Emperor, The_, yacht presented to Japanese by Lord Elgin in 1858-9,
and, thus, the first Japanese steamer, p. 482
_England_ more interested than any one else in securing a route for
her ships to the East, p. 369
——, the wisest statesmen of, Mr. Gladstone, Mr. S. Herbert, Mr.
Cobden, Mr. Bright, &c., support M. de Lesseps’ scheme, p. 369,
_note_
_England, The_, a ship sold to Japanese by W. S. Lindsay, in Jan.
1861, p. 484, _note_
_Enterprize, The_, first steamer to India in 1825, is 113 days on her
passage to Calcutta, p. 341
——, showing thereby, that, commercially, the Cape route would not
pay, p. 342
—— proves of great value to the East India Co., in first Burmese
war, p. 342
_Ericsson, Capt._, in 1836, fully demonstrates the merits of the
screw, p. 104
——, exhibits successfully his screw steamer to the Lords of the
Admiralty, pp. 105-6
_Euphrates, Route to India_, reasons advanced in its favour by
Committee of 1839, pp. 356-7, _note_
_European and Australian Mail Company_, tender of, accepted, p. 397
—— proves a failure more disastrous than even that of the Galway
Line, p. 398
_Evans, F. J., R.N._, able report by, on the “Deviations of the
Compass” in iron ships, Phil. Trans. 1860, p. 90, _note_
_Evans, Oliver_, tries a plan for propelling vehicles by steam on
common roads, in 1786, p. 47
_Farrer, T. H._, letter from, noticing the Naval Review of 1853, p.
106, _note_
_Ferry-boats at Quebec_ and between Yarmouth and Norwich, propelled,
till recently, by oxen walking on a circular platform, p. 20
_Fins of fish_ suggest the idea of a paddle, or oar, as their tails
do that of sculling, p. 4
_Fitch, Mr. F._, sketch of his life, and boat built by, pp. 42-3,
_note_, and p. 44
“_Flat floor_,” advantages of this construction for steam-vessels, as
advocated by the Americans, p. 160
_Forbes, R. B., Mr._, sketch of his commercial life, pp. 193-4, _note_
_Fowler, Mr._, proposes a steam-boat to carry a railway train from
Dover to Calais, pp. 557-8;
with details, pp. 559-60, and _note_
_France_, now, 1875, owns (including _Messageries Maritimes_) 160,
478 tons of steam shipping, p. 239, _note_
_Froude, Mr. W._, experiments on H.M.S. _Greyhound_, show a loss of
49 per cent. of motive power to attain 10½ knots, p. 581
_Fruit Schooners_, in the Mediterranean, for a while maintain their
ground against steamers, p. 418
_Fulton, Robert_, conceives, previously to 1796, the idea of
propelling vessels by steam, p. 48
——, sketch of his life, p. 50, _note_
—— pays a visit to Mr. Symington, and studies his boat and its
machinery, p. 50
—— (in 1806) builds the _Clermont_ steamer on East (Hudson) River,
p. 51
—— never claimed any patent for his assumed discovery, p. 52
——, engine of, for his _Clermont_, nearly the same as that of the
_Charlotte Dundas_, p. 52
—— not fairly spoken of by such men as Sir J. Rennie and Mr.
Woodcroft, p. 55, _note_
——, unquestionably, the first to keep a steam-boat regularly
running for purposes of trade, p. 56
——, vessel launched by, on July 4, 1815, the exact copy of that of
Mr. Miller of Dalwinston, p. 131, _note_
——, note of origin and place of birth, Append. p. 585
_Galloway, Mr._, patents, in 1829, a plan for “feathering”
paddle-wheels, still in use, pp. 99-100
_Galway Line_, or _Royal Atlantic Steam Navigation Company_, proposes
(in 1859) to carry H.M. mails in six days from Galway to St.
John’s, Newfoundland, &c., p. 265
——, contractors for, fail to deliver the vessels at the time agreed
on, p. 267
——, ships, built for, always behind their time, pp. 267-8
—— compelled to terminate their contract, May 1861, p. 269
_Ganges_, length of journey up, previously to steam, Calcutta to
Benares 2½ months; Calcutta to Cawnpore 3½ months; Calcutta to
Agra 6 months; Calcutta to Delhi 7½ months; p. 449
_Garay, Blasco de_, exhibits to Charles V. a mode of propelling
vessels in a calm, p. 11
——, his letters shown by Mr. MacGregor not to refer to a
steam-boat, pp. 12-14, _notes_
_Garry Owen, The_, being driven on shore, thereby shows the
superiority of iron over wood for strength, p. 88
_Gauthier, M._ (in 1756) writes a treatise on “Navigation by Fire,”
which, though approved at Venice, was not published, p. 28
_Gellatly, Messrs., and Company_, establish steamers _viâ_ Suez Canal
to the East, p. 437
_Germanic, The_, magnificent vessel of the “White Star Line” (1875),
p. 279, _note_
_Glasgow, The_, steam-vessel built by Mr. Cook in 1814, the standard
for some years for river steamers, p. 73
_Glasgow, The City of_, screw-steamer launched in 1850, and placed on
the Inman Line, Dec. 1850, p. 252
_Grant, T., M.D._, patents an invention “for the more speedy passage
of calmed ships,” p. 17
_Gray, Mr. John, of Liverpool_, plans the magnetic apparatus to
insure the correct steering of the _Great Eastern_, pp. 509-10
_Great Britain_, built at Bristol, from Mr. Patterson’s design, 1843,
with details of, p. 187, and _note_
—— launched July 19, 1843, and great success of, from that time to
this, p. 189, _note_, and p. 434
_Great Eastern_, relative claims of Mr. Brunel and Mr. Scott Russell
to different parts of her construction, pp. 492-3
——, Messrs. Watt & Co., of Birmingham, to make her screw-engines,
and Mr. Scott Russell her paddle-engines and hull, p. 493
——, actually commenced May 1, 1854, p. 496
——, general details of her construction, pp. 497-504
——, chief distinguishing feature of, the combined application of
the paddle and the screw, pp. 501-2
——, under full sail, can spread 65,000 yards of canvas, p. 508
——, ingenious apparatus for steering, pp. 510-11
——, conversation about, between Mr. Lindsay and Mr. Brunel in 1857,
as to whether she will “pay,” p. 513, _note_
——, a wonder of construction, but a commercial failure, pp. 513-14
——, enormous preparations made for launching, pp. 514-15
——, launching of, repeated several times, but unsuccessfully, pp.
519-20
—— at length floats of her own accord, Jan. 31, 1858, pp. 521-2
——, the whole scheme, in fact, of her mode of launching, a blunder
from beginning to end, p. 522
—— offered to Government, but this offer wisely declined, pp. 523-4
—— starts on her first sea voyage, Sept. 9, 1859, p. 526
——, report of the pilot in command of her, pp. 527-8
——, peculiar construction of rudder and anchors of, pp. 511-3
——, daily performances of, on first voyage across the Atlantic, p.
530, _note_
—— encounters a heavy gale, Sept. 1861, 100 miles S.W. of Ireland,
and returns to Cork, pp. 532-3, and _notes_
——, chief subsequent value as a cable layer, but, even then,
scarcely remunerative, p. 538, _note_
——, thus employed in 1855-6, 1868, 1870, 1873-4, pp. 539-41
——, in spite of every error, a vessel of which the people of
England may well be proud, pp. 541-3
_Great Western, The_, the first vessel specially built for the
Atlantic trade, leaves Bristol for New York April 7, 1838, p.
172
_Great Western Company_ naturally annoyed that, having started the
_Great Western_, they did not obtain the Government contract
for the mails to America, p. 180
—— obtain a Parliamentary inquiry into the relative costs of the
Trans-Atlantic mail service, pp. 184-5
_Guion, Mr. S. B._, the chief owner of the Guion Line, supplies, in
1863, cargoes for the Cunard and National Companies, p. 273
——, and his partners commence, in 1866, a line of steamers, the
_Manhattan_ being the first, p. 273
_Guion Line_, otherwise called Liverpool and Great Western Steamship
Company, excellent vessels of, pp. 273-4
_Gutznur, Mr._, of Leith, adopts in the _Athol_ and _Tourist_
steamers a new plan for connecting the piston-rod with the
crank of the paddle-shaft, p. 82, _note_
_Hall (Admiral Sir W. H.)_, evidence that iron ships are less injured
by shot than wooden ones, p. 97, _note_
_Hamburg_, now (1875) owns 45,669 tons of steam shipping, p. 239,
_note_
_Hamburg American Steam Packet Company_, fine ships of, pp. 290-1
_Hankow_, nine steamers employed in trade of, so early as in 1863-4,
since when, many more, pp. 468-9
_Hankow and Pekin Steamers_ (completed April 1874), belonging to
Messrs. Swire and Co., details of, p. 470, and _note_
_Harfield, Mr._, invents a new steam windlass, which is fitted in the
_Bothnia_, &c., p. 234, _note_
_Harland, Mr._, invents a new method of lifting the screw, pp. 280-1
_Head, Major, C. F._, account of his journeys by Red Sea and Suez in
1829-30, and evidence about Overland route to India, p. 345 and
_note_
_Heat, used in creating steam_, great loss during its conversion, p.
581, _note_
_Hero_, a mathematician of Alexandria, B.C. 120, p. 4
—— writes a work “On Pneumatics,” containing 78 experiments, many
of them of much interest, p. 4
——, machine of, called the _Æolipile_, resembling the modern
engines of Avery and Ruthven, pp. 5-7, and _note_
——, the first to record, if not actually to invent, the steam
engine, p. 7
——, experiments of, often applied to superstitious purposes, as in
the case of Nos. 37 and 70, pp. 7-8 and _note_
_Hibernian, The_, built in 1861, the first vessel with a promenade
deck from stem to stern, p. 263
_High Pressure_, meaning of, in America, p. 139
_Himalaya, The_, building of, and details, p. 392 and _note_
_Hindoo, The_, fine ship of, belonging to Messrs. Gellatly, p. 437
_Hindostan, The_, sent, in 1842, to open the line between Calcutta,
Madras, Ceylon, and Suez, p. 388
_Hooghly Tug Company_, and Bombay Steam Navigation Company, among the
first private Companies in India, p. 452
_Holland_ now (1875) owns 36,644 tons of steam shipping, p. 239,
_note_
_Hollar_, curious drawing by (A.D. 1653), of a Dutch vessel,
preserved in the British Museum, p. 20
_Holt, Mr. Alfred_, notice of his life, with particulars of the line
established by him, to Colon and West Indies, p. 331, and p.
435, _note_
——, steamers, run in 1865, from Liverpool to the Mauritius, 8500
miles without stopping, p. 434
——, the first to use the compound engine in long oversea voyages,
p. 435, _note_
——, steamers to China, details of freight by, p. 436, _note_
_Holyhead and Kingston_, average passage between, for 14 years to
Sept. 30, 1874, Append. p. 644
_Holy Ship_, curious native pilgrim vessel, so-called, with notes of
the model, her construction, p. 460
_Hongs, The Chinese_, not unlike the “Guilds” of the Middle Ages, pp.
478-9
_Horse-power_, technical meaning of, pp. 52-3, _note_
_Hugh Lindsay, The_, sent to Suez from Bombay, March 20, 1830, under
command of Capt. Wilson, p. 352
—— makes one voyage annually from 1830, p. 352, _note_
——, details of her first voyage to Suez, pp. 354-5
_Hulls, Jonathan_ (in 1736), plan by, for converting reciprocating
rectilinear into a continuous rotary motion, p. 27
——, sketch of his life, p. 27, _note_
——, boats resembling the one he made still to be seen on the Upper
Thames in England, and on the Murray in Australia, p. 27
_Iberia, The_, the first ship of the P. and O. Company, sailed Sept.
1837, p. 383
_Independence, War of_, at the close of, ships of America and England
alike under the leading strings of protection, p. 164
_India_, steam navigation to, meeting in London for, 1822, p. 339
——, report of Committee, 1834, in favour of Euphrates route much
influenced by political considerations, pp. 355-6
——, method adopted for the conveyance of mails to, previously to
1839, pp. 383-4
——, postal service with, remains under the control of the Directors
of East India Company till 1854, p. 39
——, steam to, by the Cape even now is not very remunerative, p. 426
_Indian Produce_, the bulkiest articles of, as jute, &c., generally
brought home in sailing-vessels, p. 444, _note_
_Indian Steam Committee of 1857_, at length arouses people to the
advantage of steam in Indian trade, p. 452
_Indian Trade_, no private steam companies started for, till 1845, p.
452
_Indus, steamboat for_, designed by Mr. Windus, and built by Pearce
and Co., of Stockton-on-Tees, details of, p. 454, _note_
_Inglis and Co._, builders of the _Hankow_, _Pekin_, &c., for
Yang-tse trade, note from, about these ships, p. 472, _note_
_Inman, Mr._, the first to start a regular line across the Atlantic,
consisting of iron screw-steamers only, p. 255, _note_
——, sketch of the life of, pp. 255-6, _note_
_Inman Line_, or _Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam-ship
Company_, commencement of, in 1850, p. 251
——, splendid ships of, the _City of Paris_, the _City of Brussels_,
and the _City of Richmond_, p. 253
——, logs of the _City of Brussels_, and the _City of Richmond_, pp.
253-4, _note_
—— convey, in 1856-7, 85,000 passengers to and from the United
States, or about one-third of all who then crossed the
Atlantic, p. 256
——, details of the voyages of the _City of Chester_, and the _City
of Richmond_, pp. 257-8
——, the _City of Berlin_ of, the longest, and probably the largest,
merchant ship afloat, except the _Great Eastern_, p. 259
——, steamers of, Append. p. 611
_Insurance of Vessels_, going to sea, note on, pp. 248-9
_Iona, The_, successful paddle-wheel steamer between Glasgow and the
Western Highlands, p. 545, details of, _note_
_Iron_, as a material for shipbuilding, first used partially in 1830,
p. 83
—— at first objected to by many because heavier than water, p. 84
—— successfully used by Messrs. Fawcett and Co. at Liverpool, Mr.
Laird at Birkenhead, Mr. (Sir William) Fairbairn and others, on
the Thames, p. 87
—— long objected to, owing to the difficulty in adjusting the
compasses, p. 90
_Iron ores of America_, now being largely developed (‘Times,’ May 28,
1875), p. 166, _note_
_Iron ships_, general consideration of their superiority over wooden
vessels, with reasons for this, pp. 92-7
——, various reasons why more economical, pp. 96-7
——, accidental damages in, more easily repaired than in the case of
wooden ones, p. 97
—— liable to lose their speed by the adherence to them of animal
and vegetable matter, p. 93
_Iron Steam Ships_, total built in United Kingdom, 1861-74, and total
tonnage compared with four other nations, Append, p. 645
_Irrawaddy River_, great fertility of the country it drains, p. 465
——, before introduction of steam, more than 25,000 native craft
engaged on, p. 463
_Irrawaddy Flotilla and Burmese Steam Navigation Company_, started
in 1865, one of the most remarkable commercial undertakings in
India, pp. 462-5
——, Mr. Jas. Galbraith, the managing Director, chief partner of the
firm of Henderson & Co., p. 462, _note_
—— now run their steamers up to Bhamo, 1000 miles above the mouth
of the Irrawaddy, p. 463
——, peculiar character of the vessels employed by, p. 464
——, fleet of (in Jan. 1875), consists of 15 steamers, and 25
“flats,” p. 464
_Japanese_, now have several merchant steamers and iron-clads built
for them in England, p. 482
_Japanese boats_, original form and character of, p. 483, _note_
_Jersey, New, The_, her value shown, as able to tow through drift
ice, where paddle-wheel steamers were useless, p. 115
——, many years a steam-tug on the Delaware and Schuylkill, _ibid._
_Jocelyn, Lord_, Indian Navy List supplied to the Committee of 1851,
pp. 359-60, _note_
_Johnston, Capt._ (_then Lieut._), sent to Calcutta in 1822 to
promote steam navigation with India, p. 339
—— commands the _Enterprize_ by Cape to India, 1825, p. 341
—— and, in 1828-30, the _Hooghly_ to Allahabad, p. 450
_Jouffroy, Marquis de_, said to have constructed (in 1781) a
steam-boat 140 feet long, p. 30
_Junks, Chinese_, general character of, pp. 473-4, _note_
_Just, Mr. J._, as Manager of the Pacific Company, adopts, in 1856,
the compound engine, and, thereby, saves much fuel, p. 322
_Khedive, The_, splendid new steamer of the P. and O. Company,
details of, pp. 410-14
——, log of, Append. p. 637
_Kinder, R._, in 1816, patents a shaft and screw, nearly the same as
at present used, p. 102
_King Coal_, The, collier so named, details of, p. 547, and _note_
_Laird, Mr. MacGregor_, states that wooden ships are more than twice
as heavy as those of iron, p. 95, _note_
——, under signature of “Chimera,” replies, in _Liverpool Albion_,
to Dr. Lardner’s objection against Transatlantic Steam
Navigation, pp. 171-2, _note_
_Laird, William_, sketch of his life, p. 87, _note_
_Laird, Messrs._, carry out the plan of iron vessels for ocean
navigation in 1832, and build the _Elburkah_ and _Lady
Lansdowne_, p. 88
—— build two iron steam-vessels in 1837 for the navigation of the
Indus, and those for the Euphrates Expedition, p. 90
_Lamport, C._, article by, on “Merchant Shipping Legislation” in
_Westminster Review_, for April 1875, p. 246, _note_
_Lange, Sir Daniel_, the warm supporter of M. de Lesseps from the
commencement; paper read by, to the Society of Arts, on the
nature of the ground through which the Suez Canal was cut, p.
373
_Lardner, Dr._, Report of lecture at Liverpool, December 1835, from
_Liverpool Albion_, pp. 168-9, _note_ 2.
_Law, Roberts & Co., Messrs._, undertake to carry U. S. mails between
New York, California, and Oregon monthly, in 1847, p. 156
_Leach, Harris and Forwood, Messrs._, build boats and extend line
started by Mr. Holt, p. 331
_Leith Smacks_, an early mode of communication, between Leith and
London, commenced in 1809, p. 550
——, a fleet of, successfully repel an attack of French privateers,
p. 550, _note_
_Lesseps, De, M._, sketch of the life of, p. 366, _note_
_Levees_, a peculiar kind of wharf on the western rivers of America,
and, especially, at New Orleans, p. 136
_Leyland, Messrs., and Co._, now employ twenty-three large steamers
in the Mediterranean trade, p. 420
——, the fleet of, alone could bring all the corn from Egypt
required by Ancient Rome, p. 421
_Lin, F._, patents an invention (1637) for working vessels “without
the use of horses,” p. 17
_Lindsay, Mr_., moves the reduction by 300,000_l._ of the vote for
the reconstruction of a _wooden_ navy, May 23, 1861, p. 98,
_note_
——, address to his constituents at Tynemouth, on the _Great
Eastern_, pp. 539-40, _note_
_Liners, Yankee, The_, the perfection of sailing ships, p. 270
_Liverpool, Brazil, and River Plate Company_ organized in 1865,
chiefly by Messrs. Lamport and Holt, p. 333
—— now own 49,294 tons of steamships, _ibid._
——, particulars of, Jan. 1875, Append. p. 637.
_Livingston, Mr._, enters into Fulton’s plans, and builds a boat on
the Seine, in 1803, which, however, fails, p. 49
_Lloyd’s, North German_, an old established Company between Bremen,
Baltimore, and New York, p. 291
_Lowe, Robert, The_, account of her voyage up the Yang-tze, p. 468
and _note_
—— loads at Shanghai for Hankow, May 8, 1863, and brought tea
thence direct to England, pp. 468-9
_Luck_, good or bad, applicable only to games of chance, requiring no
skill or genius, p. 246
_Lynch, A. K._, excellent account by, of the early works in
connection with the Suez Canal, p. 370, _note_
_MacGregor, J._, investigates the story of the invention of a
steam-boat, by Blasco de Garay, pp. 10-14
—— arrives at the conclusion that De Garay did not invent any
steam-boat, p. 13, _note_
—— visits Simancas and Barcelona, to investigate the story of
Blasco de Garay, pp. 12-14, and _notes_
_Mackinnon, Mr._, the founder and Managing Director of the British
Indian Steam Navigation Company, pp. 455-6
_Malcolm, Sir J._, and his brothers, Sir Charles Malcolm and Sir
Pulteney Malcolm, support Mr. Elphinstone’s views for steam
communication with India, p. 345
_Manby, Mr._, fits a steam-engine, for the first time, into an iron
vessel, the _Aaron Manby_, in 1821, p. 86
_Manchester, The City of_, fine screw-steamer, purchased for the
Inman Line in 1851, p. 252 and _note_
_Margary, Mr._, murdered (Feb. 1875) in an attempt to explore the
country between Bhamo and Hankow, p. 463, _note_
_Marine Steam Engine_, history of the progress of, since the days of
the old _Comet_, pp. 573-8
_Maritime Casualties, can_ and _must_ be reduced, p. 246
_Massachusetts, The_, auxiliary screw-steamer, sent out by the
Americans in 1845, details of, pp. 190-1, and _note_
—— still running, under the name of the _Alaska_, pp. 191-2, _note_
_McKean, McLarty, and Lamont, Messrs._, successfully employ the
_Osmanli_ and _Levantine_ in the Mediterranean ports in 1849,
p. 419
_Mediterranean_, trade in, revived by the introduction of
steam-vessels, p. 417
_Melbourne, Lord_, present of 50_l._ granted by the Administration
of, to the four daughters of James Taylor in 1837, p. 36
_Merrifield, C. W., F.R.S._, statement of the amount of work to be
obtained from 1 lb. of coal, p. 581, _note_
_Messageries Maritimes_, the largest existing Steam Navigation
Company, but, altogether, the creation of the Government, p. 422
——, originally carriers by land, make their first oversea contract
with Government in 1851, p. 423
—— own now (1875) 175,000 tons of steam shipping, p. 424
—— now run over more than 423,607 French leagues annually, p. 424
——, details of the vast trade conducted by, pp. 425-6
——, list of all steamers of, and how employed (1875), Append. p. 641
_Michigan Lake_, first steam-boat on, 1827, p. 132
_Miller, Mr._, of Dalswinton, the first, in 1787, actually to use a
marine engine, p. 32
—— lays before Royal Society, Dec. 20, 1787, an account of his
mode of propulsion, p. 33, _note_
——, his success mainly due to Mr. Symington, p. 35
——, the “parent” engine of steam navigation made by, in 1788, now
in Patent Office, p. 36, _note_
_Mississippi_, first steamer launched on, in 1814, p. 131
——, steam-boats on, constructed, specially, to rise on the
_levees_, p. 136
——, peculiar character of the boats, barges, employed on, pp. 137-8
——, and of the boatmen on the barges of, _ibid._
_Mississippi and Dominion Steam-ship Company_, founded in 1870, to
trade between Liverpool and New Orleans in the winter, and
Canada in the summer, p. 274
_Mississippi and Ohio_, 234 steamers on, as early as 1834, p. 133
_Mitrovitch, Capt._, the commander of the _Telica_, blows up himself
and vessel at Guayaquil, p. 315
_Mitsu-Bishi Steam Navigation Company_, a Japanese line, started Feb.
1875, p. 481
_Mongredian, Mr._, attempts to establish a line of steamers to
Mediterranean in 1845, p. 419
_Morland, Sir Samuel_ (in 1683), writes a work entitled “Elévation
des Eaux par toutes Sources de Machines, etc.,” and dedicated
to Louis XIV., p. 24
——, accuracy of his view with relation to the expansion of water,
when converted into steam by fire, p. 24
_Morisotus_, strange and clumsy paddle-wheeled vessel, described and
figured in his work entitled “Orbis Maritima,” p. 19
_Muhammed Ali_ suggests to Mr. Galloway a railroad between Cairo and
Suez, p. 362
_Napier, Mr._, in 1815, starts his first “fire-boat” on the Thames,
p. 77
—— builds the _Rob Roy_ in 1818, “the first sea-going steamer” to
trade between Glasgow and Belfast, pp. 78-9
——, introduces a plan for “surface condensation,” in the _United
Kingdom_ steamer, 1826, p. 82, _note_
_Napier, Capt., R.N._ (afterwards Sir Charles), commands the _Aaron
Manby_, the first iron steam-vessel, in 1821, p. 86
_National Steam Navigation Company_, first started in 1863, between
Liverpool and New York, pp. 270-1
——, like the Cunard Line, has never lost a passenger by any
negligence or act of the sea, p. 272
—— now maintains a weekly service between Liverpool and New York,
and fortnightly between Havre and New York, _ibid._
_Nautilus, The_, possesses in itself powers of propulsion by
projecting water, p. 3
_Navarrette, M._, publishes the account of the experiments of Blasco
de Garay in 1543, p. 10
_Netherlands Steam Navigation Company_, started in 1863, now own
twenty-three steamers of 20,000 tons, p. 461
—— run their steamers through Torres Straits to Brisbane, Sydney,
and Melbourne, p. 461
_Newcomen, Mr._, a working blacksmith at Dartmouth, greatly improves
Savery’s engine in 1705, p. 25
_New World, The_, details of her construction and equipment, pp.
146-50
——, type of, as of other similar vessels, wholly different from
those in England, p. 148
_New York_, destined to rival (perhaps surpass,) any city, London
not excepted, owing, in part, to its extraordinary natural
advantages, p. 129
_New York and New Orleans_, first steamer between, 1818, p. 132
_Nightingale, Sir Miles_, the first to return to England by the Red
Sea and Suez Route, p. 344
_Ocean-race_ between Cunard and Collins Line, general results of, in
1852, pp. 218-9
_Ogden, Francis B., The_, a screw-steamer built for Captain Ericsson,
at Wapping, p. 105
_Ohio, Navigation of_, greatly impeded by rapids formed over bars or
chains of locks, p. 135
_Ontario, Lake_, thirteen screw-propelled vessels on, so early as
1846, p. 115
_Orleans, The_, the first steamer on any American lake in 1811, p. 132
_Osborn, Capt. Sherard, R.N._, takes H.M.S. _Furious_ up the Yang-tse
to Hankow in September 1858, p. 467, _note_ 1
_Over-insurance of Ships_, a matter requiring the careful
investigation of Parliament, p. 249
_Overland Route to India_, various details connected with, pp. 360-3
——, papers and books on, from 1819 to 1872, p. 343, _note_
_Overstone, Lord_, speech of, March 24, 1859, giving full details of
the failure of the European and Australian Steam Company, pp.
399-401
_Oxford, City of_, steamship belonging to Messrs. Smith, details of,
pp. 443-4 and _note_, p. 444
_Pacific, The_, general character and construction of, as
distinguished from other Transatlantic steamers, p. 208
——, loss of, from causes unknown, Jan. 1856, pp. 224-5
_Pacific Mail Steamship Company_ (American), great cost and
difficulty of starting and maintaining in 1847, p. 151
—— by far the greatest of all American maritime undertakings, p.
153
—— undertakes the service between San Francisco, Yokohama, and
China, pp. 153-4
—— (English), early details of, 1840, pp. 314-7
——, value of the trade obtainable by, as shown in a pamphlet by Mr.
Wheelwright, London, 1836, p. 318
——, great difficulties in its early career, pp. 319-20
—— accept the proposal of the Admiralty to run steamers monthly to
Panama, p. 321
——, the first to prove the value of the compound engine, p. 322,
_note_
—— establish, in 1870, a fortnightly service to Valparaiso, with
an addition to Callao, _ibid._
—— now own fifty-four steamers, with an aggregate of 119,870 tons,
p. 324
——, the _Cuzco_ and _Garonne_, built for, by J. Elder & Co., with
engines by R. Napier & Sons, p. 326
——, schemes of, too elaborate and too large to be successfully
carried out at present, pp. 326-7
——, particulars of, Jan. 1875, Append. p. 635
_Palmerston, Lord_, resists, on political grounds, M. de Lesseps’
plan for the Suez Canal, p. 369
_Papin, Mr._, describes (in 1690) a steam cylinder and a mode of
propelling ships by “Rames volatiles” or paddle-wheels, p. 23
—— proposes to use gunpowder to create a vacuum under a piston,
_ibid._
—— makes various experiments with a boat constructed on the design
of the Prince Palatine Robert, _ibid._
——, sketch of his life, pp. 23-4, _note_
—— (in 1697) uses Savery’s engine to propel a _steam-boat_ on the
Fulda, p. 25
_Paris, The City of_, took H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught to America in
six days, twenty-one hours, the quickest passage ever known, p.
253, _note_ 1
_Passenger ships_, impossible to compare accurately the cost of
different, p. 284
_Pharaoh Necho_, the works of, as recorded by Herodotus, p. 365,
_note_
_Philadelphian Company_ establish a new line from Philadelphia to
Liverpool, managed by Americans only, pp. 284-5
—— have much to contend against, owing to the heavy duties imposed
by their own Government, p. 285
_Peacock, Mr._, thinks that steam to India will not pay, p. 352,
_note_
_Pekin, City of, The_, and _City of Canton_, the finest vessels that
have ever carried American flags, p. 155, _note_
_Pelican, H.M.S. The_, one of Messrs. Perkins’s “economical” engines
to be fitted in, p. 571
_Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company_, early history of,
pp. 376-7
—— propose a weekly mail from Falmouth to Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon,
&c., pp. 382-3
——, contract by Government with, Aug. 1837, to carry the mails, p.
383
——, _Oriental_ and _Great Liverpool_, the first ships of, p. 387
——, Parliamentary Committee of 1851, report strongly in favour of,
p. 389
—— obtain (instead of the Eastern Steam Navigation Company) the
tenders for mails to India, Hong Kong, and Sydney, pp. 391-2
——, various details of their contract of Jan. 1853 for carrying
mails to Singapore and Sydney during alternate months, pp. 393-5
——, eleven of their ships engaged during the Crimean War in the
transport service, p. 395, _note_
——, arrangements made in 1857, under contract of 1854, for
extending its services between Bombay, Aden, and Suez, pp.
397-8, _note_
—— contract in Feb. 1859 for transport of the mails to Australia,
p. 402
——, present enormous range of the services of, pp. 404-6
——, more than one-third of its shareholders are ladies, p. 404
——, details of the rates per mile paid to, pp. 406-8, _notes_
——, present condition (1874) and fleet of. pp. 404-10
—— employ 170 sailing-vessels to carry coal to their different
stations, p. 409
—— keep 90,000 tons of coal in stock at their different stations,
p. 409, _note_
——, for some time, have had a practical monopoly of the trade of
the Eastern seas, p. 454
——, list of all vessels belonging to (June 1875), Append. p. 369
_Perfection_ not yet attained by English or any other ships, although
there has been great improvement, p. 584
_Perkins, Jacob_, asserts that Fulton, having witnessed Symington’s
experiments, ordered an engine of Boulton and Watt for the
United States, p. 51
_Perkins, Messrs._, propose a new ship of extraordinary power, which
they call “the economical engine,” pp. 571-2 and _notes_
_Persia, The_, the first iron ship of the Cunard Line—launch of,
1855, and details, p. 226 and _note_
——, four times in 1856, runs from New York and Liverpool in less
than nine days and a half, p. 227
_Peruvian, The_, one of the Allan Line, crosses the Atlantic and back
from N. of Ireland, with cargo, in twenty-four days and fifteen
hours, pp. 263-4
_Pickard, James_, invents (Aug. 1786) the connecting rod and crank
and flywheel, so as to produce rotary motion, p. 30
_Pierson, J. P._, the inventor of the “double vacuum condenser,” p.
208
_Plombière, Guyon de la_, suggests a steam-engine for the propelling
of a boat, p. 41
_Preble, Commander_, states that Stevens invented, in 1804, the twin
screw-steamer, p. 46, _note_
_President, The, and The Pacific_, have left no record of their fate,
probably owing to their having foundered in deep water, p. 225,
_note_
_Princeton, The_, Captain Ericsson’s experiments in, quite
successful, p. 113
_Q. E. D._, first screw-collier, p. 546
_Queen of the East, The_, proposed in 1838 to run between England and
Calcutta, p. 386, _note_
_Queen Margaret, The_, runs (Sept. 1875) from London to Calcutta in
_thirty days_, including forty hours’ detention in the Suez
Canal, p. 438, _note_
_Ramelli, A._, gives a design for a boat with a wheel on each side
(1588), p. 15
_Ramsay, D._, patents an invention (1630) for making boats go against
the tide, _ibid._
_Randall, Mr._, projects the next largest steamer to the _Great
Eastern_ (1860), p. 157
——, detailed account of, and beauty of her model, pp. 157-61
——, brief sketch of what he has accomplished since 1833, and of the
various ships he built or commanded, pp. 161-2, _note_
_Rathbone and Company, Messrs._, details of ships belonging to, and
of their passages to India, pp. 438-9
_Rattler, The_, built, specially, for the purpose of testing the
screw-propeller, p. 110, and _note_
——, river trials of (1843-5) showed that, in smooth water, the
screw was equal to the paddle-wheels, pp. 110-11
——, but, not so successfully as expected, in a heavy sea in 1845,
between Portsmouth and Pembroke, p. 111
—— tows the _Erebus_ and _Terror_, in 1845, entirely to the
satisfaction of Sir John Franklin, p. 112
_Red Sea_, early popular notion that the waters were 25 to 30 feet
above the Mediterranean, p. 363
_Register at Lloyd’s_, wooden ships, never allowed by, to exceed
twelve years as A 1, though renewable, p. 96, _note_ 2
_Rennie, Mr._, services of, in advocating the employment of steam in
the navy, p. 78, _note_
_Rivault, D._, publishes (1605, 1668) “Les Elémens de L’Artillerie,”
and describes the power of steam in bursting a strong
bombshell, p. 16
_Robertson, W. J._, sets up, at the Patent Office, in 1862, the
engine of the _Comet_ he had placed in her, 50 years before, in
1812, p. 67, _note_
_Royal William, The_, crosses from Quebec to Gravesend in 1833, p. 170
——, the first steamer from Liverpool July 1838, pp. 176-7, and
_note_
_Rudder_, no real evidence as to when it was invented, pp. 511-12,
_note_
_Russell, Scott, Mr._, conversation between him and a naval
architect, on the subject of iron for shipbuilding, p. 84,
_note_
——, letter from, to the ‘Times,’ stating his share in the
construction of the _Great Eastern_, pp. 492-3, _note_
_Russia, The_, first Cunard _screw_-steamer (1862), p. 231
_Said, Port_, enormous preparatory works required for, and harbour of
132 acres, excavated, p. 370
_Salt-water_, chemical action of, on _iron alone_, less than on wood,
p. 92
_Sampans_, technical name of the small commercial craft on the
Chinese rivers, pp. 480-1, _note_
_Sauvage, F._ (one of the claimants, in 1832, to the invention of the
screw), p. 103, _note_
_Savannah, The_, the first American steam-vessel, which crossed the
Atlantic to Liverpool in 1819, p. 168
——, rigged as a sailing-ship with auxiliary steam-power and
removable paddles, p. 168, _note_ 1
_Savery, T._, proposes (in 1696) giving motion to mill-work by the
agency of fire, p. 24
——, sketch of the life of, p. 25, _note_
_Schiller, The_, evidence of chief mate, showing that the lead had
not once been cast during three days of fog, (May 1875), p.
241, _note_
_Scotia, The_, magnificent Cunard steamer (1862), details of, p. 228
and _note_
_Scotland, The_, belonging to Mr. W. S. Lindsay, the first foreign
vessel (in June 1860) to load a cargo at Shanghai for Hankow,
p. 467
_Screw-propeller_, not possible to decide the absolute inventor of,
p. 116
——, Messrs. Woodcroft, Ericsson and Smith, practically, the chief
authors of, pp. 117-8
_Sea, dangers of_, might be reduced by two-thirds with exercise of
sufficient foresight, &c., p. 245
_Seamen, great additional care of_, as shown especially in the coal
trade, pp. 549-50
_Seraffino Serrati_ plans a steam-boat on the Avon, in 1796, p. 41
_Shanghai Chamber of Commerce_, interesting reports from the
delegates of, with reference to the trade of the Upper
Yang-tse, p. 476, _note_
_Shannon Steam Packet Company_, the first to employ iron steamers in
river navigation in 1824, p. 86
_Shipbuilders_ (_American_) resolve to build the cheapest and most
remunerative merchant vessel, _ibid._
—— make many great improvements, especially in the mechanical
details of their ships, p. 167
_Shipbuilders_ (_English_) slow, at first, to improve their ships,
_ibid._
_Ship-building yards, private_, great importance of, in cases of
sudden emergency, p. 71
_Shipowners of America_ not allowed to compete on equal terms with
the vessels of any foreign country, p. 165
_Shipowners_ (_English_) having plenty of fields for employing their
ships, cling to protection, _ibid._
—— do not care to compete with Americans on equal terms, but with
inferior ships, _ibid._
_Shipowners of all countries_ ought to be compelled, under heavy
penalties, to send seaworthy ships to sea, p. 247, _note_
_Shorter, E._, in 1800, invents “a perpetual sculling machine,” which
was tried in H. M. S. _Dragon_ and _Superb_, p. 102
_Sirius, The_, leaves London for New York, on the suggestion of Mr.
MacGregor Laird, April 4, 1838, pp. 170-1, and _note_
_Smith, G., Esq._, letter from, giving an account of the rise and
progress of his firm, pp. 439-43
_Smith, T. S._, takes out a patent (May 1836) for a “sort of screw or
worm,” pp. 106-7
_Smith, Messrs._, send twenty-four sailing ships to Calcutta in 1871,
and sixteen to Bombay, p. 442, _note_
_“Snags” and “Sawyers,”_ peculiar character of, and danger arising
from, p. 134
“_Soma_,” technical name given to the Chinese tea-boats, p. 475, and
_note_
_Speed, high_, greatly increased danger from the desire to attain,
pp. 211-13
——, enormous cost of, shown in statement that to save a day or day
and a-half, cost Collins’ Company a million of dollars, p. 216
——, _relative_, of Cunard, Liverpool and New York, and P. and O.
Lines, pp. 403-4, _note_
_Stanhope, Lord_, is said to have built a small steamer, in 1790,
with a high pressure engine, p. 38, _note_
_Steam_, the ancients certainly were acquainted with the power of, p.
4
—— first applied for towing purposes on the Mersey, October 1816,
p. 77
—— in early use, between Norwich and Yarmouth in 1813; and London
and Margate in 1815, p. 73
——, on the Thames, long and bitterly opposed by the watermen, p. 74
_Steam-boat_, the first from the Clyde to Liverpool, on June 28,
1815, p. 77
——, the _Etna_, the first built as a special ferry-boat at
Liverpool in April 1816, pp. 77-8
——, the _Comet_, the first built by the Admiralty in 1819, p. 78
_Steam-engines_, general principles of all, p. 28, _note_
——, first application of, for pumping water out of mines, p. 575,
_note_
_Steamers_, owned, respectively, by the United States and Canada,
amounted in January 1875 to 258,980 tons, pp. 124-5, _note_
_Steamers of the Cunard, Inman, and National Companies_ adopt the
“Lane route,” i.e. to the south of the Newfoundland Banks, p.
286, _note_
——, by the Cape to India and Australia, cannot profitably compete
with Messrs. Green’s sailing-vessels, p. 427
_Steamers_ (_Mail_), not employed, since 1856, east of the Cape,
except perhaps to Natal and Mauritius, p. 429
_Steam-power_, ingenious plans for increasing, p. 577
_Steam-Ship Propeller Company_, incorporated by Act of Parliament,
July 29, 1839, p. 107
_Steam-ship building_, carried out by private enterprise for forty
years before the Admiralty recognised the value of steam-ships,
p. 72
_Steers, Mr._, the builder of the yacht _America_ and superintendent,
also, of the construction of the _Arctic_, p. 204
_Stephenson, Robert_, suggests the idea of covering the bottom of an
iron ship with sulphate of copper, p. 93, _note_
—— completes, in 1870, the railway from Alexander to Cairo, p. 363
_Stephenson, R. MacDonald, Sir_, publishes in _Calcutta Review_ his
plans for railway communication with India, p. 338, _note_
_Stevens, J. C._, devotes much time and money to the improvement of
steam navigation in America, p. 46
——, the first (in 1804) to place on the sea a steam-boat propelled
by a screw, p. 102
_Stevens, R. L. S._, ingenuity of his improvements, and the shape and
speed of steam-boats, pp. 142-3
_St. Lawrence, River_, the first steam-boat launched on, in 1809,
named the _Accommodation_, p. 58, and _note_
_Stockton, Capt._, orders two boats to be built (on his own account)
on Capt. Ericsson’s principle, p. 112
——, unlike the Lords of the Admiralty, at once takes up the cause
of Capt. Ericsson, p. 113
——, but, not able for two years, to persuade the United States of
the value of Capt. Ericsson’s plans, _ibid._
_Stockton, Robert F., Brig, The_, sails from England to America,
April 1839, and under the command of Captain Cram, p. 114
——, subsequently plies on the Delaware, under the name of _New
Jersey_, till 1840, p. 115
_Stuart, C. B._, valuable work by, entitled “On Naval and Mail
Steamers,” New York, 1853, p. 205, _note_
_Suavia, The_, of the Hamburg American Line, details of, p. 290,
_notes_
_Subsidies_, relative value of those paid to the P. and O. and
Messageries Maritimes, p. 426, _note_
_Suez Canal_, general details of, unquestionably the greatest
maritime work of any time, pp. 363-74
——, notices of an ancient one, across the Isthmus, p. 366
——, no reason to suppose that the men employed on, were in any
sense “slaves,” p. 370 and _note_
——, great ingenuity of the works, provided for, by M. de Lesseps,
p. 372
—— partially opened, April 18, 1869, p. 374
—— more completely opened, Sept. 28, 1869, when M. de Lesseps
steamed through it, from sea to sea, _ibid._
—— formally opened by the Empress Eugénie, Nov. 17, 1869, _ibid._
——, the whole cost amounted to about 20,000,000_l._, p. 375
——, more than three-fourths of the whole tonnage now passing
through, belongs to England, and, therefore, cannot be
prejudicial to English interests, pp. 445-6
——, its great value to India; notice in _Friend of India_, _ibid._,
_note_
——, if foreign nations wish to compete through it successfully,
they must adopt English “Free Trade,” p. 446.
——, list of vessels that have annually passed through it between
1870 and 1874, Append. p. 643
_Symington, Mr._ [if he did not suggest the use himself], employed
to carry out Mr. Taylor’s proposal to propel Mr. Miller’s
paddle-wheels by steam, p. 34, _note_
—— employed by Thomas Lord Dundas, in 1801, to place an engine in
the _Charlotte Dundas_, p. 37
——, the important points which his experiment established, p. 39,
_note_
_Szchuen, Province of_, remarkably rich in grain, tobacco, hemp,
sugar, &c., p. 477.
_Talbot, The_, the first mail steamer between Holyhead and Dublin, p.
80
_Tátar Post_, between Baghdad and Constantinople, established by East
India Company, p. 338
_Taylor, James_, a tutor in Mr. Miller’s family, said to have
suggested to him the use of steam for propelling boats, p. 34
_Taylor, Mr. J. R._, said to have lost 12,000_l._ in his efforts to
promote steam communication with India, p. 348, _note_
—— sends the plan of his scheme to Sir John Malcolm, _ibid._
_Teak_, at one time, like iron, objected to, as a material for
shipbuilding, as it will not float, p. 84, _note_
_Telica, The_, first steamer actually employed on the Pacific Coast,
in 1825, p. 315
_Thames, early traffic on_, before the invention of steam-boats,
chiefly by rowing-boats, barges, hogs, &c., p. 75
_Tobin, Sir John_, warmly takes up the cause of Ocean Steam
Navigation, October 1838, p. 177
_Tod and MacGregor, Messrs._, of Glasgow, build the _Princess
Royal_, for line between Glasgow and Liverpool, in 1840, p. 91
_Transatlantic Steam Navigation_, the Committee of House of Commons
report (1846) in favour of Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and MacIver,
p. 185
_Transatlantic Steamers_, average speed of, in 1856, p. 227, _note_.
Table of passages of, between Liverpool and New York 1873-4,
Append. p. 617
_Trevethick, R., and Mr. Dickenson_, propose, in 1809 and 1815, to
build ships of iron, but do not carry out their patent, p. 85
_Trevethick, R._, in 1815, patents a worm or screw, p. 102
_Underwriters, Liverpool_, remarks by, on the superior durability of
iron ships, p. 94, _note_
_United Kingdom, The_, steamer built by Mr. Steele of Greenock, 1826,
p. 81
_Unseaworthy Ships_, report of the Royal Commission on, 1873-4, p.
246, _note_
_Valturius_, A.D. 1472, gives several representations of
paddle-wheels, p. 10
——, his work, A.D. 1472 (published at Verona), the first in Latin,
containing woodcuts, _ibid._
_Van der Capellen, The_, the first actual steamer built in India,
about 1811, p. 448, _note_
_Verne, M. Jules_, considers the _Great Eastern_ a failure, both in
speed and comfort, p. 540, _note_
_Vessels, very large_, not so safe as smaller ones, pp. 537-8
_Vetch, Capt., R.N._, proposes, thirty years before M. de Lesseps, a
ship canal from Tineh, p. 367
_Victoria, The_, of the Anchor Line, details of, p. 290, _note_
——, Dover and Calais steam-boat, details of, p. 556, _note_
_Vincent, Mr._, intrepidity of, and dreadful story by, of the fate of
the _Amazon_, pp. 309-10
_Vivian and Co., Messrs._, the first to establish a line of
Mediterranean steamers from Liverpool in 1840, p. 419
_Waghorn, Lieut._, one of the most energetic early supporters of
steam communication with India, p. 346
——, sketch of his life, _ibid._, _note_
—— commissioned by Lord Ellenborough and Mr. Loch, leaves London
Oct. 28, 1829, and reaches Bombay, March 21, 1830, p. 347
——, rapid journey across Europe, and boat voyage for 628 miles on
Red Sea, 1829-30, _ibid._
——, as the paid agent of the Calcutta Company, at first, naturally,
supports the route of the Cape, p. 348
——, evidence of, before Committee of House of Commons, 1837, p.
361, _note_
——, the first to organize, systematically, the conveyance of the
Mails across the Isthmus of Suez, p. 361
_Walk-in-the-Water, The_, trades on Lake Erie in 1819, with cargoes
of furs, p. 132
_Wasborough, M._, patents (March 16, 1779) a plan for converting
rectilinear into circular motion, p. 29, and _note_, _ibid._ p.
101
_Washington, The_, steamship from New York to Bremen, detailed
comparison of, with the _Britannia_, pp. 195-6, _note_
_Watt, James_, by patents (of January 5th, 1769), first shows how the
steam-engine can be employed effectively for marine propulsion,
p. 28
—— invents the “double impulse” or double-acting engine, _ibid._
—— renders his engine more effective by using a detached
condenser, p. 29
—— invents (1781) the form of engine known as the “Sun and
Planet,” now preserved at South Kensington, p. 30
——, in 1770, speaks of using a screw-propeller to be turned by an
engine, p. 101
_Watt, James, Jun._, in 1817, takes the steamer _Caledonia_ up the
Rhine as far as Coblentz, p. 73, _note_
_Watt, James, The_, constructed to take the place of the Leith
smacks, p. 80
_Waves, deep sea_, approximative measurement of the height of, p.
535, _note_
_Wear River_, shipbuilding on, 1874-5, Append. p. 595.
_Welland Canal_, the bond between the other lakes and Ontario; its
great value thereby, p. 124 and _note_
_West India Royal Mail Steam Packet Company_ inaugurated, 1841, p. 292
——, their vessels to carry guns, and to be like H.M.’s war
steamers, p. 293
——, subsidy granted to, at the rate of 240,000_l._ per annum, p. 294
——, error of, in selecting, at first, as their commanders, naval
men, with no special knowledge of steam, &c., _ibid._
——, the public complain, not unnaturally, of the heavy subsidies
granted to, pp. 295-6
——, improved state of, in 1851, arising, chiefly, from improved
management, pp. 298-9
——, contract with, in 1857, requires acceleration of the mails
between England and Rio Janeiro, pp. 299-300
——, conditions of the services of, in 1864, details, &c., p. 301,
_note_
——, contract for, renewed, 1874, on a greatly reduced subsidy, p.
301
——, the _Forth_, steamship, details, pp. 302-3
——, no fewer than six of their vessels lost in their first eight
years as a Company, p. 303
——, return of vessels added to, 1851 to 1860, p. 311, _note_
——, details of present services of, pp. 312-13, _note_
—— arrange with Government, Feb. 1858, to perform the services of
the European and Australian Company, p. 401
——, particulars of, Jan. 1875, Append. p. 634.
_West India and Pacific Company_ now conveys the British mails to
Honduras and Mexico, p. 322
—— organized, in 1863, by union of several smaller companies,
_ibid._
_Wheelwright, Mr._, the first, in 1846, to point out the best eastern
and western route for Transatlantic steamers, p. 245, _note_
——, as United States Consul of Guayaquil, sees the advantages of
steam communication along the coasts of the Pacific, p. 316
——, sketch of his life and history, p. 316, _note_
—— obtains a charter with some peculiar conditions, Feb. 1840, for
the Pacific Steam Navigation Company, p. 317
_White Star Line_, conducted by Messrs. Ismay, Imrie, and Co., adopt,
in 1870, the name of this famous line of sailing packets, p. 275
——, originally, a line of the fast-sailing American clipper ships,
to Australia, now continued in steamships by Messrs. Ismay &
Co., p. 275, _note_
——, very strict regulations that no risks are to be run, safety of
life and property being always the first consideration, p. 276,
_note_
——, logs of their ships, the _Baltic_ and _Adriatic_, p. 277, _note_
—— now run in connection with the Erie Railway from New York,
booking through to San Francisco, p. 283
——, Letter of Instructions, Append. p. 613
——, passage of steamships of, _ibid._ p. 614
_Wilkinson, Sir Gardner_, supports the view that Mr. Waghorn, more
than any one else, made the Oriental route to Suez a success,
p. 361
_Willcox, Mr. B. McGhee_, sketch of his early life, p. 378, _note_
—— practically the starter of the Company since known as the
Peninsular and Oriental, pp. 378-9
—— greatly improves the Peninsular Mail Service, p. 382
_Wilson, T., of Faskine_, builds the Vulcan, the first iron vessel in
Scotland, which is still (1875) in use, p. 86
_Wilson, Robert_, brings, in 1827, under the notice of the Admiralty
a screw “perfect in all its details,” pp. 103-4
_Wilson, Capt._, note of the Journey of Hon. Mr. Elphinstone to
England by Red Sea and Suez, in 1827, p. 345, _note_
——, as Captain of the _Hugh Lindsay_, did much to “educate” the
Government of England and India, with regard to steam to India,
p. 352, _note_ 2
_Wind, the effect of_, as producing long rollers at the Cape and
elsewhere, p. 535
_Winter, T. B., Mr._, designs a very effective steam-vessel for the
Indus, pp. 453-4
_Wood_, much of the, for H.M. Ships, obtained by the vote of 1861,
left to rot in the Government Dockyards, p. 98, _note_
_Woodcroft, Mr. Bennet_, in 1832, patents “an increasing
screw-propeller” of special value, p. 103, _note_
——, “value of his varying pitch” propeller, patented Feb. 1849, p.
117
——, his invention accepted by the Admiralty, in the case of the
Royal Yacht _Fairy_, and H.M. Ship _Dwarf_, _ibid._
_Wooden and iron ships_, relative strength and weight of, Append. p.
599.
_Worcester, Marquess of_, no reasonable doubt that he was the first
to make a steam-engine, p. 18
——, but might not have succeeded if he had applied it to drive a
boat, _ibid._
“_World’s Highway, The_,” pamphlet on railway communication with
India, by Sir D. MacDonald Stephenson, p. 338, _note_
_Yang-tse-Kiang_, notice of the course of, for 3000 miles from E.
Tibet, to Shanghai, pp. 465-7
—— opened to Western Trade Feb. 1860, by Treaty, p. 467
——, navigation on, for boats drawing 8 ft., to Ichang, 363 miles
above Hankow, p. 480
END OF VOL. IV.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS
Transcriber’s Note:
Inconsistent hyphenation and spelling in the original document have
been preserved. Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
Accents and other diacritics are inconsistently used.
Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.
The text contains an m with a tilde. It is represented in this
text as co[~m]on.
This volume contains references to the previous three volumes
of this work.
They can be found at:
Volume 1: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/73757
Volume 2: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/73949
Volume 3: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/74102
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORY OF MERCHANT SHIPPING AND ANCIENT COMMERCE, VOLUME 4 (OF 4) ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
