* ,” & -
r
*-**** - - ---~~~~
º ºw-
º -
-
º ºxº
5-ºxº-...sºrºrº.

SNº.
t
E-3 ~
c a %,…,
Çhe queºus
C/Tº # 3.
finish am

*.
4.5
HF
A 3
3.
4, 77
it
JĮJĮĮĶĶĹĹĻĻĽĮRȚIȚImūūTTTTTTTTTTTTū
№sae∞∞
№№vae，∞ √≠ ≤ ≥ ≡~~~~ ~~~~！)§§¿№.
ĒĒĒĒĒĒĒĒĻ
Eſ
of:
º,...;
EŒŒ\ÑŅĢĒiſſºſ}};"
№iſ@ÑÑ&§#|#|
\
. &.\!
§§
S`-∞
J.J. f.º.º. &2 ºz º.º.A., E. J.
IIITITITIII
ºf .J. J.
S
***）
·>±
∞B
E9）5
EĶ！！，
№ſ | №ſ）
F） •ſº:
E：º：
Ē，
№
sº
|
||||||I||
Hull
H]
| º=º （…）
*ģājſp?
§<!！！！ſā№
ĒáÉ|�Miſſiliſſil[lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIĘ
ĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪíííííííííìĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪſ
sº tº ſº tº dº ſº gº º ſº sº tº sº ºm sº s ºs º sº º sº º ºs ºs sº & º sº sº ºn s sº sº as as is sº sº ºs º ºr sº as as sº as * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ſiſſiſ
milliºnullilultimºmumniſtrinºminimumilumni
iſi
Fº


























C H A R. M. A. N.
FRom # 38 i.
º-
ELLIOTT AND FRY, BAKER STREET,
LONDON,


►=，s.
■■■■∞
-}º ：š，· →
№, （^）; f;| 1-| 9– （ ）
Å! |'&�|-~ ·… - ?
~… 3·
·，-© :
. . . . '•s）.v ae ae




tºº. resºter af - S. ºffins
3mmals of ¥loyd's 3rgister
A SKETCH
OF THE
ORIGIN, CONSTITUTION, AND PROGRESS
OF
LLOYD'S REGISTER
OF
BRITISH & FOREIGN SHIPPING
LONDON.
MDCCCLXXXIV.
a * e
tº • : .
- …
- *_-- i.º.º. *— Y.
- - I.
- -> *
-

*** -
•**«* • • • • • •
--~~~~ ~~~~ -…---*
* * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~*~~ -…--
- ~ ~ ~~--~
•••
wyMAN AND SONs, PRINTERs,
GREAT QUEEN STREET, LINcoLN's-INN FIELDs,
W. C.
LONDON
^
�^,
**~ ~*~~~~ --， -， -， --★ → ----~~~~----------------º-º
�
€ £ © ®» e
� � � e œ •
º • •
�
� � � � � „


s
THE CHAIRMAN AND COMMITTEE
OF -
# Impb's 33rgſgter of 33ritigi) & foreign śbipping,
UPON THIS,
THE FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF THE Foundation
OF THE SOCIETY,
THINK THE occasion A FITTING ONE TO PRESENT TO EACH
SUBSCRIBER, THIS SHORT outline OF THE ORIGIN AND
progress OF THE INSTITUTION,+IN THE HOPE
THAT ITS PERUSAL MAY PROVE OF INTEREST "
TO ALL CONNECTED WITH SHIPPING.
2 WHITE LION COURT
CoRNHILL, I.ONDON,
3oth October, 1884.
§N (sºzººsºº &
-> *w- Sº §:23 § @º § º §º
Sº % 2aºğ tº:
§§ §§§ º, Afºº
- º
Sºº'ſ º §§§
...tºSºft WKºſºvº
Sºil 7\lſº
TABLE OF CO N T E N T S.
CHAPTER I.
Early History of Classification.—Marine Insurance.—Lloyd's
Coffee-house.—Ships' Lists.-Oldest Shipping Registers.-
Books dated 1764–65–66, 1768–69, and 1775–76
CHAPTER II.
Constitution and Working of Underwriters' Register or Green
Book.--Surveyors.-Members of Committee.—Symbols
and Rules of Classification.—Records in Register Book ...
CHAPTER III.
Shipowners' Register or Red. Book.-Explanations of their
Plan.—Criticisms on Green Book.-Symbols of Classifi-
cation in Red Book
CHAPTER IV.
Subscribers to the two Books,—Symbols of Classification in
Green Book re-altered.—Amount of Subscription.—Num-
ber of Vessels in the two Books,—Notation of Chain
Cables.—Records of Early Steamers.-Early Steam Navi-
gation.—Curious Records.—Shipbuilding Practices
y
CHAPTER V.
Rival Registers.--Expressions of Dissatisfaction.—Mr. John
Marshall,—His advocacy of Radical Changes in Systems
of Classing.—Arguments adduced.—Inquiry demanded.—
Committee of Inquiry appointed ... • * G tº º tº tº º s
w$o
*-- - -------. -- ** ** * **** ***** *-* ~ *ars...wesºs ºr -º- ºr cº-º-º-º--- ------ - - - --~~~~~~
º
Lº:
&
sº
*_x, a yº- a & 3"
S ; : I. º.º.º.
Gº-R iſ lº
º
tº J/º
-w § f * $º
Yºº -
º Bºx -
IO
17
23

*g

%
-
vi Annals of Zloyd's Aegisſez-.
CHAPTER VI.
Committee of Inquiry. — Their Report. — Suggestions and
Financial Plans for Establishment of National Registry.—
Collapse of the Movement ...
CHAPTER VII.
Decay of two Registers.--Special Committee of Lloyd's, Pro-
posed Fusion of the two Books.-Outline of proposed
Constitution. — Conference. — Provisional Committee
formed.—Proposed Rules and Regulations.—Financial
Plans.—First Edition of “Lloyd's Register of British and
Foreign Shipping ” produced. — Permanent Committee
appointed
CHAPTER VIII.
Composition of Permanent Committee.—Number and size of
Ships in Mercantile Marine in 1834.—Early Rules for
Shipbuilding.—Restoration of Vessels to the A Character.
—Early Machinery Surveys.-Staff of Surveyors in 1834.
— Shipwright and Nautical Surveyors. — Continuation
Surveys—Tables for Wood Materials
CHAPTER IX.
Society now fully established. — Classification upon a proper
Basis.-Application from Outports for more enlarged
Representation.—Especially from Liverpool.—Establish-
ment of a Liverpool Register.—Proposed Amalgamation
with Lloyd's Register.—Amalgamation effected
CHAPTER X.
Excellence of New Rules for Construction and Classification of
Ships.-Commercial Depression.—Financial Condition of
Society.—Report of Select Committee of House of Com-
mons—Growth of the Society.—Report of General Ship-
owners’ Society.—Public Opinion regarding the Register.
—Number of Vessels Classed per Annum
3
5
43
53
64
69
*g
Table of Contents. vii
CHAPTER XI.
Iron Ships.—Surveyors' Reports on Iron Shipbuilding—Iron
Rules of 1854.—Rules for Survey of Iron Ships.-Mr.
Ritchie on the Society's Operations.—Survey of Iron
Steamers 75
CHAPTER XII.
Corrosion of Iron Ships.-Experiments in sheathing them.—
Composite Ships.-Preparation of Rules for building them 83
CHAPTER XIII.
Applications from the Provinces in 1863 for share in Manage.
ment.—Liverpool Proposals. – Extension of the Com-
mittee.—Cutport Members added.—Representation of
Shipbuilders not allowed.—Underwriters' Registry for Iron
Vessels.-Proposals for Amalgamation discussed.—Finally
rejected.—Liverpool Committee of Lloyd's Register.—
Enlarged Powers
CHAPTER XIV.
Revision of Rules for Iron Ships in 1863–Reports of Ship-
builders and Surveying Staff—Objections to Old System of
classifying Iron Ships.—New Symbols adopted.—Periodical
Surveys for Iron Ships.-Amendments in Tables of Scant-
lings.-Revision of Iron Rules in 1870.-Mr. Waymouth's
Proposals.-Dimensions adopted in lieu of Tonnage as a
basis for Scantlings.--New Symbols
CHAPTER XV.
Alteration in Rules for Wood Ships in 1857–Special Survey
Mark ºf instituted.—Classes for Foreign-built Ships.-
Diagonal Doubling.—Alteration in Rules for Wood Ships
in 1870.-Salting.—Mixed Material Rule.—Improved
Classes to Wood Materials.-Still further improved in
1878–Defective Equipment
94
. I QQ

38
viii Ammals of Z/oyd's Register.
CHAPTER XVI.
Surveyors abroad.—North American Timber and Shipbuilding.
—Appointment of Surveyors for Canada; also to Holland
and Belgium, &c.—Surveyors appointed for Shanghai;
also ports in Italy and Austria.-Mr. Waymouth's visit to
Genoa.-Present number of Foreign Surveyors ...
CHAPTER XVII.
Equipment Rules in 1834.—Supplemented in 1846.—Testing
of Chains.—Rules of 1853.−Table 22 issued.—Equip-
ment Rules of 1862.-Poplar Proving House: its establish-
ment and close.—More stringent Requirements in 1863.—
Chain and Anchors Act of 1871.-Proving Houses now
under Control of the Society
CHAPTER XVIII.
Rules for Survey of Machinery in 1834.—Resolutions of the
Committee in 1873.−Engineer Surveyors appointed.—
Dangerous arrangements of Pipes and Sea-cocks.--Sur-
veyors’ Reports.-Machinery Rules.—Extent of Machinery
Surveys tº º q it is tº *
CHAPTER XIX.
Manufacture of Steel in 1860—Steel Shipbuilding in 1862,
1864, and 1866.—Steel tests in 1867.-Bessemer and
Siemens-Martin Processes.—Steel “resurrection” in 1877.
—Investigations by Society’s Officers.—Its use for Ships
and Boilers.—Tonnage of Steel Shipping.—Steel Castings.
—Inspection of Forgings ... * @ tº tº gº tº e e º 'º
CHAPTER XX.
Royal School of Naval Architecture.—Royal Naval College.—
Private Students.--Grant for Scholarship.–Conditions of
Competition ...
--~~~~...~~~...~…~ *-----------> -- ~~~~ * ~~~~~~~~< ********** *** ** ~~~~~~. ---> --> --- ~~~ * ~ *-**----~~~~
. IOS
. Io9
. I I 8
... I26
.*{-
º§§§
ſº tJ
§:
+--

*:
r
T ſº **)
& ) .**
*N
Zú
{
7able of Contents.
ix
CHAPTER XXI.
Classification of Yachts undertaken.—Yacht Register insti-
tuted.—Its Growth.-Special Classes for Fishing Vessels
CHAPTER XXII.
Draught of Water in Early Register Books.—Awning-deck
Vessels.—Their Load-line.—Committee's decision chal-
lenged.—-Judgment of Court of Law thereon.—Spar-deck
Vessels.-Board of Trade detention of Overladen Vessels.-
Action of Committee in regard to Load-line Question.—
Tables of Freeboard
CHAPTER XXIII.
Representation of Outports on Committee.—Proposed exten-
sion.—Sub-Committee appointed.—Decision of General
Committee.—Present Constitution of Committee...
CHAPTER XXIV.
Pensions to Society's Officers.-Insurance Scheme.—Mr. Way-
mouth's suggestions on the subject.—Pension Scheme
adopted by the Committee ...
-*-* *
ÇHAPTER XXV.
The present Register Book.-Comparison with that of 1834.—
Recent Additions.—Number of Subscribers now; also in
1834.—Comparative Tonnages at the two dates.—The
Posting of Alterations in the Book
CHAPTER XXVI.
Personal.—Mr. Thomas Chapman.—Mr. W. H. Tindall.—
List of Chairmen, Deputy-Chairmen, and Chairmen of
/,
I 28
. I 30
. I37
. I 4 O
. I 42
F.
ºx
#3
3.
:
X Ammals of Zloyd's Aegister.
Sub-Committees of Classification, from 1834 to 1884.—
Early Members of Committee.—Early Officers.-Principal
Officers to present time.—Confidence of Government in
Society’s Officials.—Royal Commissions, &c., on which
Society has been represented
CHAPTER XXVII.
Conclusion • a º 2 * > © tº º * * * * * 4 tº e • * *
Committee of Management
List of Surveyors...
Colonial and Foreign Surveyors ...
. I45
I 55
. I 59
. 162
. I64

• ? - º,
*... . . * * *
| rºyº sy
S. A 4 -- "
* …,N. Tº
2 (. .';
~ *
ſº
3. a-
gº ºff.
*
ammals of Lloyd's largistry.
CHAPTER I.
3 sº sº |HE early history of the
7, ºx2% \|| Classification of Ships is
\ àN veiled in much obscurity.
§§§ PSS! The first recorded attempt
3% º) to establish anything like
an organised Registry dates
back no farther than last
century, although it admits
of little doubt that the classification of merchant
shipping in a more or less imperfect form existed
long before—if, indeed, it was not contemporaneous
with the business of Marine Insurance.
Of the remote beginning of Marine Insurance,
with which the subject of classification is so closely
allied, little is known. All the best authorities, how-
ever, consider that, in some form or other, it was
coéval with maritime commerce itself, which goes
back to antiquity. .
The Phoenicians, the great trading nation of old,
B








#3. 3.
2 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
the Greeks, and other ancient peoples, were all, we
are told, in the habit of guarding themselves against
some of the risks of maritime enterprise by various
systems of insurance, whether by means of loans or
of mutual guarantees. “Nautical Insurance,” as
Gibbon terms it, was so common with the Romans,
that we find it made the subject of a special pro-
vision in one of the Justinian Laws, dated A.D. 533,
which, whilst restricting the legal rate of usury to
6 per cent, made special exemption in favour of
this “perilous adventure.” Coming down to the
i. Middle Ages, we find Marine Insurance carried on
regularly in the Italian Republics, which even went
So far as to regulate by law the depth beyond
which each vessel should not be loaded,—while
operations of this nature were then becoming not
unusual in England.
With the practice of insuring ships and their car-
goes against sea risk there would naturally arise the
necessity of adopting means to ascertain whether
the vessels were seaworthy, and to have the relative
qualities of ships in this respect classified and recorded
in some manner convenient to persons interested in
shipping.
The Merchant would not be willing to employ,
nor the Underwriter to insure, a ship, without first
\ acquainting himself with her fitness for the carriage
: of merchandise across the seas. To employ an
expert to inspect and report upon every ship when
proposed for insurance would only be practicable
when few ships existed, and when the business
of marine insurance was in its infancy. With the
º º)
s
ty. g;
2: - - - - -. .----. .------------------------------- *---------- **** * * *-* * ~ * ~ **** ~ * **** ---------~~~~~~~. - -- ** -- * * * - - - - - - - - - - 3–4
• - - - - - > --> ax-r---~~~~~~~< - -*—
tº
ºf ...
- re
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 3
growth of the mercantile marine would grow the
demand for a shipping register—not a list of the
ships merely, but a record of their size, and of their
condition and qualities at specified dates. With such
: a list before them, the parties interested in a vessel,-
* the Merchant desirous of securing a safe conveyance
for his goods, or the Underwriter willing to insure
the risks of the voyage, could form some reason-
able idea of her capabilities without going personally
to see her. It is thus evident that a maritime country
like England, whose
Argosies with portly sail,
Like signiors and rich burghers on the flood,
:
have long been known in all parts of the world, 4
must have possessed at an early date some such :
record of the seagoing vessels upon which insurances .
would be effected. - -
It appears, indeed, from the researches of the late
Mr. Frederick Martin, that accounts of this nature,
termed “Ships' Lists,” were kept for their own
guidance by the early frequenters of Lloyd's Coffee-
house. This establishment, the earliest notice of
which occurs in the shape of an advertisement in the
London Gazette of the 18th February, 1668, was.
situated first in Tower Street, and from 1692 on-
ward in Lombard Street, at the corner of Abchurch
Lane. It was owned by a Mr. Edward Lloyd,
under whose able management it became the great
resort for all persons connected with shipping, gra-
dually developing into the head-quarters of maritime
business, and especially of marine insurance.


4. Annals of Zloyd's Register.
That the house was well known is shown by the
fact of its having formed the subject of a paper by
Steele in the Zatler of 17 Io, and of another by
Addison in the Spectator of the following year;
while it is referred to in The Wealthy Shopkeeper,
a poem published some ten years earlier, in the follow-
ing terms —
Now to Lloyd's Coffee-house ; he never fails
To read the letters and attend the sales.
Lloyd seems to have been a man of unusual ability
and enterprise. He it was who started that system
of shipping intelligence which, under the direction of
the great Marine Insurance Corporation of “Lloyd's,”
has grown to be one of the most extensive and most
perfect organisations in the world of commerce. He
established and conducted newspapers at a time when
journalistic enterprise was in its infancy and the
freedom of the press was unknown. His first ven-
ture was a shipping and commercial chronicle called
Zloyd's AVews, which, begun in September, 1696, and
issued three times a week, was brought to a prema-
ture end in the following February, in consequence of
the Government having taken offence at some trifling
allusion to the proceedings of the House of Lords.
This paper, however, was the forerunner of the
world-famous Zloyd's Zist, which was commenced in
1726, and has continued to the present day. It is
thus able to claim the distinction of being, with the
sole exception of the official Zondon Gazette, the oldest
newspaper now in existence.
At Lloyd's Coffee-house, also, if not by Lloyd him-

#3
- * /º: $ ,
| *y y
y
} , --
* ...}}<^
* -
'S $ & C
.” S \\ §
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 5
self, were started those Ships' Lists already alluded to,
containing the germs of 7%e Aegister of Shifting which
sprang into public existence at some period during last
century, and which, besides being the first English
Classification Society of which there is any record,
is the parent of all other Shipping Registries now
in existence. These Lists, which were written by
hand, contained an account of vessels which the
Underwriters who met at Lloyd's Coffee-house were
likely to have offered to them for insurance. They were
doubtless, in the first instance, and probably for some
considerable time, passed from hand to hand, much
in the same way as the written news-letters of the
period. They were most probably first put into
type and circulated for the use of subscribers in
the form of a printed Register about 1726, the year
that witnessed the establishment of Zloyd's Zist. No
early copies of such a work, however, appear to be
now in existence ; any which may have been pre-
served until that time having, it is supposed, been
destroyed in the fire which laid the Royal Exchange
in ashes in 1838.
In 1770, the principal Underwriters and Brokers
who had for so long made the Coffee-house their
meeting-place, found it desirable to form themselves
into an association held together by a system of mem-
bership, and to remove from Lombard Street. Their
first place of meeting was in Pope's Head Alley
whence they went a few years later to the Royal
Exchange, there to set up on a “permanent footing
the great institution which has flourished ever since
on the same spot, growing from generation to gene-
*—
º


- t - rºyº
‘. . ...”
jº
6 Ammals of Zloyd's Register.
ration,” and making the name of Lloyd's a “household
word all over the world.”
The oldest copy of a Register of Shipping in the
library of Lloyd's Register Office,—indeed, as far as
can be ascertained after diligent search, the oldest
copy of any book of the kind at present in existence,—
bears the date of 1764–65–66, for which period it was
evidently current. It is of an oblong form, differing
in this respect from all the succeeding volumes, and
its singed edges bear evidence of having passed
through the flames. -
A specimen page of this book, reproduced on
the opposite side, shows that the information which
it contained was of a very complete nature. It
comprised the former and present names of the
vessels, those of the owners and masters, the ports
between which the vessels traded, the tonnage,
the number of their crew and of the guns they
carried, the port and year of build; together with the
classification printed in the column indicating the year
in which the vessels were respectively surveyed, the
column headed “66,” left blank at publication, being
intended to receive the latest alterations in writing.
Further particulars were added in the column headed
“Guns” in the shape of notations descriptive of the
vessels, such as “Sd,” single deck, “SãB,” single
deck with tier of beams, “3 Decks,” “Dbld,” &c.
The vessels recorded in this volume are for
the most part of very small size; but several are to
be found of four, five, and six hundred tons, and there
are two ships of eight and one of no less than nine
hundred tons.
º
... …..…. r.---- ~~~~~~~~~ *-********* *
*s
tº-3
---- ...? Jº,
4.
t
*z; Form Preſent | Mafter | Pore 7% Port | zºns Guns Fukuire Tearſ Owners . . .
64
&
66
W Walton } ...}|Lond. |Dublin – 50 S dSL 5|Harw. 1753|Wm. Stone
Ward — Alex.Murray--—Bermudas T120 s.S Eb Birojpl. 5; r. 64Ward
p. Cumb. Warren — TVickerman —|Nave -óoos W 3ojRiver R. 46 Vickerman ||
iWareham --J. Thompſon——|Ireland - 50 SD S L 5|Fren. R. 63|J.Thompſon E
Watſº Tradejoſ. Norman Liverp. Waterford- 4a || 6|Britiſh $6|Wallace & CE
Weiſbeloved John Snow Lond. Guernſey — 40 S d 5|French 58|Lugove ||
Weſt" Gally R. Knowler Port — to River 53|J. Baiſley
Alexander Weſtmore!" W. Hore —Jamaica —25o 8 4:20 Plantation;5|Ed. Hore
- wº Wm. Luce —|New York— . | Io!— 6 #. Chetwood
{Wetherel Dd, Marfig.1% ºx-St. Chriſto 200 63|Wm. Pritty
1 Weymouth W ººz. 8 |Enderby out
*Wheel Fort" |Rd. Maneſty Liverp. Barbadoes | 56 i.º.
Whitehaven Philipſon - Colerain -— $40kill & Iriſh
*Wilhelmus Ad. Janſen Lond. Hamburgh $oſwilhelmus E.M. N.N.E.
§ #. * # Burckett |Oſtend — 9o S - iver 50 y: Burchett E.M. E M
William — Th. Harbutył Dieppe — S d B | offscarbor. 37|T. Haggtººze—# ". . .
|William — J. Bófúſéjºropſh, ; — so SD B 6|Barnſtab º _{E. M. (
3.Andrew William -- T. Wheate Lond, Jamaica —26os|6Sdb4|16|Lygpº #8 ºf &C.E. M. Hºy",
william — j. Forge? Hui publin -ºss d "I'jFÉ%fiº joel Foſter'ſ "Föm H
William -– Rt. Anderſon|Lond. Mahone — too ss d b B 8|Plantat. 56Twedale &CE M E M irº,
iWilliam – Chº’ Spurier Pool Waterford 7o 7|French Joy. Spürier EM |- #e
- 53'P. Jolliff E M E M Bº-
William — Abſ.Tavern' {Carolina – 70 (S N g|Briſtol 53'P
William — W. Gilchriſ fiverp. Bally Caſtle go #8 L 4|Britiſh 63 Glaſgow A G |
iWilliam — Pat. Shaw - Colerain – . 3}––54 EM}
--------->
:
i
E
º
3
i
M








3 -
Rachel S
- |Do. S d
Simº Smith!
2.
4
5
6
Raatman Sk
Racehorſesp
Bg
Do. S
S
|Prince of Wales
8|Do.
Nelly . . . .
ºc
8
|BºxMary's s
|Jhn Johnſon
|pw Weſtcot
|JinsCaldwel
- Jºng regory
Kingſton
Radſdale Bg
Do. Bg
Ramſgate Sp
s'Kandolphs ;
S s
S
6
:
o
Oe
L. Beckman
|Daniel Hack!
- J oſ. Miller
Robertking
Moſ. Henry
Leod Brooks 3
wn Innis
John Davis
JamesMajor
|G. Hamilth .
|Ralph & Margi
|S. Sparrow
Rbt Walker
Dd Taothy
Dan. Jackſal
Iſr. Hunter
|Ste. Blundell
Rbt Forſyth
Jeckling
Jn Harbiſon |
|
:S D
| 5.of -
Friefln d
- Chichr
whitby
Yarmth)
London
- |London
Hall
Yarmth
Amer.
|Amer.
|Amer. |6 5
- S'thmth
• Scotlnd
|Wells
|River
London
len.
Stocktn
Liverpl
reb
Maryld
new Sides.
59
60
63
65
63
56
53
6 l
53
54
67
#959 6
3|Tho. Hunteriºz)
.65
66
62.
|
Jn Yeamings|*2
|Benſon & Co.]
1768
Raaſper, Bre". :
Ca pt. prow, -
Lane & Co.
Jms whittel
Cap. prt Owr|
to Scotland
Ral. Forſter |
Mr Nightngl
LancaſtrázCoſ
webſters Col.
Clemens&Co. -
!. - -
Dav. Kenyon;
to Maryland
67.
67 |
Mr. Gardner ºf
Kemps. Cap." If
a 2. '
69
|Lo. Bremenſ
I
*2]
Pool NYork
*|†º
N.Simmonds"I *2]Yar, aga
McHenry.I. 22.É.
ward, wiby-2| .
ward, Wtby ‘...!
G. Radſdale F
Chichr Dü b|
Lon. Carol.
HLiv.N.York
Pool º
- Z/ %
2|Guernſey Lo
Guernſey.o
Glaſgw Du.j
Lo. Madeira
Lon. Virgin!
// % |
Jamai. Lon'ſ
Liv. Afr. &c.
-*
%
º
LynCottnb.
Liv Bºbdoes
Peterſb. L9n 4%
PoolN'fla
º
|Dºb.Maryl.]
%
Jace 2. 7.










Åg
A maſs of Lloyd's Register. 7
The classes assigned to the vessels were desig-
nated by the letters A, E, I, O, and U, which
referred to the vessels' hulls, while the letters G, M,
and B, meaning “good,” “ middling,” and “bad,”—
related to the equipment. Thus the class AG would
denote a first-class ship with a good outfit, while
UB would be the designation given to a ship of the
lowest class, and with a bad outfit. - - -
The title-page and the front pages of this book
are wanting, but it appears from the last page that
the work was “Printed by W. Richardson and S.
Clark, in Fleet Street,” the firm which in all proba-
bility succeeded to the business of Richardson the
novelist, who, it is well known, had a printing esta-
blishment in this street some years before the date of
issue of this volume. Judging from the completeness
of this edition, it is only reasonable to suppose that
the Register must have existed for some considerable
time previously.
The next Register, in point of date, preserved in
the Office at White Lion Court, is dated 1768–69,
columns being left blank for posting by hand par-
ticulars for the years 1770–71. This volume differs
considerably both in regard to form and arrangement
of contents from the book we have just described,
as will be seen upon reference to the specimen page
given on the other side. In addition to the par-
ticulars stated in the earlier Register, this book also
contained references to the vessels' rigs, and afforded
information of the repairs effected, such as “rep,”
“thro' rep.,” “great rep.,” “well rep.,” “good rep.,”
“reb.,” &c.
} }
º
º #:
- **
\
}
-: **
* \º J
•e * $3,…;
& S.
- ~~ c.”;

8 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
The most remarkable difference, however, occurs
in the symbols of classification. Instead of the capital
letters A, E, I, O, and U being employed for desig-
nating the several classes, we now find the small
letters a, b, and & used for that purpose; while the
numerals I, 2, 3, and 4 are now adopted for the
first time in describing the condition of the equipment.
For instance, “*I’’ in this Register denoted a first-
class ship with a first-class equipment, while “b2”
denoted a second-class ship with a second-class equip-
ment. It will thus be seen that between the years
I764 and 1768 a change had been made from “AG"
to “*I " in the direction of the designation “A 1.”
The third earliest Register preserved is dated
I775–76, and in arrangement much resembles the
preceding one; but in this book the Roman capitals are
again employed for the classification of the hull, while
the figures I and 2 remain for that of the equipment.
This volume appears to be the earliest book extant,
containing the now familiar class of A 1. It may be
observed that in this issue the load-draught of water
appears to have been inserted in place of the column
formerly appropriated for the number of men in the
crew, and the alterations which, in the earlier copies
alluded to, had been made with pen and ink, were
now posted weekly in type, as at the present time.
The arrangement of the work in subsequent
editions remained substantially the same, no alteration
being made beyond the occasional introduction of a
few more particulars, such as, whether a vessel had
a deep waist or a low counter, whether she was
American property, what timber was used in her con-
*… 2
..ſ.
Fº
%) *
*- algeneriConway
|Amity's Aſſiſt. S
Bg s
.
987.*
2c.
sºn.
Garrit's
i Gatton
GenrossF
S.
*º *
*
º
Now
f....”
|the Unity Moorya; *
Fºº--- ~ag- h }}ºf -
w **ºs 20% ºzº
4-Fiends' §
*
Sr.
& 7 G
— Thomas
Yeoman S 's 75:
— Wolfe Bg’’
Bg
|Gº-Barret,
| L.Preston
|Sl
74}_ _ _ -
|RLittlvorth
12 Gans
Js Blair
- W. Money
zloedrel Reginalſ, Lamma- - -
. . . . . Dr C.B.Wv}kers |s D
*::::::::
TRennedy||
!-- Murray Bg Rt Gill H
Neptune - -
- Payne S sRt Adams la
Hugh Hill|r
fiend Wm. Knox {
s|Rd Nairne ||
S s sºjasimpſon
6
2OO . -
Nw
154
74
Scarbro'
grPyo, &lrp
w York
Nwcaſtl
illen.65&tr
BoſtonA.
Shorham
trp.
- N .Scotia
N.Eagld
Scarbro'
trºº?, nuw
America
Jrp,
Kg’s Yrd
*b,56, grp.
!
57
74.
71
lsº
7o
63
7 Jū
|sg|Wm. Barker
Tºd-pºt.
. . . . . so . . . . . . . .
3|Gale Sw sh jefferſon
4|Gallam Pºst Wm Smith
!-- . . . . .”P. . . .
Capt.& Co.
, J Blackburn
I wilkinſon
New-York
8. S.rpts 73 &;
ñº. & Co.
Capt. & Co.
6 -- 6& 1& - 4.
Lane & Co.,
Capt.& Col
ithviliºlCapt. &colº
S.rpts, 764 ' ' ' . .
Scotland
diºdnºyolklºrLynch&c.
lo-Süe bic
Lostkitts
CoAntiga
Cs Phila d.
Manilo
###|*.
AntigaDoA,
AmitmLoſe.
Lo Oſlend{A.iii.;
Virgin. Lo! !... I
- Lo. Tranſpºt:
*
Lo. Grnldlf • *
HQ.c. Tranſpt . .
Capt., & Co., 1 Cernſylo E
- | .. Ho & timbre ||
Lo.SKitts A.
C -
|Lo.
YoungBlizabeth;2" ... •
* --- ‘īr, Leeths
Andaluña -
(230
12&P êol
3 D D, |
§§
71
* 75,
Capt.
Deacon & Gil
7), I ºf ſpri -
Hº E.
Jace #. 8.
























:
Ammals of Lloyd's Register. 9
struction, &c. A list of the ships of the Royal Navy
and of the East India Company was also introduced.
The front cover and first page of the three earliest
books are, unfortunately, missing, but these books
contain sufficient internal evidence to show that the
two later volumes form part of the series of The
Aegister of Shipping founded in 1760, of which there
is a very complete collection from 1775 onwards.
This Registry was latterly known as the “Under-
writers' Register,” or the Green Book. As already
stated, the earliest volume (dated 1764–65–66) differs
from the succeeding books, and this fact has given rise
to the supposition that it did not belong to the same
series, but was the issue of a rival Register, which was
still in existence in 1768–69, when the small letters
were in use by the Underwriters' Register, but had
disappeared before 1775, leaving its successor free to
adopt the capital letters in combination with figures
as a designation of class, which has almost ever since
been retained.
sº
* º
§
ſº
*_**
r—

Åg
CHAPTER II.
isiºn the absence of more complete records than
those now in existence, it is difficult to
tº:
tution and practical working of the Registry
established in 1760. It is pretty evident, how-
ever, from the most reliable sources of information
at hand, that the Register was established and sup-
ported exclusively by Underwriters for their sole use
as “Members of the Society,” as the Subscribers were
then termed, and that the subscriptions formed the
principal, if not, indeed, the only, source of revenue.
The work was issued at first biennially, and after
a few years annually. Strict rules were adopted
and rigidly enforced, with the object of confining the
use of the book to Members. Each Subscriber at the
end of the year was obliged to deliver up his old
book before a new one was issued to him, and at one
time, if a book were lost or stolen, the person to
whom it belonged was refused another, although will-
ing to pay for it. The volume for 1779–80 contains
the following quaint prohibition :-



- 2
: A &r-3
§§
f:
Annals of Zloyd's Register. 11
“COPY of the BY-LAWS relating to the reserving the
REGISTER-BOOKS for the Use of the MEMBERS. of the
SOCIETY only. -
“As the interest of the Society is, in the first
Instance, greatly hurt by the Custom of shewing the
- Books, and leaving them at Places where they are but
too common, thereby preventing many Underwriters
from becoming Members, who, though they reap the
Advantages and Benefits in common with them, do not
pay their Quota towards the expenses of the Institution,
thereby, as much as in them lies, reducing the Members
to the Necessity of paying larger Subscriptions.”
“XII. It is therefore agreed to by the Society, and
every Member thereof, and ordered by them to be a
standing Rule and By-law strictly to be observed, that
if any Member shall, after the 6th of February, 1773,
shew or give his Book to any Person whatever, not a
Member of the Society, to read the Description or
Character therein of any Ship, or shall read the same to
him, or tell him the same after looking in his Book, or
lend the said Book to him, such Member shall forfeit the
Sum of 5s. 3d., and, for the second Breach of this By-law
the Sum of Ios. 6d., for the third Breach thereof the
Sum of £ I. Is., and for the fourth (all of them in Manner
aforesaid and within the Year) his Book shall not be
posted any more, except he pays the Sum of Two
Guineas and all former Forfeitures, within Fourteen
Days of the Notice he shall receive thereof from the
Secretary; or pays the Sum of Five Guineas for a new
Book any time thereafter, within the Year, and delivers
up his old one.”
“XIII. In like Manner, if any Member shall leave
his Book at any Place, except where he shall himself
appoint constantly to leave the same locked up ; and
that said Book, by that Means cannot be found for three
Days, or shall be found in the Possession of any Person
not a Member ; such Member shall in like Manner
forfeit as before, for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Breach of
*Tº gº
3. ***

|
4-
t
t
s
-º-º-º:
§
&
I 2 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
the said By-law. But if the Book shall be entirely lost,
the Forfeit shall be settled by the Committee, and the
Member be obliged to pay Five Guineas for a new one.”
The front pages of all the older books are missing,
but the volume for 1777–78, although without the
title-page, contains a “List of the Members of the
Society,” numbering about a hundred and thirty, and
including the most eminent Members of Lloyd's.
It seems, from the following announcement printed
on the inside of the cover of the volume for 1781–82
(but, unfortunately, partially destroyed by the cutting
out of the Subscriber's name), that the Members or
Subscribers met occasionally to discuss matters per-
taining to the Register.
“At a General Meeting of the Society, on the 12th
December last, it was unanimously resolved:
“That Mr. Alexander Stupart be appointed to
Survey any damage Sustained by [Shipping] which is to
be repaired in the River of Thames; and [that] Under-
writers be desired to employ him in that service [which
it is] supposed will be attended with many advantages.”
“That the expence of Mr. Stupart's surveys be paid
[by the] Society, to be determined annually.”
Although this is the first, and, indeed, only refer-
ence in any of the early volumes to Surveyors, there
can be no doubt that such Officers were employed
from a much earlier period, as we find it intimated
in a previous book that all ships not surveyed within
three years preceding the issue of the volume had
been left out. Besides this fact, the occurrence in the
1768–69 Register Book of the records referring to
repairs already alluded to seems to point to a super-
vision being exercised by Officers of the Society
#
| ;
Annals of Zoya's Aegister. I 3
upon ships when under repair, even so far back as
that date. - &
In the issue dated 1797–98 appear for the first
time the “Names of the Gentlemen who compose
the Committee for conducting the Affairs of the
Society,” numbering eleven, and including Mr. John
Julius Angerstein, the Chairman of Lloyd's.
The members of the Committee were:—
John Julius Angerstein, Geo. Curling,
William Bell, Wm. Hamilton,
John Bourke, Robert Hunter,
John Campbell, Robert Pulsford,
Alex. Champion, Edward Vaux,
Jacob Wilkinson.
It is not clear whether the Committee were in exist-
ence from the commencement of the Registry, or were
appointed just prior to this publication of their names;
neither is there anything to show whether the Com-
mittee were elected by, and were directly responsible
to, the Members or Subscribers, or whether vacancies
as they arose were filled up by the Committee from
the body of Members. It seems most probable,
however, that the Committee were formed prior to
the institution of the Registry in 1760, and that
they exercised the power of filling up vacancies in
their own body. The meetings of the Committee
were, it appears, always held at Lloyd's Coffee-
house, but the office of the Registry was situated
first in Sun Court and subsequently in Castle Court,
Birchin Lane.
In the Register Book for 1797–98 a new style
of classification was introduced, which, being scarcely

º
§ 3
_º
º
&
\;
ſ
*g
I 4 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
equitable in its operation, aroused feelings of con-
siderable dissatisfaction, and ultimately led to the
formation of a rival Register. The changes were of
two kinds—for not only the conditions of classifica-
tion, but also the symbols denoting the classes, were
altered. The characters assigned were M for the
first class, G for the second class, L for the third
class, and Z for the lowest class, with the numerals 8
or 4 attached; and the classification appears to have
been so altered as to depend entirely upon the place
of build and the age of the vessel. Thus, while a
vessel built on the Thames would be entitled to
continue on the first class for a term of thirteen
years, another ship of the same description built at
one of the northern ports would be considered eligible
for a period of only eight years; while prize ships
whose ages were not ascertained could receive no
characters whatever—the numeral describing the con-
dition of the equipment and the date of survey being
alone inserted in such cases. As regards the latter class
of vessel, of which there appears, ſrom records of the
period, to have been a considerable number, a note
in the Register Book states that, “When the Ages
of Prize Vessels cannot be ascertained, FP, SP, or
DP is put in the Column for the Age to denote
the Nation from whom they have respectively been
captured. And, when the Surveyors can ascertain
their Age to be less than Three Years, AN is put
into the Column for the Age to denote that the Vessel
is almost new.”
It is interesting to notice the low estimation in
which vessels built in the northern ports were held,
**-ea ...ºr-º-º- . . .<--z, “J. ...< *. -- …: ... … <-- *- :-----> --" ºr -- *** -----º-º-º-º:*-***** **** * *** **** ******** *** * * * **
* *
...~,
**
`-rº us
gº is-
- - - - - - -4
*
*
çº,
&
**
3) ºf:\
§ –-
* -
*34t
Annals of Lloyd's Register. . . I5
not only at this time, but for long after. Twenty-
five years later considerable evidence was taken by
a Joint Committee of Merchants, Shipowners, and
Underwriters upon this subject; and, although it
was generally admitted by the persons examined
that there were no reasons why as good a ship
might not be built in a northern port as in the
Thames, yet it was the general opinion that usually
the London-built ships were worthy of at least a year
longer classification than those of Newcastle, Sunder-
land, &c. Mr. Edward Gibson, a shipbuilder of Hull,
in his evidence before this Committee, stated that
“ships built on the river Thames are unquestionably
better than those built at outports: the London
builders obtain better prices, and can therefore afford
to build them of a better description. If the same
inducements were held out, there is no reason why
vessels built at the outports should not be equally
good.”
To give so great an advantage to London-built
ships was evidently a mistake, for by such a regulation
shipbuilding enterprise elsewhere was considerably
damaged, while at the same time no guarantee was
obtained that the favoured builders would continue
to produce such superior ships as before. There
can be no doubt that then, as now, excellent vessels
were built at all parts of the British Islands, and that
the first step towards getting a good ship was to pay
a good price.
The dissatisfied Shipowners made strong repre-
sentations on the subject to the Registry Committee,
and, failing to obtain the assent of the latter to their
s:
;
e.
.*.*.*.*.*... <sº- ºr ºx-º-º. -- **s-- *** ***** ***** * *******
ſº
I6 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
views, several of them, in 1799, started The AVew
Aegister Book of Shºpping, having offices at No. 22,
Change Alley, and afterwards at No. 3, St. Michael's
Alley. This work, although bearing on the title-
page the statement that it was issued by a “Society
of Merchants, Shipowners, and Underwriters,” ap-
pears to have been in reality managed by Ship-
owners only, and was commonly known as the “Ship-
owners' Register,” or Æed! Book. The characters
assigned by the new Registry were expressed by the
vowels A, E, I, and O, with the figures 1, 2, and 3
for the condition of the “materials,”—as the equipment
of a vessel was then termed. The new Register
Book was a trifle larger than the Underwriters' Book,
of which it was, both as regards the particulars it
contained and their arrangement, a precise copy.
The elder Society appears to have had Surveyors
stationed at twenty-four ports in the United Kingdom,
viz. –
Belfast, Exmouth, Leith, Star Cross,
Bristol, Exeter, Liverpool, Teignmouth,
Cork, Falmouth, London, Topsham,
Cowes, Greenock, Lynn, Waterford,
Dartmouth, Hull, Poole, Whitehaven,
Dublin, Lancaster, Portsmouth, Yarmouth.
The Shipowners' Society modified this list slightly
in the case of their Book, leaving out Exmouth and
Star Cross, and appointing representatives at New-
castle, Plymouth, Sunderland, Shields, Workington,
and Whitby, in addition to those at the other twenty-
&
t
3.
two ports.
* |s
%
3.
ºft's
*-*.
./ºf .
{{(6.
...'Twº *~!
3.
CHAPTER III.
*T the date to which we have now come
§§ (1799) there were, therefore, two Register
Books in operation, known as the Green
Book and the Red Book, the former being
the Underwriters' and the latter the Shipowners'
Register.
The following was the constitution of the com-
mittee of the Red Book in 1799 —
John Hill, Chairman.
Norrison Coverdale, Charles Kensington,
Robert Curling, Thomas King,
Joseph Dowson, William Leighton,
Thomas Horncastle, John Lyall,
Ives Hurry, J. J. Oddy,
Ralph Keddey, William Sims,
Thomas Keddey, William Thompson.
The Committee of the Red Book, in an expla–
nation with which they prefaced that volume, men-
tioned that— -
“The Society for conducting the Publication of the
New Register Book of Shipping think it necessary to
give a general Explanation of their Plan, as well as to
C
wº
*A
6.
sº
3-
y
..?$53*
;
|
->
^,


I 8.
Annals of Lloyd's Register.
state the Motives which induce them to undertake a
Work of so much importance.
“It is well known that a Book has, for a long series
of years, been annually printed under the direction of a
Committee of a Society, formed of Subscribers, for the
information of Underwriters; which Book, after a variety
of alterations, was at length arranged in a manner that
gave general satisfaction ; and, having continued above
twenty-four years to be the record of the age, burthen,
built, quality, and condition of vessels and their materials,
marked according to the opinion of skilful and diligent
Surveyors (employed by the Society in all the principal
ports of the kingdom) had become a Book of Authority,
and, in a great degree, governed the Merchant, the Ship-
owner, and Underwriter, in their opinions of the quality
of Ships for the purpose of freighting goods or insuring,
and, consequently, in a great measure regulated their
value.
“In the preceding year the Committee of the Society,
without consulting the Subscribers at large, made an
entire change in this system, so long established and so
universally approved, and Substituted in its place a plan
founded on a principle diametrically opposite and
perfectly erroneous.
“Instead of classing the Ships which they gave an
account of according to the actual state and condition,
ascertained by a careful Surveyor, a new system was
adopted of stamping the character of the Ship wholly
by her age and the place in which she was built, without
any regard to the manner in which she was originally
constructed, the wear or damage she might have
sustained, or the repairs she might from time to time
have received, or even being rebuilt: thereby at once
obviating the necessity of surveying the hulls of vessels,
lessening the inducement to build Ships upon principles
of strength and durability, and taking away the

encouragement to keep them in the best state of repair,
that they might maintain their character in the Register
Book alluded to.”
38
Annals of Lloyd's Register. . . . I9
A list of the classes assigned to vessels built at
the several ports was then given, by which it seems
that in the Green Book the thirteen-years class was
given to ships built in the River Thames, Royal
Dockyards, and India. The twelve-years class was
assigned to vessels built in certain ports on the south
coast of England. Many of the Channel ports, how-
ever, were considered capable of producing only
ten-year ships; Liverpool and Bristol also being in
this list. To vessels built in Scotland, Wales, the
north-east ports of England, and some of the east
coast ports, only eight years were assigned. French,
Dutch, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, and some Ger-
man ships were also granted a term of eight years.
United States built ships were allowed twelve years
when built of the live oak of the Southern States,
but otherwise only six years were granted to them.
Colonial and fir-built vessels were allowed as little as
five, and in some cases only four years; but ships built
at Quebec and Bermuda were granted a class of ten
years. Upon the expiration of the number of years
first assigned on the M letter, a continuation on the
G letter, or second class, was given. Vessels classed
thirteen years were further allowed seven years on
the letter G; those of twelve and ten years obtained
five years; and those of eight years were continued
for six years; while six-year vessels were allowed
another four years, and so on.
The Red Book Committee go on to say in their
introductory explanation :-
“No general reasons have been assigned for the new
plan ; and, as to the distinction of places, imagination is
C 2
º:
;
s
•

*3.
!
2O Annals of Lloyd's Register.
left to its free scope to ascertain what causes make some
situations so inferior to others; for instance, why should
ships built at Quebec stand in the first class two years
longer than vessels built at Hull or the Northern ports
of this kingdom, Wales, &c. P and professional men are
equally at a loss to conjecture why the Committee have
thought proper to class the shipping of Some ports in
these kingdoms in degrees so much inferior to that of
others; not to say anything respecting the relative situ-
ations in which ships in foreign ports are placed. On
the first appearance of this new system, meetings were
held by a numerous body of the shipowners of this city,
who came to resolutions, expressing in the strongest
manner their disapprobation of the conduct of the
Committee of the Society, and amongst other resolutions
declared their opinion that it was ‘founded in error, and
calculated to mislead the judgment of merchants and
underwriters, and, if continued, would not only prove
of the most injurious consequences to individual ship-
owners, merchants, and underwriters, but to every branch
of trade connected with repairing and refitting vessels;
and in a great measure tend to destroy the shipping of
the country.’” -
After a few further remarks, from which we
learn that the Shipowners' Committee, when they
sought to point out to the Committee of the Green
Aook the injurious tendency of their system, were
refused an interview by the latter, the Åed Book
Committee proceed to indicate the character of
their Rules. These are so brief as to occupy but
one page of the book, and contain no instructions
whatever in regard to the scantlings and construc-
tion of ships, but refer only to the place of their
build. Singularly enough, after complaining of a
similar system, the Shipowners' Committee adopted
a method of original classification based almost en-

**. gº
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 2 I
tirely upon the locality in which the ships were
built, but with the important difference that subse-
quent classification at the expiration of the original
class depended upon the condition of repair in which
they were found. - -
Thames-built ships, if built entirely of British oak
and well fastened, were classed twelve years, and
“country-built” ships, on the same conditions, were
classed for ten years. It is scarcely necessary to
state in detail the rules of classification adopted in
the new Register. It may be sufficient to say that
the four classes were, as already mentioned, repre-
sented by the letters A, E, I, and O.
The second class, marked E, included all ships
kept in perfect repair that appeared on survey to have
no defects, and to be completely calculated to carry a
dry cargo safely.
The third class, marked I, was composed of ships
which, from defect or want of thorough and sub-
stantial repair, did not appear upon survey perfectly
safe to carry dry goods, though deemed seaworthy
for carrying goods not liable to sea damage.
The fourth class, marked O, was composed of
vessels out of repair, which were not deemed safe and
seaworthy for a foreign voyage.
The numerals 1 and 2 after the letter related to
the “ship's materials” or outfit; if well found, the
vessel was marked 1, and if indifferently found she was
marked 2.
The system of classification adopted by the
Committee of the Red Book was also based,
although perhaps to a less extent than in the
--
|
sº
s
.**)
§sº
*g
22 Annals of Z/oyd's Register
Green Book, upon the place of build and the age
of the vessel. Under the regulations of both
Societies, a vessel, upon the expiration of her original
class, lapsed to an inferior grade, and no amount
of repairs or strengthening would enable her to be
again placed upon the A 1 character; while in
neither case were there any Rules for the construc-
tion and systematic survey of vessels, and the Sur-
veyors were practically uncontrolled in their decisions.
In both cases the systems were unsound; and,
although the books remained in concurrent circula-
tion until they were merged in the present Society
in 1834, their operations appear to have encountered
the hostility of a large section of the Shipping com-
munity long before that date. -
3--"*>*., -
{sº
J
f;
.

CHAPTER IV.
#T the beginning of the year 1800, the Green
'#' Book numbered 233 subscribers, and the
Red Book only 125; but during the year
the latter received an accession of no less
than 76 subscribers, one of whom took twelve books,
whereas the Green Book only shows 31 new members
during the year. It would thus appear that the
Shipowners' Register very quickly gained popularity
and strength in the early stage of its existence.
In 18Oo the Committee of the Underwriters'
Register, or Green Book, influenced, apparently, by
the agitation which their altered system of classifi-
cation had provoked, returned to the use of the former
symbols of character, A, E, I, O, and U. In the issue
for the same year was also witnessed the introduction
for the first time of a title-page to the work, with
the inscription “Instituted in 1760.” A “Key to the
Register Book” was also then inserted, which, how-
ever, gave no real explanation of the manner in
which a ship , was classed. Another alteration
observed in this volume is the entry of the age of
a vessel in place of the year of build, which was
formerly recorded.
-




i.
~.
!
;
g
3.
7.
º
j
24. Annals of Lloyd's Zºegister.
The re-appearance in the Green Book of the old
signs was not without its effect upon the circulation of
its rival. Accordingly, in the following issue, or third
edition, of the Red Book, we find a new preface
inserted, pointing out that, although at first sight it
might appear that the Committee of the other
Register had forsaken their new principles, and
returned to their original system, yet “it will be
found, on inspection, that the new plan is still adhered
to, namely, that of giving characters to ships accord-
ing to their ages and the places where built, without
a due regard to the manner in which they were
originally built, the repairs they have received, and
their actual state and condition.”
It is clear, however, upon a careful scrutiny of the
Books issued about this period, that the practice of
the Underwriters' Register had been altered in at
least one particular. According to the Rules current
in 1798–99, prize ships and other vessels whose ages
could not be ascertained were not eligible to receive
any class whatever. But many of the vessels of this
descriptión, which were refused characters in that
and previous years, appeared in the succeeding
editions of the Green Book with classes assigned to
them. -
From a receipt written upon one of the fly-leaves
of the Red Book for 1801, now in the collection at
Lloyd's Register Office, it seems that the amount of
the subscription for this volume was, from its com-
mencement, eight guineas per annum. It was, doubt-
less, mainly due to this fact that the Committee
of the Underwriters' Register, in 1810 (the fiftieth


Annals of Lloyd's Register. 2 5
year of its existence), reduced the price of their
Book from twelve to eight guineas. .
The vessels classed in the oldest Register Book
extant, namely, that dated 1764–65–66, amounted to
4, Soo, This number went on steadily increasing until
it reached 8,271 in 1800, in which year the second
edition of the Shipowners' Register contained par-
ticulars of 7,754 vessels. During the following twelve
months, however, the New Register Committee added
a large number of ships to their Book, so that the
next issue—that in 18OI—comprised even more vessels
than were included in the Underwriters' Register,
there being 9,145 vessels in the latter and 9,540 in
the former volume.
Iron cables would appear to have been introduced
about 1813, vessels supplied with them having the
words “Iron Cable" noted against their names; and
in 1816 the letters “P. I. C.” were employed to denote
that the cables had been proved. There is, however,
a note in the Register for 1824, to the effect that, in
the case of vessels fitted with iron cables, and having
none of hemp, the figure denoting the quality of the
equipment was omitted ; but the question had become
of such importance in 1828, that full instructions
regarding the same were issued to the Surveyors of
the Underwriters' Book.
In glancing over the old volumes forming part of
the collection of the Underwriters' Register, we are
reminded of the fact that, in the early part of the
present century, steam navigation was practically
unknown. -
It is not until 1822 that we find any record of a

º
sº
–3–4° '"
26 Annals of Z/oyd's Register.
steamship in the Register. In the supplement to the
Book bearing that date there occurs the entry of a
steam packet, appropriately named the /ames Watt,
of 294 tons, built at Greenock in 1821, and classed
A 1. Although this is noteworthy, as being the first
appearance of a steamer in the Register, we learn that
for several years previously vessels propelled by
steam had gradually come into public notice.
Indeed, as far back as 1736, an invention “for
carrying Vessels or Ships out of or into any Harbour,
Port, or River, against Wind and Tide, or in a Calm,”
was patented by a Mr. Jonathan Hulls. His idea,
however, does not appear to have been put into
execution, although several attempts were made
during the following fifty years to build a steamer.
No result of any real importance was obtained until
1787, when Mr. William Symington, at the instigation
of Mr. Patrick Miller, an Edinburgh banker, fitted a
steam-engine on board a large boat in the Forth and
Clyde Canal, a trial of which took place and proved
highly satisfactory. -
The distinction, however, of possessing the first
practical steamboat was reserved for Lord Dundas,
who, in 1801, had a vessel constructed by Mr.
Symington, which he named the Charlotte Dundas.
This steamer, it is stated, towed two loaded vessels
against a strong breeze, along the Forth and Clyde
Canal to Port Dundas, a distance of 16% miles, in six
hours. This vessel had to be laid up for several
years, in consequence of the fear of the proprietors of
the canal that the wash of the boat would injure the
banks
& -
de
\

upgrº
-& ſº--
Ammals of Z/oyd's Aegister. 27
The idea, however, was now fairly started, and in
1811, Henry Bell, of Glasgow, after some years of
experimenting, built a steamer, the well-known Comet,
which carried passengers between ports on the Frith
of Clyde. Other steamboats quickly followed, and
amongst them one built in London in 1814, which
was tried on the canal near Limehouse, the Lord
Mayor and other celebrities being on board at the
time. Indeed, to such importance had the subject
grown in 1817 that a Committee of the House of
Commons sat in that year to consider the means of
preventing the mischief arising from explosions on
board steamboats. As the result of their investiga-
tions, regulations were issued which required all
steamboats to be registered, and, in the case of
passenger-vessels, the boilers—which it was thought
necessary to prescribe should be of wrought-iron or
copper—were to be submitted to inspection. Each
boiler was required to be fitted with two safety-
valves, and to be tested to three times the working
pressure, which was not to exceed one-sixth the
pressure the boiler was calculated to withstand.
It would thus appear that the Committee of the
Register Book were far behind the times in admitting
steamers to classification; but from the year 1822,
when the entry of the ſames Watt was made, the
number of classed steam vessels rapidly increased, the
Book for 1827 containing 81 steamers, whilst that for
1832 included no fewer than 100. Whatever may
have been the Rules which guided the Register in the
classification of steamers, they were evidently of a
very imperfect nature, containing no provision for the
tº - * - &N * *
\o fy * sº
Sºſ ; -2 § º
jº S \, . * * - - - - - - - - - - ------- - --- - - t---9 *...* I v
§§ {T
28 Ammals of Z/oyd's Aegister.
periodical examination of such vessels. It is observed,
for instance, that the last-named ship remained classed
on the A character without having been surveyed
from her entry in 1822 until the year 1830, after
which, her term of classification having apparently
expired, she disappeared from the Register Book.
Amongst the curious records to be found in some
of the Register Books of early date may be mentioned
y
the following :—“s.s.,’ small scantlings, in the Book
for 1812; “sheathed with zinc,” in 1820,-this being
the first notice of a vessel sheathed with this material;
and “sheathed with tanned leather,” in 1831.
It further appears that even at this early period it
was not unusual for builders of wooden vessels to
employ salt to preserve the timbers from dry-rot,
even to the extent of boiling them in salt water.
The beneficial effect of salt on timber was suf-
ficiently exemplified in the frames of river craft
employed in its conveyance, which, in many cases,
after fifty years' service were found as sound as when
first built.
Coming down to more recent times, it appears that
other experiments were made with the same object
in view—viz., that of preventing the development of
fungi in the tissues of the timber and planks through
the fermentation of the natural juices in the wood.
Sulphate of copper, Sulphate of iron, creosote, and a
variety of other substances were tried, but none
proved so trustworthy as rock-salt.

CHAPTER V.
fºLIE concurrent existence of two Registers
§: § was, as might have been expected, very
ºligº soon found to be productive of incon-
venience and other unsatisfactory consequences. At
a very early period in the century the General Ship-
owners' Society had offered their mediation with a
view to amalgamating the two Registers, but without
SUICCCSS.
The widespread dissatisfaction, however, which
had been yearly gaining strength, found expression in
a succession of public meetings held by merchants
and shipowners in 1823. In that year Mr. John
Marshall, a shipowner of London, to whose untiring
energy and sound judgment the movement owed a
large measure of its success, brought the subject
prominently before the annual general meeting of the
Society of Shipowners, held at the London Tavern,
on the 11th December, with Mr. George Lyall in the
chair. Mr. Marshall has left upon record a very full
account of the proceedings at this and subsequent
meetings, from which we gather that by this time
both the Registries of Shipping had fallen largely
into disrepute, and were travelling slowly to financial
t
:



3O Anna/s of Zloyd's Aegister.
ruin. A fair idea of the revenues of the Societies
may be formed from the following extract from one
of his speeches:—
“The Old Book has about 180 Subscribers, at eight
guineas each, and twenty guineas each from the Royal
Exchange and London Assurance Companies, which
gives, as I assume, an income of £1,550; the New Book
has about 126 Subscribers, at the same rate, and with two
similar donations, realises about £1,080. If, instead of
two, only one Book was published, and that on a principle
which would combine general approbation, the aggregate
number of Subscribers would, I conceive, be much in-
creased, and the ability to pay fit and competent Sur-
veyors and other necessary and efficient officers of the
establishment, proportionably augmented. The number
of vessels registered in the Old Book is, in round numbers,
about 14,450 ; in the New one, about 13,950 ; and upon
So numerous a Marine, a revenue might, in my opinion,
be raised, without any undue pressure on its Proprietors,
fully adequate to the expenses of an establishment, in
all respects efficient for its object.”
Mr. Marshall boldly advocated radical changes in
the entire organisation and administration of the
Registries. He urged a change in the governing
Committee, who, instead of being composed of
gentlemen of one class only, “self-elected and wholly
irresponsible,” should consist of representatives elected
by Merchants, Underwriters, and Shipowners; and
he further demonstrated the necessity for a change
in the system then regulating the classification of
vessels, not by their intrinsic qualities, but by con-
ditions of their age and place of build. He also
disapproved of the decisions of the Surveyors being
uncontrolled.
|
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 3 I
Amongst other evils of this system, complaint was
made that it served to create and perpetuate an
amount of tonnage for which the country was unable
to find remunerative employment. Age being the
great standard of classification, the effect was that,
when a ship had outlived her first character, the
Owner was induced immediately to sell her, from
the impossibility in many trades of employing any

vessel to the name of which the “talismanic charm
of A 1” was not appended. The owner would then
substitute a new ship, thus increasing the previously-
existing glut: whereas, if classification had been
based upon intrinsic merit, the owner in many cases
would have effectually repaired the vessel, which
would then have remained on the first class.
Upon the motion of Mr. Marshall, the meeting
resolved unanimously that the present system of
classing the shipping of the country was unfair
in principle, injurious in its operations on the pro-
perty of individuals and the efficiency and reputa-
tion of the Mercantile Marine, and misleading to those
concerned with it, to the injury of all persons con-
nected therewith, and that, with the view of effecting
a revision of the system, a Committee, representative
of all the interests concerned, should be appointed to
obtain the fullest information on the subject, and to
consider, and subsequently report, the result of their
deliberations. - -
These resolutions received the unanimous confirma-
tion of a large gathering of Merchants, Shipowners,
and Underwriters, held under the presidency of Mr.
Thomas Wilson, M.P., on the 22nd January, 1824,

32 Annals of Z/oyd's Aegis/e7.
when the gentlemen to represent the Merchants and
Shipowners on the Committee of Inquiry were elected,
the Underwriters' nominees being left to the selection
of the Committee of Lloyd's.
But, having arrived at this stage, the difficulties
only now began. The proposal to interfere in any
way with the existing systems of classification met
with most determined opposition from a large and
important section of the members of Lloyd's, in-
cluding the Committee of that body. Mr. Ben-
jamin Shaw, the Chairman, stated, at the meeting
held at Lloyd's on the 18th February, 1824, that
“although the present mode [of classing ships] might
not be free from objection, yet he thought that it had
been found to answer very well for the Underwriters,
and therefore he should look to any alteration of the
system as calling for their vigilant attention. The
Committee, in the exercise of that discretion on matters
affecting the interests of that House which he con-
sidered was vested in them, had given this important
subject their most serious attention and consideration,
since the resolutions above referred to had been
officially communicated to them ; and they had come
to the conclusion, that the proposal of that House
concurring in the proposed investigation, by appoint-
ing eight of the Members to form part of the Com-
mittee of Inquiry, was a measure which they strongly
deprecated, and they had therefore prepared a written
Report of their views on the subject, which he wished
might be read.” This document, recommending the
“Subscribers to abstain from acceding to the invita-
tion,” formed the subject of an animated discussion.
Şs
s
Ø
%
I

*
; §
§
Annals of Zloyd's Register. 33
Mr. Marshall made a powerful speech, traversing
the Report of the Committee of Lloyd's, in the course
of which he said:— ~
“All that is now asked for is inquiry; and to make
that efficient, and to secure the approbation and support. -
of all, it is proposed that all the great interests, con-
Cerned shall take part in the investigation, by each
appointing an equal number of persons to constitute the
Committee. That this House will, on this occasion, act
worthy of its character, I entertain no doubt –cele-
brated, as it is, from Pole to Pole for its liberality; ever
ready, as it has invariably shown itself, not only to concur,
but to take the lead, in objects involving the welfare of
the country, and more especially its maritime prosperity
and greatness . . . Looking, sir, at the public spirit
which has ever been conspicuous in the proceedings of
this House—at the tone and impulse it has at different
times imparted to the country, whenever its best feelings
have been properly appealed to, recollecting, too, that
the very name of “Lloyd's' is regarded, not at home only,
but also in every part of the world where the British name
is known, as synonymous with everything that is liberal,
just, public-spirited, and honourable—I cannot, I will
not, believe, unless the conviction is forced upon me by
a decision to-day contrary to my expectations, that this
House will on this occasion forget, or choose to lose
sight of, those great principles of equity and justice
towards others by which every community must regulate
its conduct, or must retrograde in its character, its con-
siderations, and just consequence.”
The result was, that the meeting resolved almost
unanimously (there being but two dissentients) to
nominate eight of the Members of Lloyd's to serve on
the Committee of Inquiry. Still another obstacle,
however, was interposed. It was found, when the day
of election arrived, that most of the twenty-four gentle-
T)
i


ãº
%
}-
34 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
men nominated on the above occasion had withdrawn
their names from the ballot.
Another general meeting was accordingly called.
It was held on the 3rd March, 1824. The whole
subject was rediscussed at great length and with much
warmth, and, the opponents of the Committee of
Inquiry demanding a ballot, Wednesday, the IOth
March, 1824, was fixed for that purpose, the poll “to
commence at one and close at four o'clock,” and to
finally decide the question whether Lloyd's should or
should not take part in the inquiry. Both parties
exerted themselves to the utmost in the interval.
The Committee of Lloyd's printed and freely circu-
lated their Report on the subject, to which Mr. Marshall
replied with a counter manifesto. Excitement ran
high as the time approached for the ballot. Summing
up his narrative of what occurred, Mr. Marshall
says:—
“The intense interest created by it, the feelings
exhibited in its progress, and the extraordinary efforts
made by most of those who so mistakenly exerted their
opposition, will never be forgotten by the friends of
Žngzºy, who on that day Supported the moderate and
reasonable proposition submitted to them. Suffice it to
Say, REASON TRIUMPHED ! no less than six hundred and
Seventy-nine Members of Lloyd's voted on that occasion :
almost every counting-house and coffee-house in the
City being visited to procure the attendance of every
Subscriber who could be found ; the result, however, was
that the Resolution ‘That Lloyd's do concur in nominat-
ing eight of their Body to represent them in the Com-
mittee of Inquiry,’ was confirmed on the ballot by a
majority of twenty-five—there being 352 for and 327
against it /*
35
|ɺğ.
|ɺ § {}º - * * * ſº
| | | < * a
N
CHAPTER VI.
tº HUS after repeated efforts and a most
§§ §§ arduous contest the Committee of Inquiry
ºlº was complete. The following were the
members:–
FOR LONDON. -
Merchaſets. Shipowners. Underwriters. -
George Palmer. George Lyall. James Lindsay,jun. !
William Mitchell. George F. Young. Arthur Willis.
Andrew Colvile. John W. Buckle. John Buck.
John Hodgson. John Dawson. Jacob Mill.
Henry Douglass. Nath, Domett, Robert Simpson.
John Higgin. James Greig. John Whitmore.
Robert Cotesworth. Thomas Spencer. David Carruthers.
W. M. Alexander. Thomas Urquhart. Thomas Ashton.
POR THE OUTPORTs,
Liverpool.................. Edward Hurry,
Hull............... . . . . . . . . . John Marshall.
Glasgow ............ ..... Robert Douglas.
Newcastle ............... Thomas Forrest,
Whitby .................. Robert Chapman,
Sunderland....... ........ Thomas Davison.
Yarmouth. ......... tº p a tº a 4 John Diston Powles.
Leith ..................... David Charles Guthrie,
Whitehaven& Maryport John Simpson.
& Sº
Nº.
* * *g
º
º
3.


.-.
36 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
Mr. James Lindsay, jun., of Lloyd's, was appointed
chairman of the Committee, whose investigation was
of a most searching character, extending over a period
of two years. Mr. Marshall, who it will be observed,
sat on the Committee as the representative of Hull,
records his conviction that “never did any Committee
enter upon the duties imposed upon them with greater
zeal, or a more anxious desire to acquit themselves
faithfully of their obligations to the public, than the
gentlemen just named; never was there exhibited a
more thorough absence of every personal or private
object, or a more single-hearted and earnest endeavour
to render their labours practically beneficial and accept-
able to a// whose interests they were called upon, to
the best of their judgment, to secure.”
The Report presented by the Committee, dated the
8th February, 1826, bears ample evidence of the pains
taken to obtain the fullest information. Describing the
steps adopted, the Committee state that they “spared
no effort to obtain from every quarter interested in the
inquiry, or possessing information calculated to eluci-
date it, such testimony as should at once justify their
recommendations and command public respect, The
concurrent readiness with which their applications
have been received has afforded them the advantage
of obtaining the invaluable evidence and opinions of
the Commissioners and Surveyors of His Majesty's
Navy; of the Master-builder of His Majesty's Dock-
yard, Deptford; the Principal Surveyor of Shipping
to the Honourable East India Company; the Surveyors
to the existing Registry Books; the Shipowners'
Societies at Liverpool, Hull, Sunderland, Whitehaven,
'º. b 3.
%

*
Annals of Zoyd's Aegister. 37
and Yarmouth ; and of a considerable number of most
respectable, impartial, and intelligent shipowners,
brokers, agents to underwriters, shipbuilders, and
others, whose long experience, high character, and
extensive practical knowledge, convey abundant assur-
ance, that, whatever may be the general opinion as to
the recommendations framed on their testimony, by
the Committee, the evidence itself must stand far
beyond the reach of impeachment or suspicion.”
The Report then proceeds to a recapitulation of the
main points of the evidence brought before the Com-
mittee, from which it appears that the whole of the
Merchant Shipping of the country was at that time
classed in the Books printed for the avowed use of the
Underwriters of Lloyd's, but supported by the general
subscriptions of Merchants, Underwriters, Shipowners,
and others; that the circulation of these Books was
not confined to the port of London nor even to Great
Britain, but was extended over every part of the
Globe, and that they had become the almost universal
standard by which the Merchant was guided in his
shipments, the Underwriter in his insurance, and the
Passenger in undertaking his voyage—in short, that
the character they affixed stamped value on the ship,
and almost exclusively regulated the confidence re-
posed in her safety and sufficiency. -
Seeing that so much importance was attached to the
Books, the Regulations of the governing bodies should
have been on a correct basis, and the execution of these
Regulations should have been entrusted to competent
persons. An examination of the effect of the Books,
however, showed them to be productive of many evils.
'º
gº
-**
-
3–4°
&
*
J
tºº
38 Annals of Z/oyd's /ēegister.
The principles adopted under the existing system of
classification were “most fallacious and erroneous,”
while the “partial degree of actual survey required by
the system ’’ was “rendered practically nugatory by
the insufficiency of the salaries paid to the Surveyors.”
After demonstrating the urgent necessity for termi-
nating these “erroneous, unjust, and destructive”
systems of classification, the Committee propounded a
scheme for the establishment of a Registration Society
on a proper basis, with a set of Rules for the Classifi-
cation of Ships.
Dealing first with the Constitution of the proposed
Society, the Committee observe that—“it has been
their object to provide for the fair and equal repre-
sentation therein of all parties immediately interested.”
Their proposal was as follows:–
“That the future Superintendence of the Classifica-
tion of Shipping be entrusted to a Committee in London,
to be composed of thirty-two Members, consisting of
six Merchants and six Shipowners of London, to be
appointed by a General Meeting of Merchants and Ship-
owners, respectively; six Members of Lloyds, to be ap-
pointed by that body; one Representative by the Royal
Exchange, London, Alliance, and Mutual Indemnity
Assurance Associations, respectively; and one Repre-
sentative resident in London for each of the following
Outports, viz.: Liverpool, Hull, Glasgow, Newcastle,
Bristol, Whitby, Yarmouth, Leith, Whitehaven, and
Sunderland. -
“That two Members of those appointed by the
Shipowners, two of those deputed by the Merchants of
London, and two of the Members of Lloyd's, should go
out of office annually, but be eligible for re-election; and
the appointmentof the Outport Representatives be during
the pleasure of their Constituents,
*-
*śjº
x
&
* * >

*3. & &
& só…
Gº ?
;" *—-
Annals of Zloyd's Register. 39
“Such Committee to appoint, a Chairman and
Deputy-Chairman, Secretary, and Assistants, and all the
Surveyors both for London and the Outports; and to be
restricted in their proceedings to a conformity with the
Rules and Regulations under which they may be ap-
pointed ; but to have full-power to make such Bye-Laws
for their own government and proceedings as they may
deem requisite, not being inconsistent with their original
constitution.” -
In regard to Classification, the Committee, believing
that the evils which they described had been “chiefly
produced by the want of an enlarged and well-organised
system of survey, which has been rendered impracti-
cable by the inadequacy of the means existing for the
proper remuneration of independent and competent
Surveyors,” proposed to establish a rigid inspection,
beginning with the construction of vessels, to be carried
out by a large staff of Surveyors stationed throughout
the country, and subject to the supervision of Principal
Surveyors appointed in London, who were to make
occasional visits to the outports. Very precise in-
structions follow as to the conducting of the Surveyors’
duties. &
Vessels were to be arranged in three different
classes: the First Class to comprise vessels built
under survey, the number of years assigned ranging
from twelve to six, according to the materials used in
the construction, and also ships built in the Colonies,
which were surveyed on arrival in England; the
Second Class to contain ships which, being from age
no longer entitled to the First Class, were still found
competent to carry dry and perishable cargoes to any
part of the world; the Third Class to include vessels
A.
-
*-º
§
i
#j
;3
4O Anna/s of Z/oyd's Zºegister.
which, although unfit for the conveyance of dry car-
goes, were perfectly safe and capable of carrying
cargoes not subject to sea damage.
While recommending the institution of the survey
of vessels during construction, the Report does not
suggest the adoption of any specific modes of con-
struction, nor propose any scale for regulating the
scantlings of new vessels, leaving full scope to the
discretion of the shipbuilder and shipowner in these
respects. Provision was to be made for the restora-
tion of vessels, upon proper Survey, to the first class,
after the expiration of the period of years first
assigned.
As regards the expenditure that would be involved
in the establishment and equipment of a Register of
Shipping upon the liberal basis proposed, the Com-
mittee estimated that the charges would amount in
the aggregate to about 4, 13,700 per annum, composed
of 47,700 in respect of the salaries of thirty-four
Surveyors, the individual amounts ranging from 4600
to £150, and, in the case of a few of the smaller
ports, to 475, −and about £6,000 for the expenses of
Secretary, Printing, Committee, Travelling, &c. In
fixing the amount of salaries to be paid to the Sur-
veyors, the Committee pointed out the absolute
necessity of the sum being sufficient to ensure the
services of men of intelligence, activity, firmness,
and integrity; and added that, to the absence of .
regular and constant professional supervision, by
properly-selected persons, the abuses and evils of
the existing system had been principally traced.
Coming to deal with the important question of the
*

*
#3
%
best mode of raising funds adequate to meet the
Annals of Zloyd's Register. 4. I
expenses of the system recommended for adoption,
the Committee, while preferring to leave this problem
to the wisdom of the General Meeting, record their
decided conviction that all expectation of raising a
sum sufficient to cover the estimated expenditure
“must, except under the sanction and authority of
Parliamentary provision, prove visionary and hope-
less.” It was therefore proposed to establish the
Society by means of a subsidy from the Government,
the charge on the public exchequer to be met, it was
suggested, by a trifling duty on tonnage or a small
addition to the existing duty on Marine Insurance.
The Committee at the same time admit that the
“direct interposition of public support would, in all
probability, transfer to the Executive Government the
superintendence of a system imperatively requiring
for its effective administration the aid of mercantile
and professional knowledge and experience.”
The fear of the Committee that a Register Society
founded upon voluntary principles would not be able
to raise funds equal to the establishment and mainte-
nance of the system of classification which they
sketched out, although shown by later experience to be
groundless, was not so unnatural, considering the state
of financial collapse into which both of the existing
Registries had fallen. It is not at all unlikely that to
the Committee's halting, inconclusive treatment of
this question, upon which all else hinged, was
largely due the fate that immediately befell their
Report.
This document was presented at the general
à

i
42 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
meeting of all concerned held on the 1st June, 1826,
on which occasion Mr. Thomas Wilson, M.P., was in
the chair. At this meeting a letter was read from
the Board of Trade, which stated, “that the Board
approved highly of the proposed alterations, and were
of opinion that it would give rise to great improve-
ment in the naval architecture of the country; and
that the Lords of their Committee would be disposed
to assist in carrying the proposed regulations into
effect, in any manner which might, on subsequent
discussion, be deemed advisable.” Beyond this offer,
the Board declined to make any positive announce-
ment which might be held to commit the Government.
A subsequent meeting was appointed to be held
to discuss the proposals. The consideration of the
subject, however, was from one cause and another
adjourned from time to time without any decision
being arrived at ; until, in consequence, as would
appear, of the sudden death of two of the principal
leaders of the movement, and of the opposition offered
to the scheme from some quarters, and the indifference
manifested in others, the supporters of the proposed
system were induced to desist from pursuing it
farther at that time.
º
§

CHAPTER VII.
zºEVERAL years elapsed before any effectual
§ i steps were taken in furtherance of the
§: Object, but the gradual decay of the two
Registries greatly strengthened the position of those
who advocated the entire reorganisation of the exist-
ing systems of classification.
The Shipowners' Book had, it is stated, been
carried on at an annual loss, and the effect of the
competition appears to have told upon the finances of
its older rival, as will be seen from a statement pub-
lished with the Green Book for 1828–29, which runs as
follows:—
“LLOYD'S REGISTRY OF SHIPPING,
“CASTLE COURT, BIRCHIN LANE,
“January, 1829.
“The Committee beg leave to remind the Sub-
scribers that when this Society was established, in the
year 1760, the Annual Subscription was Twelve Guineas.
“At the end of Half a Century, their funded Pro-
perty having increased to £ 12,OOO Stock, the Price of
the Book was reduced one-third, viz., from Twelve to



* § ; -
44 - Annals of Zloyd's Register.
Eight Guineas; but the Expenses for the last Twenty
Years having exceeded the Income by nearly £500 per
Annum, and the Stock now remaining amounting to
only £2,000, the Committee are under the necessity of
raising the Price of the Book this Year to Ten Guineas.
“Nearly Ten Thousand Vessels are surveyed every
-Year; the Expense of Survey, by competent Judges,
cannot be reduced under the present Salaries, which
exceed 4 I,000 per annum, rather under 2s. Iłd, each
vessel.”

The impossibility of reducing the salaries of the
Surveyors will not be disputed when it is mentioned
that the two principal Surveyors in London were
receiving only £250 per annum between them at this
period
It is worthy of notice that in this announce-
ment we find the first assumption of the name of
“Lloyd's,” as prefixed to a Register of Shipping—
preceding books having been styled “Registers” only.
In 1833 we find both of the Registries in so
desperate a state that it was not expected they
would be able to carry on their operations be-
yond another year or two. The “Special Committee
on the affairs of Lloyd's,” fearing that under these
circumstances the community might be left without
a Book, and with the object of rendering the in-
spection of shipping more efficient, appointed a Sub-
Committee to confer with the Committees of the two
bodies, and endeavour to effect a union between them.
On the 14th August, 1833, a meeting was held in
the Merchant Seamen's Office, of which the following
copy of a minute, signed by the members of the
“Special Committee,” now exists:–
3.
**.
Annals of Z/oyd's Register. 45
“The Sub-Committee to whom it was referred at
- the last meeting to confer with the Committees of the
two Register Books beg to report that they met for
that purpose, in this office, on Tuesday, the 13th inst.,
the following gentlemen on behalf of the Red Book,
viz.:- -
Mr. Lancaster, Mr. Hall,
Mr. Palmer, Mr. Harrison,
- Mr. Willis; -
And the following on behalf of the Green Book, viz.:-
Mr. Harford, Mr. Luke,
Mr. Kerr, - Mr. Carruthers,
Mr. Dawson, Mr. W. G. Shedden.
And that, after much discussion, the following resolu-
tions were carried unanimously, with an understanding
that, if any obstacle should arise on the part of the
Shipowners’ Society to carrying the same into effect,
an early communication thereof should be made to this
Committee by the Committee of the Red Book.
“Ist. That it is not practicable to carry on the two
Register Books as at present circumstanced.
“2nd. That in the opinion of this meeting it is desir-
able that an union of the Committees of the two Registers
take place for the purpose of establishing one good and
efficient Register.—
- “(Signed) R. DEWAR,
J. MILL,
S. SMITH,
J. SIMPSON,
W. F. SADLER.”
Mr. Sadler, writing at the same date to Mr. Lan-
caster, Chairman of the Red Book, on behalf of the
Special Committee on the affairs of Lloyd's, expressed
their earnest hope that he would, in conjunction with
the Committee of the other Book, take early measures
for carrying into effect a resolution which appeared to
§
46 Annals of Zloyd's Zºegister.
the Special Committee to be of vital importance to
the shipping and commercial interests of the country.
No opposition being offered by the General Ship-
owners' Society to the proposed fusion of the existing
Books, a meeting of the Committees of the two
Registries was held on Thursday, the Ioth October,
1833, at the River Dee office, over the Royal Ex-
change, at which the under-mentioned gentlemen
were present:—
George Palmer, Charles Harford,
INathaniel Domett, David Carruthers,
J. W. Buckle, Thomas Chapman,
George Allfrey, Joseph Somes,
John Luke, J. Dawson,
W. N. Lancaster, Crawford D. Kerr,
Thomas Hall, Henry Cheape.
Mr. Palmer was appointed Chairman, while Mr.
Chapman consented to act as Honorary Secretary,
discharging the duties of this office during the period
covered by the first six meetings of the Committee.
It was then resolved to form, the Members of the
two Committees into a Joint Committee for carrying
the proposed union into effect, the principal details
of the scheme being remitted to the consideration
of a Sub-Committee. The first outline of a Consti-
tution is contained in the Minutes of the second
meeting of the United Committee on the 24th October,
at which the following resolutions were passed :—
“That a Society be established for obtaining an
accurate classification of the Mercantile Marine of the
United Kingdom, and of the Foreign vessels trading
thereto, and that a Book be annually printed, to be
called ‘The Register Book of British and Foreign
Shipping.’
—i.
*3. -- -
&
* ******* * **** **-ax z-- > --~~ *** - ...--> --~ * ~ * * ~~~~ -ºº º- > * * * * *
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 47
“That all persons subscribing the sum of Three
Guineas annually be Members of the Society, and en-
titled (for their own use) to a copy of the Register Book.
“That the affairs of the Society be conducted by
a Committee of twenty-one Members, who shall elect
from amongst themselves a Chairman and Deputy-Chair-
man, and be empowered to fill up vacancies, and that
five be the quorum. .
“That such of the present Members of the Two
Committees as shall signify their assent thereto, shall
be Members Óf the New Committee.”
Further regulations were also adopted respecting
the subscriptions of Marine Insurance Companies and
public establishments, the appointment of Surveyors,
and the scale of Fees to be charged. Respecting
the classification of vessels, it was decided to adopt,
with some alterations, the Rules for Classification laid
down in the printed Report of the Committee of 1824,
the first “Instructions to Surveyors” drawn up being
also founded upon the recommendations of that docu-
ment. These Rules formed the subject of a confer-
ence between Sub-Committees of the projected Society
and of the General Shipowners' Society, comprising
the following gentlemen —
A'epresenting the Registry Committee.
Arthur Willis, B. McGhie,
Charles Harford, John Luke, *
Henry Nelson, Thomas Chapman,
Nathaniel Domett, George Allfrey,
Joseph Somes.
Representing the General Shipowners' Society.
George F. Young, Robert Barry,
Octavius Wigram, Robert Carter,
William Tindall, Henry Buckle,
3:
º
%
48 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
The Rules then underwent very material altera-
tions, and in their amended form were adopted at
a meeting of the United Committee of the Registry
-*.
on the 17th January, 1834, and ordered to be pub-
lished in the form of a “Prospectus of the Plan for
the Establishment of a New Register Book of British,
and Foreign Shipping.” From this document it
appears that the existing Committee were to be
considered merely as a Provisional Committee for
arranging and completing the establishment of the
Society on the following basis — -
All persons subscribing the sum of three guineas
annually were to be Members of the Society, and
entitled, for their own use, to a copy of the Register
Book; the subscription of Public Establishments being
fixed at ten guineas, with the exception of that of
the four Marine Insurance Companies in London,
namely, the Royal Exchange, London, Alliance, and
Mutual Indemnity, which had each agreed to give an
annual subscription of one hundred guineas.
The superintendence of the affairs of the Society
was to be entrusted to a Committee in London, to be
composed of twenty-four Members, consisting of an
equal proportion of Merchants, Shipowners, and Onder-
writers, and in addition the Chairman of Lloyd's and
the Chairman of the General Shipowners' Society, for
the time, were to be ear-officio Members of the Com-
mittee.
The Provisional Committee were in the first in
stance to appoint the eight Members constituting the
mercantile portion of the Permanent Committee; the
Committee of the General Shipowners' Society to
%


* §§ -
*
Annals of Zloyd's Register. 49
elect the eight Members constituting the portion of
Shipowners; and the Committee of Lloyd's the eight
Members to represent the Underwriters.
. The vacancies thereafter arising through the annual
retirement, by rotation, of six of the Members, namely,
two of each of the constituent parts of the Committee.
(who would be eligible for re-election), were to be
filled up by the election of two Shipowners and one
Merchant by the Committee of the General Ship-
owners' Society, and two Underwriters and one
Merchant by the Committee of Lloyd’s.
The Committee were to have full power to make
such Bye-Laws for their own government and pro-
ceedings as they might deem requisite, not being in-
consistent with the original Rules and Regulations
under which the Society was established. -
After stating the conditions attaching to the
appointment of Surveyors to the Society, the Pro-
spectus proceeds to explain the general principles
which the Committee had determined to adopt for
their guidance in the future classification of ships, and
which are sufficiently clear from the first resolution
under this head, namely:— -
“That the characters to be assigned shall be, as
nearly as circumstances will permit, a correct indication
of the real and intrinsic quality of the ship ; and that
the same shall no longer be regulated, as heretofore, by
the incorrect standard of the port of building nor on the
decision of the Surveyors ; but will henceforward be in
all cases finally affixed by the Committee, after a due
inspection of the Reports of the Surveyors and the docu-
ments which may be submitted to them.”
In regard to the funds of the Society, which it was
- E
3
|
}
•r.
3.
º
^-
\s:$º&*...*º,
5O Ammals of Zloyd's Aegister.
provided should be under the authority and control of
the Committee, it was decided that the revenue should
not depend solely upon the subscriptions to the
Register Book, as had evidently been the case with
the preceding Register Societies. The subscription
to the Register Book, it will be observed, was fixed
at a very low figure, but, in addition, fees were to be
charged to shipowners for the survey and classifi-
cation of vessels according to an approved scale.
It is evident, from the records of the Provi-
sional Committee, that they at one time contemplated
the necessity of receiving some pecuniary assistance
from the Government in furtherance of the objects of
the Society. Mr. George Lyall, M.P., a member of the
Committee, was deputed to seek an interview with the
President and Vice-President of the Board of Trade,
and to enter fully into an explanation of the intended
proceedings of the Society, and urge the claims of the
Society to national support. When it appeared from
this gentleman's inquiries on the subject that no expec-
tation of pecuniary assistance from the public funds
could be relied upon, it became a serious question
with the Committee whether sufficient confidence
could be placed in their prospects to enable the
Society to proceed with the means that might now
be calculated upon. *
A Sub-Committee of Finance was specially ap-
pointed to investigate the expected resources upon
which dependence might be placed for proceeding with
the proposed undertaking; and their report, which
contains an elaborate estimate based upon the ex-
perience of the two preceding Registers and the total

l roaf's)
..., , ; -2°
Ammals of Zloyd's Register. 51
tonnage of the country, concluded with the opinion
that the Committee were justified, under all the cir-
cumstances, in proceeding with the scheme.
An application to the Government to obtain
the privilege of transmitting reports of surveys
from the outport Surveyors free of charge in
those days of heavy postage proved equally un-
availing. The Committee's appeal to Shipowners
and Underwriters, however, for contributions to the
Society, with the view of expediting the appointment
of Surveyors and the arrangements necessary for the
issue of the new Book, was productive of better
results. The Subscribers to Lloyd's, at a general
meeting, upon the motion of Mr. Arthur Willis, a
member of that body and also of the Provisional
Committee, unanimously voted a sum of £1,000 from
their funds in aid of the Society, and individual Under-
writers contributed over 4,700 ; while, in addition to
the annual subscription of IOO guineas which the
London Assurance Corporation and the Alliance
Marine Assurance Company had agreed upon, they
each gave a donation of 50 guineas, and the West
India Dock Company one of 30 guineas. It should
be mentioned that the amount received from Lloyd's
was repaid to that Institution a few years afterwards,
when the funds of the Society permitted.
The Provisional Committee continued to manage
the affairs of the Society until October, 1834—framing
the Rules for Classification, selecting and appointing
Surveyors and other officers, examining the reports
of survey sent in by the Surveyors, classifying the
ships for entry in the Register Book, and making all
E 2
*g_º
z'S \ .
&
;|*.
3.* :ºs'
:
3.
52 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
necessary arrangements for the preparation and issue
of the Book. At first the Committee met two or three
times a week, but the pressure of business had become
so great by June, 1834, that on the 27th of that month
it was decided that the General Committee should
“be convened to meet on Tuesday next, the 1st July,
at eleven o'clock, and that from and after that day the
Committee will sit daily” for the transaction of busi-
ness. Having brought their labours to a satisfactory
termination by the production of the first edition
of “LLOYD's REGISTER OF BRITISH AND FOREIGN
SHIPPING,” they dissolved on the 21st of October,
1834, and handed over their trust to the Permanent
Committee, which had by that time been appointed.
—#- §:
3%
* *b*

ãº,
CHAPTER VIII.
riº HE Permanent Committee was composed of
the under-mentioned gentlemen —
MERCHANTS
(Appointed by the Provisional Committee).
T. W. Buckle. Crawford D. Kerr.
T. A. Curtis. George Lyall, M.P.
Thomson Hankey, jun. Alexander Mitchell.
George Hanson. Patrick M. Stewart, M.P.
SHIPOWNERS
(Elected by the Committee of the General Shipowners' Society).
Thomas Benson. Joseph Somes.
Nathaniel Domett. -William Tindall.
Richard Drew. Thomas Ward.
B. A. McGhie. George F. Young, M.P.
UNDERWRITERS
(Elected by the Committee of Lloyd's).
George Allfrey. William Marshall.
David Carruthers. John Robinson.
Thomas Chapman. R. H. Shepard.
Henry Cheape. Arthur Willis.
Chairman of Lloyd's.
George R. Robinson, M.P.
Chairman of the General Shipowners' Society.
Octavius Wigram.


*
-
sº
...} :
*323-3.
§§ { }
X. &
54 Annals of Zoya's Aegister.
Mr. David Carruthers was elected Chairman of
the Permanent Committee, and Mr. Crawford D.
Kerr the Deputy-Chairman. For a period of about
two months, in 1833, Mr. Chapman had served as the
Honorary Secretary to the Provisional Committee,
and, as will be seen, his name appears in the list
of the Permanent Committee of 1834–35. But upon
Mr. Kerr's retirement, through ill - health, Mr.
Chapman was elected on the 9th April, 1835, to
the office of Deputy-Chairman, and on the 25th June
of the same year, shortly after the death of Mr.
Carruthers, he was appointed Chairman of the Society.
Mr. Nathaniel Symonds, who acted as Secretary
to the Committee until January, 1837, was then
succeeded by Mr. Charles Graham, who had previously
been in the service of the Lords Commissioners of
the Admiralty. -
We have now reached the period when the present
Register Book came into existence, and it will be of
interest to pause here and consider the circumstances
of the British Mercantile Marine at this time, especially
in their relation to the Society's earliest operations.
In 1834 a vessel of 500 tons was considered large,
and the tonnage built in each of the several preceding
years bears but a very small proportion to that of
to-day. For instance, there were built—
IN THE UNITED IN BRITISH
YEAR. I&INGDOM. COLONIES.
In 1830 750 vessels. 367 vessels.
, I83 I 76O , 376 ,
35 I 832 7.59 y? 22 I yy
; : *
|
º/
& Sº,
: 23°4's
& * * *
gº)
Annals of Zloyd's Aegister. 55
Of the 750 vessels built in 1830, the tonnage was
composed as follows:–
About 210 were under 50 tons.
» 2CO - 2, IOO ,
j) I 50 yy 2OO ,
yy I5O j } 3OO ,
y) 3O 95 4OO ,
and IO above 500
The large proportion of vessels built in the Colonies
—chiefly North American—is also an item worthy of
attention in examining these statistics.
Of the vessels belonging to the United Kingdom in
1830 the following is a summary of the tonnages:—
50 tons and under ... tº ºn tº 6,542 ships.
5O tons to IOO • * 's tº s tº 5,212 x
IOO . , 2OO tº º ſº tº º º 3,942 x,
200 , 3OO tº tº a § tº º I,948 , .
3OO 2, 4OO & ſº tº tº e G 969 ,
400 , 500 tº a º tº tº º 329 ,
5OO , 800 tº e & * @ e I IO ,
8OO , I,000 tº º c e tº º I5 x
I,2OO and upwards ... ... 43 ×
- \
Total ... IQ, I IO 9,
In addition to these there were 4,547 vessels of
330,227 tons registered in the British Colonies.
In 1833 we find that the Underwriters' Register,
or Green Book, contained 16,615 ships, and that the
number recorded in the rival Shipowners' Register,
or Red Book, was 15,670. 4
It need hardly be said that all this tonnage was of
wood, as no iron ship appears in the Register Book
until the year 1837. -

:

||--º
Wſ|
i
-
56 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
The Register Book as issued in 1834—a reprint
of a page of which appears on the opposite side—
contained a record of all vessels of 50 tons and
upwards registered in the United Kingdom, whether
classed or not, and the following particulars, as far
as they could be ascertained, were given —The
name and description of the vessel, the name of
the master, the tonnage, the port and year of build,
the name of the owner, the port of registry, and
the classification, if assigned, together with the port
at which the vessel had been surveyed. There
were also abbreviated descriptions of the material
of which the vessel was built, and of the repairs
executed. - -
The form and arrangement of the Book, as deter-
mined in 1834, remained practically unaltered for
many years. The first volume necessarily contained
but a small proportion of classed to unclassed vessels,
as characters were assigned only after survey by the
Society's Officers. In this respect, and also as regards
the amount of the information it contained, the new
Register Book would not bear comparison with the
issue of either of its predecessors; and there appear
to have been many complaints of vessels being entered
in it without a class. The reason for including ships
not classed is obvious. It was impossible, under
the rules adopted by the Committee, to assign a
character to the vessels already afloat until they had
been surveyed and reported upon by the Society's
Surveyors. If the volume had contained only the
particulars of the vessels which had been classed
by the Committee up to the time of its issue, it
:
No. Ships. . . Masters. Tons. | Owners. belonging º
- i. - t | . | , - -T-I - --- to. . . . -
i
| where. when
426
Sion Hills, Richards | 168 - trfr liv. Haſbro **
!
: pts,&C.29 | – . . . . .
sir ºr T.Cuthill 282 °t |*-as r | | ||
- Hammond | | - - -] | | | | |
8— —M.Ken-Williams | 124|Strnwy Cardiff Cf. Watrfd |*||
9–Bottcher w; § - * , ||
I - ~ sy, ºw. ley Ağ
430;. ºriełg J. Leslie |364Abrán.
I — —M“Car- J. Walker|188BKirsd1821J. Walker London Lon.C.G.H.
zie Bg f TS
88 ſlfracb 1.
- rey ‘Jº R, TX.
| bes S
- º | Restored 18345 Y. : |
E&F'No.29 |_ _ _ - -
**k---- - - - 4... -- ~ ------Hajri * - - -
5–Edward B
nks -
a |London
- A. Bºuce | 105 Aberd'n
7|— Norwood 180 | |London||
8— — Hamil- |R. Lundy483 Lond: 1894, T.W. ard Brdlgen {{ {i}. Anter E 1|
|-ton S F.&s.34.- . . . . . . - - - . . . .
9]— |Newbolt 471
440——Paget R. Martin 482 -
I —Francis BurwOunbar|41.1|Quebe 1825|D. Gibb. Liverp'l iv. Africal | 1 |
|-ton S. s.3.q.32 I.Scott T | | | | a
2–. —Drake SiG.Nichols I 13|Plym 182: Capt.&C Plym'th|F
§tmyessel g 3 ...] trp.33
Bennett |
tip.3: - • *
- - |London|
|London .
al. Prismh I
tä3 M.C. * - • * $3.
Beverly 327 P.E.Islls29W. Lens Liverpºl Liv. Bathrst E |
HGeorge Māº
- B.B.A. K.P.
-rray Bk F.&s.32. . . . . . . * - ºr . .
*#. StanJ.Johnson 85| London
... -hope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º
Humphrey J. Brown 65 | | | |Nwcastl
3
4.
B.
... }. Davy . . . - I • - g
6—James Cock G. Allen 366 London
*/
3.
• *— TKempt J. Patrick 804 N.Sch 1836.J. Wait Dundee Dun. Baltic |AEI
el ºn...&#, c.nº loa, **** -
- JäBeº J. Collin |292. - -
łrp.32 | s
Liverp'l
W. Cram - 141|Poole 1832 Fryer&Co Poole. Poo Nwfind 10 A |
-ford -
9— —Byng Bg
— —Franklin Mitch'nsn 244|Sthwkł833 Baton&c Nwcastiliz. Mºntral J A |
sw C. * | | | Elveryl || | .*
Jace #. 56.




















—i. .”
**. §
Annals of Zloyd's Register 57
would have been of but small dimensions, and of little
service to the public. The succeeding editions of
the work, however, bear testimony to the extensive
scale of the Society's operations. During the first
five years of its existence no fewer than 15,000
surveys of vessels had been held, and the reports.
thereof dealt with by the Committee. The decision,
therefore, to omit, upon reprinting the book in 1838,
vessels which had never been surveyed and classed,
made no appreciable difference in the bulk of the
volume.
The Rules and Regulations as finally adopted by
the Provisional Committee, and in the framing of .
which Mr. G. F. Young, M.P., and Mr. William
Tindall took a leading part, treated of the construction
of wood ships in brief and general terms, and contained
but slight reference to the building of wood steamers,
which until that time had been comparatively few in
number. There was little direction laid down beyond
the description of timber to be used in the construction
of vessels for the respective terms of classification, and
the scantlings of the principal parts of a vessel. Four
different grades of classification were provided, based
substantially upon the Rules drawn up by the Mixed
Committee of Inquiry in 1826, the methods of distin-
guishing the classes previously in vogue being followed
by the new Society. ,
The letter A indicated the first description of the
First Class, which included ships that had not passed
a prescribed age, and were kept in the highest state
of efficiency. - -
The character Æ denoted the second description
*>3.

r
--> -º-º-º------- - - -
* - -
*
- -
58 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
of the First Class, and applied to vessels which had
passed the prescribed age, and had not undergone
the repairs required for Continuation or Restoration
on the A character, but were still in a condition for
the safe conveyance of dry and perishable cargoes.
The letter E designated the Second Class, com-
prising ships which, although unfit for carrying dry
cargoes, were perfectly safe for the conveyance, to all
parts of the world, of cargoes not in their nature
liable to sea damage. -
The Third Class, denoted by the letter I, included
vessels which were good in constitution and fit for
the conveyance on short voyages (not out of Europe)
of cargoes not subject to sea damage.
The condition of the anchors, cables, and stores,
when satisfactory, was indicated by the figure 1; when
unsatisfactory, by the figure 2.
New ships, to be entitled to rank in the first
description of the first class, for the full period pro-
vided by the Rules, must have been inspected, while
building, by the Society's Surveyors. The prescribed
examination was very like that now prescribed for
vessels building under “ordinary survey”; which
is to say that they were examined at certain stages
of their construction, and not continuously, as is
required in the present day for vessels building under
“special survey.” - -
As regards vessels already in existence at the
establishment of the new Register, and which, as
intimated, were required to undergo a careful
survey at the hands of the Society's officers prior
to classification, it was stated that “they would be

:
sº
%
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 59
classed agreeably to the descriptions laid down for
the building of new ships, unless on such survey there
were found sufficient cause to assign them a less
period.” -
But while a sufficiently favourable opportunity was
thus afforded to owners of existing ships to secure a
class equal to that which would have been granted if the
vessels had been built under survey, the same latitude
was not extended to those built subsequently to the
promulgation of the Rules. In the case of such
vessels, one year was to be deducted from the class
which would otherwise have been awarded; and in
1842 this regulation was so altered that a vessel not
built under survey could be classed no higher than
10 A. -
So early as 1834 the importance of keeping wood
vessels dry during construction was understood, and
an extra year was added to the period for which
they might be classed, provided they were built under
an efficient roof, and twelve months were occupied in
their construction. -
After the expiration of the term of years originally
assigned to vessels on the A character, they could be
restored to that grade, under certain restrictions, at
any age, if found upon surveys of a most searching
character to be in a satisfactory condition. Indeed,
the requirements of the Rules in this respect were far
in excess of any now in operation, and it is perhaps
Somewhat surprising that this severity does not appear
to have raised complaints from any quarter at the
time. The Rules on this point were, however, in
accordance with the best practice of the period, as
º
ſº •')
*s Ç ...”
;: \–1—
*


|
.
º
6O Annals of Zloyd's Register.
exemplified by the ordinary routine of the East India
Company in the periodical examination of their
vessels. x
If a vessel was not restored to the A class, she
lapsed into the second description of the first class,
designated AE, provided her condition was sufficiently
good; it being considered that vessels of this descrip-
tion were fit to carry dry and perishable cargoes.
Restored vessels also lapsed into the AE class upon
the same conditions. *
The Rules issued in 1834.contained precise regu-
lations regarding the survey of steamers, the number
of such vessels having been gradually increasing for
several years prior to that date. It was provided
that they should be surveyed twice in each year; and
that at the above directed surveys a certificate from
some competent Master Engineer should be produced,
a notation to this effect being made in the Register
Book.
It is worthy of note that, under the provisions of
the Rules in force at this time, and for about twenty
years later, the scantlings allowed for wood steamers
under 300 tons were required to be only equal to
two-thirds of those prescribed for sailing ships of the
same tonnage, the proportion being altered to three-
fourths in steamers of larger size.
To conduct the surveys prescribed by the Rules
of the new Committee, a staff of Surveyors was
appointed, numbering sixty-three in all, of whom
thirteen were exclusively the servants of the Society,
and these were distributed at the different ports in
the United Kingdom, in proportion to the average
, 3/3%
*
V.
*º
A.
3º
*
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 61
amount of tonnage built at or sailing from the district.
The exclusive Surveyors were appointed thus:—
DISTRICT. §º
Bristol tº gº º tº º º tº e is tº ſº tº ... I
Glasgow, Greenock, and ports on I
the Clyde tº gº tº tº C & tº e =
Hull, Gainsborough, Goole, Selby,
Thorn, and Grimsby ... © tº e 2
Leith and ports in the Frith of \ I
Forth & e tº © º o tº s tº
Liverpool ... 2
| London ... tº º ſº 3
Newcastle and Shields I
Sunderland 2
Total I3
These Surveyors were of two classes, known as
“Shipwright Surveyors” and “Nautical Surveyors.”
The former were practical shipwrights, who had
served an apprenticeship in the usual manner; whereas
the latter were shipmasters possessing an acquaint-
ance with the construction and repairs of ships. The
primary duty of the Nautical Surveyors appears to
have been to attend to the survey of vessels afloat,
and that of the Shipwright Surveyors the inspection
of vessels while building, while both officers joined
in the surveys on Old vessels in dry dock; but this
division of labour could only be adopted in the prin-
cipal ports which had surveyors of both classes.
The duty of classifying ships upon the Surveyors'
reports was at first undertaken by the whole Com-
mittee; but in 1835 it was delegated to Sub-Committees.
+–&
tº
A -
".
- º
t
tº

:•s

tº
62 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
The earliest list of these Sub-Committees is dated
April 9th, 1835. - -
The changes made in the Rules of the Society
during the earlier years of its existence were not very
considerable. In 1837, a new class, *AE in red,
was introduced, to represent vessels of a Superior
character to those previously given the AE class, the
red colour having been probably chosen to distinguish
the vessels readily from others classed with the same
letter in the Book. Ships so classed were fit to carry
dry and perishable cargoes to and from all parts of
the world, and had lapsed from the A class without
having completed such repairs as were neces-
sary for restoration or continuation to the first
class.
In the year 1837 the Rule for the continuation of
ships on the highest class was first given. This
continuation was not to exceed one-third the number
of years originally assigned, and was to begin from
the expiration of the original class, and not from the
date of survey. The opening out of the vessel was, it
seems, left to the judgment of the Surveyor, and not
carefully prescribed as at present. This was the only
Rule in operation under which a vessel was eligible for
continuation on the A1 character until 1863, when, by
a more stringent examination of the vessel's frame,
an extension of two-thirds the original class was
granted. These two terms of continuation—viz., the
one-third and the two-third terms—were supplemented,
in 1881, by a third Rule, which provided that the
vessel might be again continued at the end of the
ordinary continuation period, such continuation not
3%

* - - — ------- -— - — . —#
- & - - . *-
f - - *
Annals of Lloyd's Register, 63
to exceed one-third the number of years originally
assigned. - t
In 1837, carefully - prepared Tables were first
introduced into the Rules, specifying the different
periods of classification which would be assigned by
the Committee to vessels built of certain different
kinds of wood, and stating the several parts of the
vessel in which these woods might be used for the
respective terms of years.
ºf cºfº) \{^^)
$º . &º.
§§§ ". - 3.

CHAPTER IX.
riº HE new Society was now, in 1834, an accom-
ºf plished fact, and although, perhaps, it did not
Bºlº fully realise in all respects the perfect ideal
f a National Registry of Shipping, it was unques-
tionably an immense improvement upon the previously
existing Registries. Now, for the first time, the
classification of the Mercantile Marine was entrusted
to a large Committee directly representative, not of
one section only, but of the whole of the interests
concerned, namely, the Merchant, the Underwriter,
and Shipowner; and now also, for the first time, was
there a serious and systematic attempt made to put
into actual practice the principle of assigning the
character of a vessel according to her intrinsic
merits. - -
Coming after the promulgation of a scheme of repre-
sentation drawn on such broad and liberal lines as
those laid down in the Report of the Committee of
Inquiry in 1826, it was, perhaps, scarcely to be expected
that the constitution of the Committee of Manage-
ment of the new Registry, although infinitely superior



t rººf" y
Annals of Lloyd's Aegister. { 65
to that of the Boards of its predecessors, should com-
mand universal approval. The members of the Com-
mittee, it was true, were elected by each of the several
interests involved, but they were drawn from the
shipping community of London alone, the outports
having no direct voice in the choice of representatives.
The Committee who framed the constitution of the
Society expressed their “earnest desire to cultivate
and maintain the most perfect good understanding
with the Merchants, Shipowners, and Underwriters of
the different ports of the United Kingdom, on whose
support and co-operation they rely for the promotion
of the objects of the Institution within their respective
districts,” and they sought, and in many cases obtained,
the advice and assistance of commercial bodies at the
different ports in the selection of properly qualified
Surveyors. t
The desire of the principal outports, however, to
possess a more direct representation in the manage-
ment of the Society was evinced at a very early
period. Soon after the publication of the Prospectus
in the beginning of 1834, the Committee were called
upon to consider the question. The first communica-
tion on the subject was received from Sunderland,-
then the most important shipbuilding centre in the
country, nearly equalling, as regards the number and
tonnage of ships built, all the other ports together.
This was quickly followed by a representation from
Liverpool, then, as now, the great centre of the West,
in all matters pertaining to merchant shipping. The
objections emanating from the latter port were at first
confined to the proposed Scale of charges. The estab-
2>
s
*


;
66 Anna/s of Z/oyd's Register.
lishment of a local Committee affiliated to the Com-
mittee of the Society was next suggested. It appears,
however, that the powers desired for the proposed
Liverpool Committee were greater than could be
granted consistently with the constitution of the
Society, and therefore negotiations were ultimately
abandoned. -
The Liverpool people upon the rejection of their
proposals endeavoured to establish another Register
of Shipping, and there was issued in the follow-
ing year (1835) a book bearing the title of the
“Liverpool Register of Shipping,” containing the
names and other particulars, but not the characters,
of vessels belonging to Liverpool and of those trading
thereto. There appears to have been but this one
issue of the work.
During the next few years the constitution of the
Society and its practical working were freely canvassed
in the mercantile press. In the course of time the
opposition of parties at the outports was, for the most
part, conciliated by the action of the General Ship-
Owners' Society. To this body was entrusted the
election of one-half of the members of the Register
Committee, and when filling up vacancies care was
taken to include a fair proportion of such members of
the Shipowners' Society as held seats there as the
representatives of outports. By this means we find
that in one year, out of the twelve gentlemen returned
by the Shipowners' Society to serve on the Committee
of Lloyd's Register, no less than five were the nominees
of outports, namely of Whitby, Sunderland, Scar-
borough, South Shields, and North Shields. *
Aſena/s of Z/oyd's Register. - 67
—s.
In Liverpool, however, this arrangement was
not considered quite satisfactory, and a guarantee
fund was raised in April, 1838, for the creation of
a separate Register. The outcome of this movement
was the “Liverpool Register of Shipping,” which
appears to have closely imitated Lloyd's Register,
both in the symbols of classification and in the arrange-
ment and phraseology of the Rules.
In 1844, a proposal was made by the Com-
mittee of the Liverpool Book that the two Societies
should make a common revision of their respective
Rules, in order to remove the differences that existed ;
between them, and so put an end to any attempt to :
play off one Society against the other. Upon the
invitation of the Committee of Lloyd's Register, the
Liverpool Committee forwarded their suggestions on
the Rules, and concluded by stating that, should their
views be adopted, one Book would be sufficient. .
The propositions put forward by the Liverpool
Committee involved the existence of two Boards of
Management, having equal powers within their re-
spective provinces, Lone at Liverpool having sole i
control of that district, and the other in London
having jurisdiction over the other ports of the country.
To this the General Committee could not consent, as it 5,
would have been inconsistent with the “fundamental
constitution of this Society,” but they referred the
proposed amendments of the Rules to the considera-
tion of a Sub-Committee. Negotiations now closed,
but were reopened next year. A common ground of
agreement was discovered, and on the 28th April,
1845, the amalgamation of the two bodies was finally
;
;
*.** : F 2 ºf * r *
... " \ſº
*&_X § Nº
§ {{ ºx
t


s:*
ſi
$
.
|
§|
f*
sºAſ
s
3.
*2_3.
*—;
68 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
approved of by the General Committee in special
meeting assembled. *-
The basis of amalgamation was substantially as
follows:–The Liverpool Branch Committee, it was
arranged, should consist of twelve Members, who
would be elected by the Liverpool Underwriters
Association and Shipowners' Association in equal
proportions, the Chairmen of the Associations of
Shipowners, Underwriters, and Shipbuilders respec-
tively remaining ex-officio Members. The Chairman
and Deputy-Chairman of the local Committee, together
with the Chairman of the local Classification Committee,
were each to have a seat at the London Board, eac
officio. In dealing with reports of surveys held in the
Liverpool district, the Branch Committee would stand
in much the same relation as the Sub-Committee
of Classification in London to the General Committee,
whose decision on all reports of survey, as well as on
other matters, is final.
It was further distinctly specified that none of
these arrangements should restrict the London Com-
mittee from the exercise of a general superintendence
over the affairs of the Society, in the Liverpool
district, as elsewhere, as prescribed by the Rules.
Such vessels as were classed exclusively in the
Liverpool Register Book were to be placed in an
appendix to Lloyd's Register, to be discontinued after
a few years, the difference in the Rules of the two
Societies being made the subject of consideration.

CHAPTER x.
####|HILE these constitutional questions were
}}} being discussed and arranged, there were
Sºğ also heard sounds of murmuring against
the proceedings of the still young Register Society
in another respect. Prior to the publication of the
Rules for the classification of vessels, the principles of
theoretical naval architecture were little known. The
country doubtless, had many very good shipbuilders,
who built good and efficient vessels, but they were
seldom guided by scientific rules. No scale of
scantlings for the principal parts of merchant ships
had been in force, nor was the practice of the
preceding Register Societies, as regards new ships,
based upon reliable data; while, alike as regards the
construction of new vessels and the efficient repairing
of old ones, there was entirely wanting any well-
arranged or uniform system of inspection. The
Surveyors under the old arrangement, as has already
been pointed out, were left practically uncontrolled in
their decisions, and assigned characters in the Register
Books to the vessels which they themselves surveyed.




i*
|
;
%
70 Annals of Zloyd's - Aegister.
But now there was introduced by the Society's Rules
a uniformity of system based upon the best ascertained
practice, which left no room for glaring differences.
between the practice of one locality and another and
the judgment of different Surveyors. The presiding
Committee now granted classes to vessels only upon
evidence of the requirements of the Rules having
been complied with. - -
The transition from the old, loose practice to the
new systematic course of procedure was naturally
attended with no small difficulties. Shipowners and
shipbuilders, who had hitherto been left to follow their
own inclinations in many cases, did not take kindly to
the altered circumstances, and, as a result, the Society
gained a notoriety in some quarters for being arbitrary
and too strict in its requirements.
Added to all this, the commercial marine of the
country was then passing through a period of severe
depression, which was not calculated to awaken ship-
owners to a lively interest in a Register Society that,
constituted as it was, must depend entirely for support
upon them and the other interests concerned.
Under these circumstances, it is not surprising to
learn that for the first two or three years of the
Society's existence it was somewhat doubtful
whether it would succeed. The Subscribers to the
Register Book, who on the establishment of the
Society in 1834 numbered 721, had dwindled down
in two years to 615; and in 1836, when Christmas
came round, the funds were at such a low ebb that
Mr. Chapman, the Chairman, advanced a sum
of money in order that the salaries of the officers

Ammals of Zloyd's Register. 7t
might not be in arrear ! This, however, was the
turning-point, the “darkest hour before the dawn";
for prosperity soon afterwards attended the Committee's
efforts, and there was never a recurrence of this state
of things. The Rules of the Society by this time
had gained a hold on the public, and the number of
Subscribers to the work rapidly increased from year
to year, until the Committee had the satisfaction and
pride of seeing the Institution which they had brought
into existence take up a position of the first importance
in the confidence of the public,+one that the vicissi-
tudes of fifty years have left unimpaired. -
A brief reference to some of the contemporary
records containing evidence of the estimation in which
the Society was then held, may not be without
interest. The Report of the Select Committee of
the House of Commons, appointed in the year 1836,
to inquire into the causes of the increased number of
shipwrecks, furnishes us with the opinions of ship-
owners and others who gave evidence, and with the
judgment of the Select Committee itself, in regard to
the operations and influence of the Register.
It seems that at that time there was a feeling of
uneasiness in some quarters regarding the apparent
increase in the number of shipwrecks, and in connexion
with a question of such importance affecting the mercan-
tile marine it could only be expected that the Society's
work would come under consideration. The Select
Committee in their Report explain the shortcomings of
the old Register Societies, to whose defective systems
of classification they show that the production of cheap
and badly-constructed ships was chiefly due ; and
-

72 Ammals of Lloyd's Register.
they then go on to say that “the system of classifica-
tion has been greatly improved by the formation of
a new Association, entitled, ‘Lloyd's Register of
British and Foreign Shipping,” the basis of whose
regulations appears to be a bond-ſide attempt to
classify vessels according to their real and intrinsic
merits, including their age, construction, materials,
workmanship, and stores”; also that “there is reason
to believe that the ultimate result of this new system
of classification will be to effect a great improvement
in the general character of the ships of the United
Kingdom.” That this expectation has since been
realised is doubtless the opinion of all who have care-
fully watched the successive developments in naval
construction during later years, and have traced the
effects of the Society's influence in relation to them.
The Annual Report presented to the public
meeting of the General Shipowners' Society in
July, 1840, bears testimony to the continued growth
of the Society, which is alluded to in the following
term S :-
“The last point to which your Committee would
especially call attention is one which involves probably
a greater degree of real importance than any other charge
entrusted to their superintendence. It is the position
occupied by the Committee in relation to the now really
national establishment of ‘Lloyd's Register of British
and Foreign Shipping.' The vast influence over the
Shipping property of the country exercised by that
Committee, though by some imperfectly understood,
and by many inadequately estimated, may be inferred
from the fact that I I,595 ships and vessels are now
recorded in the Register.” + + +
“It is the unhesitating belief of your Committee that,

wº)
&

- - *- -- * ~ *~ * ~~~~ - -- 2 -
* - v º
f -
- *
* **
"
Annals of Zloyd's Register. 73
making reasonable allowance for difficulties inseparable
from such a task, this important duty is, on the whole,
ably, impartially, and beneficially performed ; the general
character of British Shipping having considerably im-
proved since the establishment of the new system.”
The views of the Committee received confirmation
from the speeches delivered at the meeting, one out-
port representative stating that, to his knowledge, the
“improvement in shipbuilding at Sunderland was
greatly due to the action of Lloyd's Register.”
Some interesting evidence to the same effect is
found in the proceedings of the Select Committee of
the House of Commons of 1843 on “Shipwrecks.”
The Committee's report contains the following para-
graph —
“The Association formed for the survey and classi-
fication of merchant vessels, especially alluded to in the
- report of the Committee of 1836, under the name of
‘Lloyd's Register of British and Foreign Shipping, has
made regular progress from that time, and, as appears
by the evidence of the Secretary, any objections enter-
tained against it in the first instance are now removed, and
shipowners are generally ready to submit their ships and
stores to the fair examination of the surveyors of the
Society for the purpose of having them classed in the
Register Book according to their real quality.”
By this time Shippers and Passengers, as well as
Underwriters, were in the habit of consulting the
Register Book before they embarked their goods, their
persons, or their money upon a ship to risk the hazards
of a voyage, believing that when information respecting
a ship was not to be obtained by reference to the
Register it was a “bad omen and a weighty objection

74 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
against her.” We now find the Shipping and Mer-
cantile Gazette, which, in the earlier existence of the
Society, had been one of its most candid critics,
constrained to admit that the Committee of the new
Society had “exercised their functions with honour,
firmness, and impartiality”; and that the system of
classification “brought into operation under all the
difficulties of a declining trade, had attained a success
which, considering the want of unanimity among Ship-
owners, is very remarkable.” Again, the same journal
stated that the Registry had by this time “acquired
so great an importance as an authority upon the value
and seaworthiness of merchant vessels, that it would
be impossible for ever so good a ship to obtain
freight abroad without reference to the Register.”
The following figures show the progress made in
the classification of ships between 1836 and 1842 –
Number of vessels classed A in 1836 ... 2,789
}} yy }} I837 tº ſº tº 3, 186
}} 25 3) 1838 gº tº e 3,782
9) * I839 ... 4,4CI
33 }} 3) 1840 ... 5,226
jy 3y Jy I84I tº tº gº 5,961
y? I842 ū 6 @ 6,321
3y 35
%

L G-- º, - . . . … º. R8A.. s." . . . .” * * dº. . . . . . * * - = i. i* .
Rex, ºo::::::... ." : sº ... ºº * ** tºº. ...; §§ tº ºf * * | "...ºz.:
. . º.º. ºf . {{ º º H. : : ºf º %. . º. 2 ſº º º :S
s:--> * - -º -- --- £º: E- tº "E.
ºrsº-ºº::=::=34:ºs-e-º-º: º-
º:-ºº-ºº-º-º: ſº ºf: Fº: E---> -º-
CHAPTER XI.
# tº LTHOUGH no Rules for the construc-
W##| tion of Iron Ships were promulgated by
Włºś the Society till 1855, vessels of this
description were admitted to classification in the
Register Book at a much earlier date. The atten-
tion of the Society was first directed to iron as
a material for ships about 1837, in which year
the first iron vessel that received a class was
built. This was the steamer Sirius, of 180 tons,
built in London under the inspection of the Society's
Surveyors, and owned at Marseilles. She appears
in the supplement to the 1837 volume, having the
A character without a term of years, and the nota-
tion “Built of iron.” The next one entered in the
Book was the iron sailing ship /?onside, of 270 tons,
constructed in 1838 by Messrs. Jackson & Jordan,
of Liverpool, for Messrs. Cairns & Co., of the same
port. This vessel appears in the 1839 volume, with
the same note “Built of iron,” but without any class,
although it is evident from the date, “I I, 38,” inserted
in the column for classification, that she had been
surveyed by the Society's officers in November, 1838.
From 1838 until 1844 the Committee continued to



76 Annals of Z/oyd's /ēegister
record iron ships in the Register Book with no other
designation than that of “built of iron,” such as was
accorded to the Ironside. In August, 1843, however,
the Committee determined to collect all the evidence
available from their surveying staff relating to the
experiences acquired in regard to iron ships, and the
Surveyors were requested to report to the Committee
upon the qualities, durability of materials, workman-
ship, and fastenings of such vessels. These reports
were duly received and considered by the Committee,
and upon the 4th of January, 1844, a notice was issued
that “in future (by a resolution passed that day)
the character A1 will be granted by the Society to
vessels of iron built under the Survey of the Society's
Surveyors, and reported to be of good and substan-
tial materials and with good workmanship. All such
vessels to be surveyed annually.” **
It should be added that before this date the number
of iron ships had so increased, and the demand for
some kind of higher class, based on fixed Rules, had
become so general that the Committee appealed to the
Shipbuilders of the country for assistance in compiling
such Rules. This request was, however, made in
vain, and the Iron Rules remained in a vague and
indeterminate form until the year 1854. The Com-
mittee hesitated to lay down hard-and-fast lines for
the construction of iron ships while such ships were
in their infancy, preferring rather to await more
lengthened experience.
During the next few years the reports received
from the Surveyors stationed at all parts of the
country constituted an excellent and safe guide in the
&
Annals of Zloyd's Aegister. 77
preparation of the Rules for Iron Ships, when that
task was at last undertaken. :
Under the direction of Messrs. Martin and
Ritchie, the Society's principal surveyors, every
opportunity was taken for collecting trustworthy data
in regard to the performances of iron ships. The
principal iron Shipbuilders of the United Kingdom
were also communicated with on the same subject,
and the replies received from them proved in many
cases of value to the principal surveyors in preparing
their recommendations for the consideration of the
Committee. -
The earliest suggested Rules for Iron Ships of which
any record exists were received from the Glasgow office
of the Society, the Clyde being then, as now, one of
the principal centres of the iron shipbuilding industry.
They were dated the 10th of February, 1854, and
were signed by Richard Robertson, Henry Adams, and
Samuel Pretious, surveyors of the Society, stationed
respectively at Glasgow, Hull, and Newcastle, who
appear to have sat as a Committee upon the subject,
by the direction of the Committee of the Register.
These proposals, slightly altered, appeared in the
Register Book for 1855, in the form of the first
Rules on Iron Shipbuilding issued by the Society,
and were prefaced by the following remarks:–
“Considering that Iron Shipbuilding is yet in its
infancy, and that there are no well-understood general
rules for building Iron Ships, the Committee have not
deemed it desirable to frame a scheme compelling the
adoption of a particular form or mode of construction ;
but that certain general requirements should be put for-

- —t-
78 Ammals of Z/oyd's Register.
ward having for their basis thickness of plates and
substance of frames, showing a minimum in each par-
ticular, to entitle ships to the character A for a period of
years, subject, however, to certain periodical surveys ;
and also to a continuation of such character, should
their state and condition justify it on subsequent exa-
mination. For the purpose of attaining this object, the
following Rules and the accompanying Tablé of Dimen-
sions have been formed.” - • -
According to these Rules, iron ships built under
survey might be classed for periods of twelve, nine,
and six years, subject to occasional or annual surveys
when practicable, and to a special survey in dry
dock or on blocks every third year. The thickness
of the plating, together with the spacing of the frames,
determined the number of years assigned, there being
a difference in thickness of I-16th of an inch between
each grade, and a difference in frame-spacing of
two inches between the highest and the two lower
grades; but in all other respects the requirements
were common to the three classes. Following the
provisions of the Rules for Wood Ships, one year
was added to the period assigned in the case of
vessels built under a roof; while vessels not sur-
veyed during construction were classed A from year
to year only, but for a period not exceeding six years.
On the expiration of the terms of classification, the
vessels were liable to lapse to the AE character, unless
specially surveyed to determine their claims to be
allowed a higher class.
The quantity of material used in iron ships at this
period was considerable, as may be seen on reference
to the scantlings and arrangements prescribed in the

Anna/s of Z/oyd's Aegister. - 79
Rules. For instance, the shell plating was required
to be one inch in thickness for vessels of 3,000 tons
of the highest grade, and the frames to be spaced
not more than sixteen inches apart for the twelve-
years' grade, this limit being increased to eighteen
inches in vessels of the lower classes of nine and six
years. In addition, all iron vessels were required to
have a strake of clamp or ceiling plates fitted all fore
and aft between the tiers of beams; and in vessels
with only one tier of beams, the clamp was required
to be fitted about two feet below the beams. -
The foregoing Rules, which underwent some
alterations in 1857, when the thickness of the plating
for vessels of the several grades was increased by I-16th
of an inch, and the frame-spacing was increased from
sixteen to eighteen inches, remained in force for
nearly ten years, but they do not appear to have
gained universal approval. -
Mr. Ritchie, one of the Society's principal Sur-
veyors, who took an active part in the preparation of
the Rules for Iron Ships in 1854, has left upon record
the following remarks in regard to them, which may
now be read with interest and advantage:—
“At the time the Committee drew up the first Rules
in 1854, they felt that a classification of six, nine, and
twelve years, although it might approach the truth as
to the probable comparative durability of the various
kinds of timber of which such ships were allowed by the
Rules to be built, yet these characters could not correctly
indicate the durability of vessels built of metal, which
only deteriorated by the wasting of the surfaces, and
whose durability depended upon different laws than that
of timber.”
;3
3.)
> &
$

f#
zº;º
3.
8O Annals of Zloyd's Register.
It was considered, however, that these rules for
classing would serve until more experience was gained,
not only in the durability of iron when subjected to the
continuous action of sea-water and the chemical action
of Some descriptions of cargoes, but also on unascer-
tained points in the construction of iron ships which
could not be premised from the most complete
knowledge of wooden ships.
In the year following the preparation of the first
Rules issued by the Society for the construction and
classification of iron ships, the Committee passed reso-
lutions sanctioning the continuation and restoration
of such vessels, subject to their being submitted to
certain prescribed examinations. The continuation
granted upon the A character was not to exceed half
the term assigned originally or on restoration, and
the restoration could not exceed two-thirds the period
originally assigned, and was to commence from the
date of survey. Further resolutions were also adopted
at the same time relating to vessels already classed
without a term of years, by which such vessels might
be granted a term, unless it should be found that, if
they had been originally classed for a period of years,
their characters would have expired, in which case
they would lapse into the AE class, if found entitled
thereto.
In 1856 the Committee issued the very important
regulation, that when the engines and boilers of iron
ships were taken out of them, the ships should be
submitted to a particular and special survey. The
necessity for this measure has since been abundantly
illustrated.


#3
* | * ~ *
{j
| 6′ſº
§§ § -------------------------, ---, ----------------------- ~~~~----- - -------
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 81
An important departure was taken about this time
by admitting to classification vessels which were not
built in accordance with the Society's Rules. In
July, 1857, the Committee decided that ships built on
peculiar principles should be specially surveyed every
two years and marked “Expl. (B.S.),” denoting that
they were of an experimental character, and were
classed subject to their being surveyed biennially.
Mr. Ritchie said, in 1863, when addressing the
Institution of Naval Architects:—“It should be borne
in mind that, although the mode of constructing iron
ships primarily intended by these Rules is the original
ordinary one of vertical frames and longitudinal
plating, the Committee do not hesitate to admit into
the Register Book and into the same classes, vessels
otherwise constructed, if of equal strength; and they
have classed ships with longitudinal frames or with
diagonal frames, and many with double or cellular
bottoms for water - ballast.” Contemporary evi-
dence of this disposition of the Register Committee
to afford every impetus in their power to constructive
development is also obtainable from such an eminent
shipbuilder as Mr. Scott Russell, the builder of the
Great AEastern.
That gentleman, who built more novelties than any
other shipbuilder of his time, when referring to this
subject in 1860, alluded to “the let mom scripta, or
unwritten Rule of Lloyd's"; and said that, although
the Society was compelled to frame Rules for the
guidance of its Surveyors, it was yet prepared to class a
ship built in any other way, “if it can be shown that
she is as strong as one built by the Rules”; and,
G
:
:
%
i
-
.*-i-
+
3–V."
*
;
82 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
further, that the Society “ had relaxed their Rules in
a way which enables them to combine with the
strictness of Rules a defiance of any one saying
that they stand in the way of the progress of iron
shipbuilding.” These statements are interesting now,
as showing the hold which the Society had gained
upon the goodwill and respect of the shipping com-
munity at a time when iron shipbuilding was in an
unsettled and growing state, and when there were so
many difficulties in the way of arriving at a just
conclusion regarding the merits of the many modes
of construction which were being proposed and tried.
|
-
l>º"2")};

CHAPTER XII.
#####ITH all the advantages that arose from
: } | the use of Iron for Shipbuilding, there
§ was one objection which soon began to
make itself apparent. -
Experience showed that the bottoms of iron
ships were more or less subject to fouling and cor-
rosion, whereby the speed became greatly reduced
after the vessels had been some few months at
sea. Many attempts were made then, and have
been continued since, to discover a material for coating
the bottom which should prevent both fouling and
corrosion; and, although some of the compositions in
use do effect that result to a considerable degree, yet
it must be admitted that to a large extent the same
difficulty exists now as at the beginning.
Hence, so early as 1861, and even before then,
various modes of sheathing the bottoms of iron
ships were tried, the sheathing being in every case
covered with copper or Muntz's metal; and ultimately
the plating was in Some instances entirely dispensed
with, and wood planking wrought upon the iron
frames. These latter vessels came to be spoken of
as “Composite Vessels,” and that designation is still
G 2
-
---
sº |
: jº.
•e




84 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
retained. Their planking was, of course, caulked, and
their bottoms were sheathed with copper or Muntz's
metal, like those of ordinary wood ships, thus
giving them all the advantages of the latter as to
cleanliness and consequent speed.
The trade with China and the East Indies round
the Cape of Good Hope created a special demand for
vessels capable of making fast homeward passages,
and the composite system was exactly adapted for
such ships. The composite tea clippers, and their
singularly swift ocean voyages, vić the Cape, with
cargoes of new teas, will long be remembered,
although these ships are now becoming of the past,
and the special work for which they were built is
being performed by steamers.
The first composite ship to appear in the
Register Book was the 7uða/ Cain, of 787 tons,
i which was entered in the edition for 1851 with the
notation, “Iron frame, planked,” and with the character
A, but no term of years. N
In 1860 and the immediately subsequent years
this description of vessel appears to have been viewed
with more favour than previously, as we find several
shipbuilders inquiring what class the Committee would
be prepared to give to such vessels when built. The
experience of the Committee with this type of ship
having led them to regard composite vessels as experi-
mental, a notation to this effect was placed against
*.\,
:
these vessels in the Register Book, and they were
subject to biennial survey, in order that particular
ł ttention might be - paid to the condition of their
fastenings.
†: 3 - º
------------------------——---—----------- ?----
*-3
* - - ---------------------------------- - - --~~~~~ * ~ *----->4.--------- ~ *~~~~- - - - - - - a •. - *- - - - -, * * - - -

g- 3:
Annals of Lloyd's Register. - 85
Subsequent experience proved the wisdom of this
course being adopted, as the renewal of bolt-fasten-
ings has been the chief source of expense in the
repairs of composite ships, except when entirely of
copper or mixed metal. It was, however, at that
time very doubtful whether the association of iron and
copper in the framing and fastenings of these vessels
would not lead to a galvanic action such as would result
in the wasting of the former and the loosening of the
latter. A term of years was, however, granted by the
Committee, in accordance with the characters assigned
to the wood materials employed in their construction,
the same as in the case of wood ships.
Various modes of construction were at first pro-
posed. Some of the vessels had wood floors and iron
angle-frames; in others, the frames were of “channel ”
iron, or some equally novel sectional form; many
variations also existed in the modes of fastening.
Under these circumstances, Mr. Waymouth, one
of the Surveyors on the London establishment, pro-
ceeded, in 1864, by the Committee's direction, to
prepare Rules for the construction of Composite
ships, and these were adopted by the Committee, and
issued as suggested Rules for Composite ships in the
year 1867. As before, the period assigned was based
upon the nature of the wood materials employed, and
the character of the fastening, an addition of one
year being also given when the vessel was built under j
a roof. Indeed, the Rules were practically the same as
those for wood ships so far as regards these points.
It should be stated that the Rules were illustrated
with drawings prepared by Mr. Cornish, who is now
-
-
| 6′y’s sº
Sºlº wº
º §§.
2N} º'
* \\,.... i - . ...?" JR
t -
+ 86 Annals of Zloyd's Aegister.
one of the Assistants to the Chief Surveyor, and that
the original drawings upon exhibition at Paris and
Moscow were awarded Bronze and Gold Medals.
These Rules were universally adopted, and nearly
every composite ship since built has been constructed
in accordance with their provisions. Subsequent expe-
rience with these vessels has been very satisfactory, but
the opening of the Suez Canal checked their produc-
tion at once, especially as their construction is rather
expensive, when compared with that of iron ships.
Many of the composite ships still remain, doing good
and regular service.

º
§ {{*.
CHAPTER XIII.
#FTER the amalgamation of the Society with
# the Liverpool Register in 1845, no further
ɺlº change took place in the constitution of the
Committee until 1863. But the intervening years
were not allowed to pass without a renewal of the
applications from the Provinces to be admitted to
a share in the management of the Society. The
enlargement of its London Board, by the admission
of Nominees from Liverpool, touched the suscepti-
bilities of the other outports; and the north-eastern
districts, then rapidly growing in commercial activity,
were not slow to take advantage of the opportunity
thus afforded to urge their claims.
It was contended that the outports generally had
a very insufficient voice in the management of the
affairs of the Society; and that, as its operations
extended to all the ports in the country, the election
of the London Committee by and out of residents
in the Metropolis was at variance with all prin-
ciples of representation. These appeals, however,
did not lead to any immediate result, and, as already
stated, it was not till 1863 that any modification was
made.
s
«Y.
-** -
s
3.2
t
&
*—
.*



—s
88 Ammals of Zloyd's Register.
In that year the whole question of the representa-
tion of outports was raised by the Associations of
Shipowners and Underwriters at Liverpool. The
proposals of these bodies were brought under the
consideration of the Committee at a special meeting
on June 1st of that year, when it was resolved unani-
mously, that the Committee were prepared to consider
favourably the proposition to admit additional
Members, to be nominated from the outports. A
deputation from Liverpool was received by the
Committee in support of the views of the Shipping
interests at that port, and at a subsequent meeting,
specially convened, the following resolutions were
adopted :— -
“That an addition, not exceeding ten Members, be
made to the present Committee.
“That four of the additional Members be nominated
from Liverpool, viz., two to be elected by the Liverpool
Shipowners' Association ; two to be elected by the
Liverpool Underwriters' Association.”
It was left entirely to the discretion of the Asso-
ciations above named to elect gentlemen who were or
were not already Members of the Liverpool Com-
mittee; but in either case the Liverpool Committee,
it was understood, should not be increased in the
number of its Members,
The powers of the Liverpool Committee were at
the same time somewhat enlarged, and a local Chair-
man of the Rotation Sub-Committee of Classification
was appointed, -
The remaining six additional Outport Members,
'a
&:
g
35
s
3.J

g
& º
Annals of Zloyd's Register. 89
each of whom had to be either a Merchant, Ship-
owner, or Underwriter, were allotted as follows:–
Two Members for the Clyde—namely, one Under-
writer, and one Shipowner.
One Merchant for the Tyne.
One Shipowner for the Wear.
One Merchant for Hull.
One Merchant for Bristol. -
In the following year (1864) a further addition was
made to the Committee in the person of a Member
assigned to the Tees and Hartlepool district, and
returnable as an Underwriter, This made the Mem-
bers allotted to the north-eastern ports three in
number—namely, a Merchant representing the Tyne,
a Shipowner from the Wear, and an Underwriter
elected on the Tees.
Regarding the admissibility of Shipbuilders as a
constituent part of the Committee, it is interesting
to observe what views were held on the subject
by the Committee of that time. Touching a pro-
posal received from Liverpool, to the effect that,
besides the four additional Members allotted to that
port, the Chairman for the time being of the Liver-
pool Shipbuilders' Association should be appointed
a Member of the General Committee, the following
resolutions were adopted :—
“That in readily acceding to the recommendation
of the Liverpool Associations for the amendment of the
Constitution of the Committee, by the admission of ten
additional Representatives for the Outports, ‘four of whom
to be elected by the Shipowners and Underwriters of
Liverpool, the residue to be distributed over the other
\; tº
*\
{
Ammals of Zloyd's Register.
--
Outports, according to their importance,' this Committee
were actuated by a sincere desire both to enlarge
the sphere of usefulness of the Society, by a compre-
hensive extension of its administrative powers, and to
give Liverpool the share of such power to which the
extent of its interest in Maritime Commerce justly
entitles it.” J
“That having already, in accordance with these
principles, consented to the election from Liverpool,
of the number of Representatives asked by the Liver-
pool Associations, this Committee cannot, in justice to
the interests of other Outports, consent to any increase
of that number, nor are they prepared, having reference
to the original Constitution of the Society, and to all
circumstances of the specific recommendation from Liver-
pool, to admit, as an element of the composition of the
Superintending Authority, of a Representative of the
Shipbuilding interest generally, and still less of a
Representative of such interest from any one particular
port.”
“That this Committee are confirmed in the above
Resolution from the consideration that the Liverpool
Shipowners' Association, having the unrestricted right
of selecting their own Representatives, have always the
power of giving effect, should they see fit, to the objects
of which they express approval.”
Again, in the record of the proceedings attending
the discussion of some proposals made on the north-
east coast about this period, with the object of se-
curing a local Committee of Reference, the following
statement appears : —
“The Chairman [Mr. Chapman] explained to the
T]eputation that the Constitution of the Society required
that the Committee should consist of Merchants, Ship-
owners, and Underwriters, in equal proportions, and
that consequently the admission of Shipbuilders as an
Åg
*
| 6′y’s
Yº SK-
sº- ---------
Ammals of Lloyd's Register. 91
element in the Committee would be a violation of the
Constitution on which the Society was formed.”
The Committee of this Society have twice had
under consideration the question of the advisability
of an amalgamation with the “Underwriters' Registry
for Iron Vessels,” which was established in Liverpool
in 1862. * *
The first occasion upon which the question arose
was in 1870. In the early part of that year the
Liverpool Branch Committee of this Society brought
forward a proposal to the effect that some measures
should be taken with a view to promote the closer
association of the Steamship-owning Interest of the
United Kingdom with the Register Book. This sug-
gestion commending itself to the General Committee,
a special Sub-Committee was then appointed to con-
sider what steps could most properly be taken to
secure the object. Liverpool being then the great
centre of steam shipping, the Sub-Committee paid
a visit to that port in August of the same year.
A basis of amalgamation between the Liverpool
Registry and this Society was proposed, and was
referred to a conference between the Special Sub-
Committee, the Liverpool Branch Committee, and a
Deputation from the Underwriters' Registry.
At this conference the subject was very fully
discussed, but the propositions which were finally
agreed upon did not commend themselves to the
Committee of Lloyd's Register, to whose considera-
tion they were submitted at a special meeting.
The question appears to have remained in abey-
#.J
•
*ē*
-:-
| rºsfy
$2
zº W.
92 Annals of Z/oyd's Register.
ance until 1873, when it was revived by a Member
of the General Committee of this Society.
Subsequently a meeting was arranged between
delegates from each Society, and a report of their
proceedings was considered by the General Com-
mittee of Lloyd's Register; but no further progress
was made, and the proposal fell through.
In the meanwhile the Rules regulating the
relations of the Liverpool Branch Committee with
the London Board had undergone such revision as
experience showed to be necessary ; and under
the arrangements then adopted, and which have
remained in force unaltered up to the present time, the
relations of the two Committees have been carried on
with the most perfect harmony and with the most
satisfactory results to all parties concerned.
The revised Code which was adopted in 1871
allowed Liverpool an additional member on the
General Committee. In place of the represen-
tatives elected under the previous regulations by
the Associations of Shipowners and Underwriters
(who were not of necessity members of the Local
Committee) and the three ear-officio members, it was
determined that eight of the members of the Liver-
pool Committee should be members of the General
Committee in London, two to be elected by the
Liverpool Shipowners' Association, two by the Liver-
pool Underwriters' Association, and the remaining
four by the Liverpool Committee; two of the latter
being the Chairman and Deputy Chairman, unless
they should have been elected by either of the other
electing Associations. It was at the same time
Annals of Zayd's Register 93
--------
decided to admit other members of the Liverpool
Committee as substitutes for any of the eight Liver-
pool representatives who might be unable to attend
a special meeting of the General Committee in
London. -
** *** - **** ***k, *-*.*.*.
------------- ~~~~~~~. -------- - - -- ~~~~~ * > --~~~~~~~~~ ********** *-*** ***-*.
-: * ---> 2s,
^*-w *Y. Y J
*sº * 8 * \º
Šºć (g } %.
2% f $—e” **,


{
CHAPTER XIV.
pºsitiºn the year 1863, after nine years' experience
with the working of the Rules for building
s: iron ships, the Committee again took this
under their consideration, with a view to
revision in those particulars which had been found
to require it. As a preliminary measure, inquiries
were made of the whole of the surveying staff and
of the principal iron ship-builders in the United
Kingdom, and replies were received from twenty-
four Shipbuilders and twenty-eight Surveyors. The
result of their recommendations, and the subsequent
deliberations of the Committee, was a general
revision of the Rules and an alteration in the mode
of classification. J
It had been found that the practice of classifying
iron ships for terms of years was not in harmony with
the characteristics of the material employed in their
construction, which does not decay, but wastes on the
surface by oxidation. The character of an iron ship
would be determined by the thickness of the plates
and angle-irons of which she is built—having regard
to her dimensions and proportions. So long as these
scantlings remain undiminished, or almost so, it is


Annals of Z/oyd's Aegister. 95
not reasonable that her character should suffer simply
because she has reached a certain age. This was the
opinion which had grown in the minds of the Society's
officers during the course of their periodical examination
of the iron ships classed in the Register.
The Committee therefore determined to class iron
ships under the three grades, A, AEN, and A6M, and that
these classes should be retained so long as the state of
efficiency of vessels entitled them thereto. The AN
and A classes denoted vessels that had been built in
accordance with, or equal to, the requirements of the
Rules, while the AEN class consisted of vessels entitled
to character A, but which had not been built according
to the Rules. With the introduction of these new
Rules, the frame-spacing was increased to twenty-
one inches; but in vessels provided for half their
length amidships with double frames, fitted back to
back, and riveted to one another and to the floors and
shell plating, the spacing could be extended to twenty-
three inches. It was further resolved that, in order
to ascertain the conditions of classed iron ships from
time to time, they should be subjected to a special
survey every four years in the A class, every three
years in the A class, and every two years in the AN
class, in addition to the annual survey prescribed in
the Rules in the case of every vessel.
These periodical special surveys now took the
place of the continuation and restoration surveys
previously required, and the Rules for these surveys
were laid down with the same precision as those for
reclassing wooden ships. ~.
Many amendments were made in the Rules and
96 Anna/s of Z/oyd's Aegister.
Tables of Scantlings previously in operation, but the
number of these is too considerable for notice here.
Their tendency was in the direction of reducing the
scantlings towards the extremities of vessels, and in
generally adjusting the proportions of the thicknesses
of material in accordance with the strains and wasting
influences to which they are subjected.
The attention given to this important question in
1863 marks an interesting epoch in the history of the
Society, as the Rules then formulated constitute the
groundwork of those in operation ever since.
The ample strength provided by the Rules for
iron ships of the prevalent type of that day is
clearly shown by the fact that many vessels built
in accordance with them are still sound, and fit for
the heaviest work.
The year 1870 witnessed a most important depar-
ture in the Rules for iron ships.
Up to that time the basis adopted in fixing the
scantlings for iron ships under the Society's Rules
was the under-deck tonnage, the same as that
adopted in the cases of both wood and composite
vessels. Experience, however, had shown that
tonnage was not a suitable basis for regulating
the scantlings of iron ships. Apart from other
reasons, there was always the possibility of the limits
of tonnage which fixed the scantlings of a vessel
being exceeded. The tonnage could not be deter-
mined with certainty until the vessel was completed
and measured by the Government officer; and in the
case of vessels which it was intended should be
slightly under any of the limits of tonnage, it not
Ammals of Lloyd's Register. . 97.
unfrequently occurred that when finished their tonnage
was found to be in excess of those limits, thereby
bringing the vessels under a higher scale of scantlings
than that adopted in their construction. In such cases
the Committee were unable consistently with their
published Rules to assign to the vessels the classifica-
tion contemplated. - w ,
Under these circumstances Mr. Waymouth, the |
present Secretary, who was then one of the principal i
Surveyors, submitted, as the result of the long
and anxious thought he had given to the Rules, a -
proposal that the scantlings of iron vessels should
be determined, not by their tonnage, but by certain
of their dimensions. At the same time, he submitted
new Rules and Tables, which had been framed by
him on the proposed method. These Rules, which
introduced for the first time the element of the pro-
portion of breadth to length as affecting the scantlings
of vessels, authorised a new and improved mode of
construction, which, by the better distribution of the
material in the structure, admitted of considerable
reductions in the scantlings previously insisted upon.
In November, 1869, the first of a long series of
meetings of a Sub-Committee was held to consider
the Society's Rules for the construction and classifica-
tion of iron ships. This Sub-Committee came to the
conclusion that tonnage was not a proper standard
for determining the scantlings of iron vessels.
They, therefore, recommended that it should be
abandoned, and that in place of it Mr. Waymouth's . |
proposal and new Rules should be adopted. i
It was in the first instance suggested that the
Pºgºs
}
}
|
II `
U &º.

* ºf fºr * Nº.
sº a - §.
; (63. ; 35.

98 Annals of Zloyd's Aegister.
dimensions basis, referred to, should not be insisted
upon generally, but should be sanctioned as an alter-
native standard, to be adopted at the option of the
Shipbuilders, if they preferred it. -
Mr. Waymouth's proposals, however, did not meet
with the concurrence of Messrs. Martin and Ritchie,
the principal Surveyors, who were strongly in favour
of retaining the old method; and the Committee gave
instructions for a conference to be held between them
and some of the senior Surveyors from the outports.
Several meetings took place, at which Mr. Martell,
now the Chief Surveyor, took a leading part in com-
bating the views of those opposed to Mr. Waymouth's
suggestions, and after much discussion the opinions
in favour of the alteration prevailed. Ultimately, as
the result of a most careful and protracted considera-
tion, the General Committee resolved to adopt the
method proposed by Mr. Waymouth as the sole
standard in determining the scantlings of iron vessels.
The dimensions then adopted are such as those still
in use for regulating the scantlings of iron ships in
the present Rules. -
With the new Rules the symbols 100A, 90A, 80A,
&c., were introduced in the classification of iron ships.
Vessels to which these classes are assigned are entitled
to retain them so long as on survey they are found
to be in satisfactory condition. Ships classed 100A
to 90A inclusive are to be submitted to special survey
every four years, while those classed 85/\ and under
are to be specially surveyed every three years.
In 1871 the Rules for the construction of iron
ships were still further revised, and Tables added,

**
&
3.Sw*
.
º
3.
º
º
6.
e3.
jº.
‘.
à
3£,
º
%
Annals of Lloyd 's Kegister, - 99
giving size of beams, breadth of stringer-plates, and
particulars for the construction of iron and steel masts,
bowsprits, and yards. A. -
With some further modifications in the details, and
additions where more recent experience has proved
them to be necessary, the Rules passed in 1870 remain
in force to this day. The basis of measurement is
the same as was then adopted, and any changes which
have been made are in the form of amendments in
the scantlings.
sº
#2
º6;
§
==
#.
ſº
ſº
#
==<=.
£He
ºFG
º
Fº:
&:
3:sº~§
Šº
e
ſ
º
II 2
-
;
:
;
*
i


;
*
i
:
: not inactive in regard to those constructed of wood.
: The experience continually being acquired by the
.};
&
CHAPTER XV.
###|HILE the developments we have just
recorded were being made in the Rules i
relating to iron ships, the Committee were
Surveyors pointed to the necessity for holding a
special survey upon a vessel when half the period
of her first classification, or continued or restored
class had expired; and by a minute of the Committee
in 1847 it was directed that, in addition to the ordinary
annual surveys, a special survey should be held upon
every vessel very soon after the expiration of one-half
the period of her classification.
Various alterations were made about 1857. In
that year the red A class was instituted, instead of
the red *AE, as the second description of the first
class. Vessels not originally assigned a longer term
than five years were not eligible for this class.
Under the provisions of the early Rules, vessels
which were not submitted to survey for continuation
or restoration on the expiration of their several terms
of years on the A character, immediately lapsed to i
the AE class. This was so far altered in 1857 that
i
:
s
?
j;
%*,3


—t • * g ..?
Annals of Zloyd's Register. I O I
the word “lapsed” was set against ships in that
condition, unless the owner requested the insertion
of the AE character; and the classification was omitted
from the next reprint of the Register, unless the
requisite survey had previously been held. The
practice of inserting the word “expired" against
vessels when they had run off the letter A was
begun in 1863, and has continued to the present
time. -
About this period, also, was introduced the second
survey, under the Rule for Continuation, already
referred to as allowing an extension of two-thirds of
the vessel's original term of years.
Other improvements of a somewhat earlier date
were the regulations admitting ships classed A for
short terms of years to the advantages of the con-
tinuation survey, and the special survey for A in
red. * -
The special survey mark K, to indicate that a
vessel has been surveyed specially and continuously
during her construction, was first instituted in the year
1853. Continuous surveys were, of course, held for
some time before a distinctive mark was chosen to
indicate them ; but it was only right that the great
superiority of the conditions of survey in one case
over the other should be properly recognised in the
Register Book. The order was made retrospective,
so as to apply to vessels already built and classed,
In 1865 a new character was introduced
into the Register Book, foreign - built vessels,
with scantlings not in accordance with the Rules,
being classed 1 F, 2 F, or 3 F, according to

§§ #
*S
ſ§
i
;
}
rf. (ºft” §
& 3.
I O2 Anna/s of Z/oyd's Register.
their condition when surveyed. This character was
continued in the book until 1876, when it was with-
drawn, and owners of vessels of that class were
requested to submit them to survey for some other
character provided in the Rules.
The benefits arising from diagonal doubling of
ships having been frequently brought under the notice
of the Committee, they determined, in 1869, that
ships should be allowed an extension of class,
provided they were diagonally doubled when under
survey for continuation on, or restoration to, the
A class, or for the class of A in red. Vessels of the
five-years' grade and under received two years'
extension ; those above five and under twelve years,
three years' extension; while twelve-year ships had
four years added to their time.
In 1871 it was further determined that any ships
diagonally doubled, in accordance with the require-
ments of the Rules, would be eligible to receive a
similar extension of time on the A class, provided
they were not doubled before the expiration of twelve
months from the date of launching. No vessel, which
is allowed an extension of her original classification
for doubling can have any further extension on the
same ground when re-classed.
Several important alterations and additions to the
Society's Rules for the classification of wooden vessels
were made in the year 1870. Reference has already
been made to the salting of ships—a beneficial practice
which had by this time become frequent in some
parts of the country. This was now made uniformly
prevalent through the encouragement offered by the


Annals of Lloyd's Register. 1O3
Rules allowing an additional year in classification for
salting. -
The term of years assigned to certain descriptions
of timber was also increased by the Committee in
accordance with the latest experience acquired in
regard to their durability. For instance, East India
teak, which, until this time, had been classed as a
twelve-years' material, was now raised to fourteen
years. The periods assigned to certain other
materials were at the same time reduced, in con-
sequence of unfavourable reports regarding them.
But the most important resolution adopted by the
Committee relating to wood ships during the year
1870 is that known as the Mixed Material
Rule.
The object of this new regulation, which was
proposed by Mr. Waymouth, was to give to vessels
built with mixed timber material (below the twelve-
years' grade), of superior workmanship, and in which
high-class material and extra fastenings had been
judiciously employed to such an extent as to satisfy
the Committee, an extension of class of not more
than two years beyond that to which the lowest
material used in their construction would otherwise
entitle them. Through the operation of this Rule,
encouragement was offered to the production of wood
ships with the best materials and workmanship,
and the owners of existing vessels of this description
were to some extent remunerated for the extra outlay
on their materials and fastenings.
In the year 1878 a further alteration was made in
the Rules for wooden ships by raising the grade of
|
*
IO4. Annals of Lloyd's ſtegister.
certain materials, especially when salted, it having
been found that American oak and fir timber were
worthy of a higher character when salted than had
been hitherto assigned to them. The periods allowed
for other materials were lowered, and some woods
were wholly expunged from the Table.
Very few wood vessels are, however, now being
built, iron and steel having almost entirely superseded
the once universal material for ships. But there
can be little doubt that wood ships were never
better built than when they were being superseded
by iron vessels.
The figure 2, representing a defective equipment,
was withdrawn in 1876, and the mark, thus —
substituted. In the same year the I, or lowest
character, was omitted from the Rules and Register
Book.

CHAPTER XVI.
*LTHOUGH, from the commencement of
§ the Society's existence, it was styled a
ºš Register of British and Foreign Shipping,
yet for many years afterwards there was no provision
made for the survey of ships abroad. Applications
had been made at different times for appointment to
the post of Surveyor at one or other of the principal
foreign seaports, but the Committee had never acceded
thereto. *
From a very early period in the history of
British North America and the United States, ship-
building was an important industry, being, doubtless,
fostered by the abundance and cheapness of the
fir and oak timber on the uncleared lands. And,
although the oaks were inferior to those of the West
of Europe, and the firs no more durable than such
timber is anywhere, yet, as the available dimensions
were considerable, the deficiency in strength and
durability was largely compensated for by the extra
scantlings employed.
The earliest statistics published by the Society
show that the number of new vessels built in the
“British Plantations,” as they were termed, was by


{
#
**,
I O6 Annals of Zloyd's Aegister. -
no means small, even when compared with those
built in this country. The modes of construction
were not, however, very good. Men who tilled the
land in the summer addressed themselves to ship-
building during the hard Canadian winter, when agri-
cultural operations were necessarily at a standstill.
There was consequently a great need for skilled
supervision in the construction of these vessels,
and so early as 1851 a letter was received by the
Secretary from St. John, New Brunswick, stating that
the written authority and guarantee of several respect-
able shipowners in St. John had been given for the
sum of £300 a year during five years, as a basis
for the appointment of a Surveyor to the Society at
that port. -
It soon became apparent that in the North Ameri-
can Colonies there was a wide field for the Society's
usefulness. In 1852 a Surveyor was appointed for
Quebec and the River St. Lawrence, and in the
following year another officer was placed at St.
John, New Brunswick. These appointments were
quickly followed by others. Two Assistant-Surveyors,
one for each port, were sent out within the next
two years; and when, in the course of two more
years, these officers were assigned separate districts
of their own, one becoming Surveyor of a newly-
opened surveying district at Prince Edward Island,
and the other being allotted the Miramichi district,
the vacancies caused by their removal were filled
up by additional appointments, thus making no less
than six Surveyors to the Society stationed in North
America.
& Séf -
- &
_º **

—s-
: s &
r
2.tº
*—3.jº^,
Annals of Zloyd's Register. Ioy
In 1856 the Committee appointed a Surveyor for
Holland and Belgium, and selected for the office
Mr. Pretious, already on the Society's staff, who
remained until 1861, when he was recalled.
No further steps towards the appointment of
Surveyors on the Continent seem to have been taken
until 1866, when Mr. L. Meyer was appointed as
Surveyor for Holland and Belgium, residing at
Antwerp.
Early in the year 1868 a memorial, forwarded
by thirty merchants and shipowners in Holland, was
received by the Committee, suggesting the appoint-
ment of a resident Surveyor at Rotterdam. Six
months afterwards Mr. Meyer recommended that
the deputies or agents appointed by him at Amster-
dam, Rotterdam, and Veendam, should be appointed
Assistant-Surveyors. In January, 1869, this recom-
mendation was acted upon, and, shortly after, these
assistants were made independent officers.
Earlier in the same year an English Surveyor was
sent out to Shanghai as the Society's officer, he
being the first representative of the Register on the
continent of Asia. In the following year Surveyors
were appointed at Trieste, Ancona, and Venice.
The succeeding year, 1871, saw Surveyors repre-
senting the Society established at Bordeaux, Ham-
burg, Melbourne, and Sydney; and in 1872 similar
appointments were made at Copenhagen, Bergen, and
Genoa.
In 1872, Mr. Waymouth visited Genoa and
inspected the vessels building there. Upon his
return, he reported to the Committee that he had

*3.
IO8 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
found a large quantity of shipbuilding in progress
at that port, and on his recommendation one of the
Surveyors on the London staff was associated with
the local Surveyor.
At that time wood, and even iron shipbuilding—
but especially the former—was in an active condition
at the Italian ports. The materials for wood ship
construction were both good and abundant, but the
system of fastening was defective. It was extremely
necessary, therefore, that the supervision of a Sur-
veyor trained in the English practice should be given
in the application of the Society's Rules in the Italian
and Austrian ports.
Additions to the number of the foreign Surveyors
have been made from time to time, as the necessity
for their appointment became apparent; so that, whilst
in 1870 there were five officers of this class, in
1873 the number had risen to twenty-two. At the
present time there are no fewer than sixty-six non-
exclusive Surveyors abroad; and the Society may now
be considered fairly represented in all parts of the
globe.
$—é
5%

CHAPTER XVII.
SºT will have been observed that the system of
*a*- : : classification adopted even by the earliest
ſºlº Registers took cognisance of the state of
a vessel's equipment, the relative efficiency being
recorded with the character assigned to the hull.
In 1834, when this Society was established, the
Rules merely specified the number of anchors and
the length of cable required for different sized
vessels. This was supplemented in 1846 by the
issue of instructions to the Surveyors, to see that all
new chains supplied to classed vessels had been duly
tested, and the strain marked on each length.
In 1853 it was made imperative that certificates
of test should be produced previously to the vessels
being classed. *. p *
Five years later, the Committee issued the
present Table No. 22, showing the number and
weight of anchors, and length and size of cables,
hawsers, and warps for various sizes of sailing vessels
and steamers. The Committee decided, at the same
time, to allow a reduction to be made in the sizes
of chain cables which satisfactorily withstood the
Admiralty test at a public proving-machine,
º/
§ NC,
, 3) &
º



º
%
^–;
I IO Annals of Lloyd's Aegister.
In 1862 the Committee introduced the Rule re-
quiring all anchors and chain cables supplied for
vessels, classed or proposed for classification in the
Society's Register Book, to be tested and certified
at a public machine, and in the same year at great
cost they established the Society's Proving House at
Poplar for the testing of chains and anchors. This
establishment was abandoned by the Society in 1873,
on account of the great expense it entailed. It was
then leased by the Trinity House, who kept it open
till 1875, when it was finally closed and the plant
disposed of. \
The Committee's requirements were made more
stringent in 1863, by the addition of a proviso that no
testing would be recognised unless done at an estab-
lishment belonging to a Corporation or open to an
Inspector appointed by, and under the entire control of,
Lloyd's Register; but these regulations did not come
into full operation till 1864. This arrangement
continued for some years.
In 1871, the Laws respecting the proving and sale
of chain cables and anchors were amended by an Act
of Parliament, under which licences could be granted
by the Board of Trade only to certain corporations or
public bodies. Under this Act the testing certificates
of the several joint-stock Companies Owning Proving
Houses could not be recognised. Consequently, the
Committee, at the suggestion of the Board of Trade
and with the consent of the Proprietors, agreed to
undertake the sole control of the testing operations
at such establishments. The licences for these works
are granted to the Committee, who appoint a General

.*
i-
ſº g
Annals of Z/oyd's Aegister. I 11
. Superintendent and also local Superintendents of
Testing.
The superintendence of the Committee has within
recent years been extended to several Proving Houses
previously under the management of Corporations or
public bodies; until at the present moment all but
one of these Proving Establishments are under the
control of the Society.
Ž *

§
6.
*3.
whe rºº
º & #
gº &:
CHAPTER XVIII.
isitiºT has already been stated that in the early
: days of steam vessels the Committee were
ſºlº satisfied, so far as the machinery and
boilers of classed vessels were concerned, with
receiving a report of their efficiency from a recog-
nised competent Marine Engineer. *
The Rules issued in 1834 contained the following
provisions —
“All seagoing Vessels navigated by Steam shall be
required to be surveyed twice in each Year, when a
character shall be assigned to them according to the
report of survey as regards the classification of the hull
and materials of the vessel.
“With respect to the Boilers and Machinery, the
Owners are required to produce to the Surveyors to this
Society, at the above-directed surveys, a certificate from
Some competent Master Engineer, describing their state
and condition at those periods.”
The machinery so certified was to be described by
the letters “M.C.” in the Register Book; but if no
certificate of the condition of the engines and boilers
were furnished as directed, then no character could be
assigned.




Annals of Lloyd's Register. 13
A few years later the public mind was agitated by
the serious loss of life which not infrequently occurred
in connexion with boiler explosions on board ship,
and steps were therefore taken by the Committee to
secure a more rigid compliance with the Rules, quoted
above, for the survey of steam vessels.
This was the beginning of the Machinery Surveys
which now constitute so important a feature in the
Society's operations. Although duly appointed Engi-
neer Surveyors to the Society were not employed till
within recent years, it is interesting to observe that an
application for the post of Engineer Surveyor was
received by the Committee as far back as the year
1838. *
In 1873, however, the number of steam vessels
had increased so largely, that the Committee felt they
would be no longer justified in classing them, without
taking steps to assure themselves with the same
certainty as in the case of the hulls of the vessels
that the whole of the details of the machinery were
in thoroughly safe condition. Accordingly, after
the matter had been carefully considered by a Sub-
Committee nominated for the purpose, the Committee,
in January, 1874, decided to augment their surveying
staff by appointing Engineer Surveyors.
At the outset they were fortunate in securing the
services of Mr. William Parker as Chief Engineer
Surveyor, and, at the same time, they appointed as Ship
and Engineer Surveyors two gentlemen who were
experienced Marine Engineers. Within twelve months
four other Engineer Surveyors were appointed.
Since that time, as this branch of the Society's use-
- º &A's
Rºx"
:^
-#-
fs
:
I I4. Annals of Zloyd's Aegister.
fulness has developed, the staff has been gradually
increased, until at the present time it consists of one
Chief Engineer Surveyor, with two assistants, twenty
Engineer Surveyors, and seven Ship and Engineer
Surveyors, all of whom are exclusively the servants of
the Society, while there are also ten Engineer Sur-
veyors and sixteen Ship and Engineer Surveyors
stationed in foreign ports who are not employed
solely by the Society.
One of the earliest subjects to which the attention
of the Engineer Surveyors was drawn was the com-
paratively simple, but very important, matter of the
arrangement of sea cocks and pipes in connexion
with the engines. In a large percentage of vessels,
these were found to be so arranged that by careless-
ness on the part of the engineers or firemen the
cocks could be made to open a direct communication
between the sea and the engine-room. This was so
evidently a source of great danger to the vessel, that
in all cases, as soon as the faulty arrangements were
pointed out to the shipowners, they took steps to
have them altered. There can be no doubt that this
simple matter of faulty arrangement of pipes had
previously been the cause of many mysterious founder-
ings of steam vessels, while some vessels had even
sunk from this cause when in dock.
Those Engineer Surveyors who were stationed at
ports where engines and boilers were being con-
structed for vessels intended for classification, ex-
amined them during construction, and reported in full
detail the scantlings of the various parts of the
machinery and boilers; so that the Committee were
º
º)
㺠3.
$


3.
3:
Annals of Lloyd's Aegister. II 5
early in possession of the practice of the principal
Marine Engineers of the country, and by obtaining
similar information in the cases of old vessels, in
which the machinery had been proved by experience
to be sufficient, they were soon able to formulate
Rules for the strength of boilers, and these Rules im-
mediately obtained the confidence of manufacturing
Marine Engineers. They have since, of course, been #
slightly modified from time to time, in accordance with
the teachings of experience, or as the advancement
of Engineering has introduced new conditions of
construction.
Although the Society's Rules are applicable to the
existing practice of marine engineering, in no case i
have they been allowed to interfere with the intro-
duction of improved methods of construction or
application. The Rules, while so framed as to insure
strength and safety in all respects, place no restriction
upon the design or proportions of engines, and there-
fore afford free scope for the skill and inventive t
ingenuity of the country. |
As regards novelties in engineering, it is the
practice of the Committee in every case, before
deciding upon a new departure, to carefully investigate
the matter. When they are assured that ample safety
is provided, the arrangement is sanctioned uncondi-
tionally; if the plan is such as to require further
experience to prove its durability, or if the arrange-
ment is of such a nature that its efficiency depends
greatly upon increased attention being bestowed upon
it, approval is given conditionally upon its being
subject to frequent surveys; and only in the event of
Lºyº I 2 º]
*2_X^* ***-*
sº, __ ___ º
t
;i{
||
|
I IG Annals of Z/oyd's Register.
the proposal being altogether unsuitable would the
Committee disallow it. This elasticity in the Rules
which govern the Society's inspection of machinery
has been greatly taken advantage of by enterprising
engineers and shipowners.
When the survey of machinery was first under-
taken, the Supervision, although sufficient in the main
to ensure soundness of materials and good workman-
ship, was not of so thorough and minute a description
as that at present exercised. Very soon, however,
shipowners found its value, and made special requests
for the Engineer Surveyors to pay particular attention
to the details of engines building for them, and
expressed their readiness to pay extra fees for the
extra services they required. On consideration, the
Committee sanctioned these surveys, the engine-
makers in every case being perfectly willing, not
only to allow such inspection to be made, but also to
carefully consider any suggestions made by the Sur-
veyors as to matters of detail which would, if
carried out, be likely to add to the durability and
efficiency of the machinery.
This special supervision became so much appre-
ciated, and necessitated so much additional labour on the
part of the Surveyors, that the Committee, on enlarging
the Engineering staff, thought that general satisfaction
would be given by requiring that the machinery of all
steam vessels built under special survey should be also
constructed under special Survey; and this requirement
has been found to work so well, that at the present
time not only is the machinery for all new vessels
intended for classification built under special survey,
3:
º¥


- --- *~~~ as ºr vr *- ;-- - Ž, a -------- --- s &
$
*
Annals of Zloyd's Aegister. II 7
but practically also all the renewals, both of engines
and boilers, are carried out under special survey;
whilst engines and boilers building for stock by several
makers are now being specially surveyed during con-
struction. -
Not the least important, and certainly by far the
most arduous, duty of the Engineer Surveyors is that
of the periodical surveys required to be held on the {
machinery of classed vessels.
At each of the special surveys of steam vessels,
the machinery and boilers have to be carefully
examined in all important working parts; and in
addition to these surveys, the boilers are also sub-
jected to special survey at shorter intervals, according
to their age. After the boilers of a vessel are four
years of age they are not allowed to run without
re-survey for a longer period than two years, while
after they are six years old they are required to be
surveyed at least every year.
To show the extent of the work undertaken by
this branch of the Society, it will perhaps suffice to
state that in August, 1878, there were 246 sets of
engines and boilers being constructed under special
survey. In the same month in 1879 there were 126,
in 188o there were 292, in 1881 there were 4oD, in
1882 there were 456, and in 1883 there were 424.
Besides these, there are at all times a large number
of new boilers being made to replace those worn out
in old vessels, -
.
Tºzs, f
sº J.
3-2.
...?' &c.
&
:
i
:
i
‘.

wº
.
:
;
i
i
CHAPTER XIX.
. . . .” -- ~~~~
tº ºf , ". . . . . . . .” -
FºEIE improvements in the manufacture of
! steel previously to the year 1860 led
ºff to attempts being made by several
Shipbuilders to employ that material in the con-
struction of ships. But the processes were not
sufficiently perfected at the time to produce
steel of a uniform and trustworthy character, fit
for the purposes of the Shipbuilder and Shipowner.
In 1862 applications were made for vessels to be
classed which were about to be built of puddled
steel; but the Committee replied, that in the absence
of experience regarding the durability of steel it was
not in their power to sanction the proposal.
In the case of a steam yacht of 2,400 tons built
for the Viceroy of Egypt in 1864, under the survey
of the Society's Surveyors, and constructed partly of
steel, the Committee consented to a reduction being
made in the steel scantlings, amounting to about one-
fourth of the thicknesses allowed in an iron ship of
the same size. In 1866 plans were submitted for
building a vessel of 1,552 tons with Barrow hematite
steel, the sectional area of the material to be two-
thirds that required by the Rules for a similar vessel





§§(Q'
Annals of Zloyd's Register. I IQ
if built of iron. Upon this proposal, the Committee
decided, on certain conditions, to class the vessel on
completion as “Experimental.”
In 1867 a report was made to the Committee
by some of the principal Surveyors to the Society,
upon the steel manufactured at Barrow-in-Furness,
by the Bessemer process. Having considered this
report, the Committee agreed to class ships built
under special survey of steel of approved quality.
The notation “Experimental” was, however, to
be made against the characters of such vessels
in the Register Book. A reduction was allowed
in the thickness of the plates, frames, &c., of
ships built of steel, not exceeding one-fourth the
thickness prescribed for iron ships. It was required
that the steel should be able to withstand a tensile
strain of not less than 30 tons to the square inch.
This appears to be the first occasion upon which
tests were applied to steel, so as to enable the Com-
mittee to formulate regulations for its use in classed
ships, • *
Further tests were made early in the following
year upon steel manufactured at Bolton-le-Moors, but
the results were not so satisfactory, the report stating
that the quality of the steel would not warrant the
Surveyors in recommending it for any reduction in
scantling from that allowed for iron of good quality.
Several years were allowed to elapse before the
question of the suitability of steel for shipbuilding
purposes again occupied public attention. About the
year 1877 there occurred what has not inaptly been
termed the “resurrection ” of steel,
~}.
Sº
i-
zº
J.
2
<

º
!*
^
33
****º-ºr-
I 20 Annals of Zloyd's Aegister.
The objections made to steel during the earlier
days of its manufacture were two-fold. In the first
place, the material was of a hard, brittle, and untrust-
worthy character; whilst, even if the quality of the
metal had been above reproach, the price was quite
beyond that which would have enabled it to enter
into competition with iron.
During the interval between 1867 and 1877,
however, great changes had taken place. Improve-
ments had been made in the manufacture of steel
by the Bessemer process, and a new method of
manufacture, viz., the Siemens-Martin or open-hearth
process, had been introduced. The production, at
a greatly reduced cost, of a mild and ductile material
differing from iron only in being superior to it was
thus rendered possible, and the present development
of the use of mild steel for the construction of ships
and boilers may be dated from this time.
A review of the action of the Society in this
matter will show that the careful investigations made
by the Society's Officers, and the subsequent approval
of the material by the Committee, had the effect of
largely aiding its introduction by giving the public
confidence in its suitability for the purposes intended.
The first proposal to use this new steel for classed
vessels was made by Messrs. John Elder & Co.,
of Glasgow, who, in 1877, commenced to build two
paddle-steamers of that material, under the survey of
the Society's officers, to the order of the London,
Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company. In
the same year the Wallsend Slipway Company, of
Newcastle, submitted a plan of the first marine boiler
Sºo
; #— -- ~ *
Annals of Lloyd's Register. I 2 I
proposed to be made entirely of steel. Before giving
their approval in these cases, the Committee required
a series of tests to be applied to the material intended
for use in the structures, in order to ascertain its
suitability. In the case of the boiler, tests were
also applied, in order to ascertain the actual strength
of the flat plates stayed as proposed, and of the
riveted seams of its shell.
At the same time the Society's professional
advisers visited the principal steel manufactories in
the kingdom, as also the principal establishments
where steel had been used for boiler purposes, the
material having already by this time come into
very extended use for locomotive and stationary
boilers.
At each of these places information was gained
as to the properties of the material and the con-
ditions required to be complied with in working
it in order to insure satisfactory results. The infor-
mation gained was freely placed at the disposal of all
interested in the subject; and so much confidence in
the material was the result, that it became freely used
for both shipbuilding and boiler-making. In the case
of boilers, it was used in many parts for which the
most expensive brands of iron before had been
exclusively employed.
During the earlier periods of its use there were a
few failures of steel plates, which had at first a mys-
terious appearance, and which would undoubtedly
have thrown so much suspicion upon the material,
unless they had been promptly and exhaustively
investigated, and their true cause discovered, that its
§
ºº
F
1 22 Ammals of Zloyd's Register.
use would have been seriously retarded. The causes
of failure were in each instance investigated by the
Society's officers, and were clearly traced to faulty
manipulation, and not to defective material. Increased
experience with steel has, however, led to its proper-
ties being better understood, and the Engineer and the
Shipbuilder are enabled to handle it now without fear
of such failures occurring.
One great cause of the confidence which is felt in
mild steel is no doubt the fact that the steel plates are
all tested before leaving the manufactory, and are
required to be capable of withstanding certain specified
tests. These tests are witnessed by the Society's
Surveyors, and they are so comprehensive that material
which will withstand them can with confidence be
used for any part of a ship or boiler.
The result of the use of steel in shipbuilding is
a general reduction of 20 per cent, below the scant-
lings prescribed in the Rules for Iron Ships. In
the case of boilers, in which a reduction is also
allowed in the thickness of the shell plating and stays,
there ensued a great increase of steam pressures. Ten
years ago the common steam pressure in new boilers
was from 60 lb. to 65 lb. per square inch, 75 lb.
being then looked upon as very high.
These limits of pressure were arrived at by reason
of the difficulty of properly working the thick boiler
shell plates which higher pressures would have neces-
sitated. The use of steel of greater strength than
iron admits of the same thickness of plates being
sufficient for much higher pressures, and now very
few boilers for new engines are constructed to carry a
Ammals of Zloyd's Register. 1 2 3
less working pressure than 90 lb. per square inch,
while very many are made to work at 150 lb. per
square inch.
These increased pressures result in a greater
economy of fuel consumption than is possible with
lower pressures.
The increase in the use of steel for shipbuilding
during recent years is shown by the following account
of the amount of the tonnage built of steel under the
Society's inspection :-
Tonnage of
Year. Steel Ships, Steel Steamers. Total Tonnage,
I88o ... I,342 ... 34,031 ... 35,373
1881 ... 3, 167 ... 39,24O ... 42,407
I882 ... I 2,477 ... I I 3,364 ... I 25,84I
1883 ... I 5,703 ... I 50,725 ... I 66,428,
3% 3% # %
About two years ago, another departure occupied
the attention of the Society's principal officers. Steel-
makers had so far improved upon the methods used
for making heavy steel castings that they stated these
could now be made more trustworthy than heavy iron
forgings, both for engine work and stern and rudder
frames.
The processes of making these castings were
specially investigated, and the quality of the resulting
material was ascertained, and several of the various
articles which had been manufactured were tested to
destruction. As a result, the use of these castings
has been sanctioned by the Committee for crank-shafts
and several other important parts of engines, and also
º
I 24 Ammals of Zloyd's Aegister.
for stern-frames, rudders, and rudder-frames. In
order that these castings may be accepted, it is neces-
sary that they shall be found to be sound and free
from blow-holes, and that test pieces cast with them
shall be found by actual test to have a tensile strength
of not more than thirty tons per square inch. It is
also required that other test pieces, cast on them and
planed to an inch and a quarter square, shall bend
cold without fracture through an angle of 90 degrees
over a circular arc having a radius not greater than
an inch and three quarters. These tests are so severe
that none but material of great ductility can withstand
them. The whole of the shafts, frames, &c., which
have been approved of by the Society upon these
conditions have so far given satisfaction, and have
justified the confidence reposed in them.
The results of all tests upon steel for shafts,
frames, &c., as well as those made on a large
number of riveted joints of steel plates, have been
freely published, together with other matters of interest
to Shipbuilders and Engineers, by means of official
reports and of papers read at the various Technical
Institutions; and in this way much good has no doubt
been done in disseminating useful knowledge regarding
the capabilities of the new materials and the most
approved methods of manipulating them.
% ºft $% %
The appointment in 1882 of Inspectors of Forgings
may be mentioned as a more recent extension of the
Society's operations. Previous to that time large
forgings intended for classed vessels were inspected
)
º
65
^-5 -
g
Ammals of Lloyd's Register, 1 2 5
after delivery at the shipbuilding or engineering
establishment in a finished state.
Experience had shown, however, that serious
defects might exist in Forgings, which it would be
impossible to discover by an examination of them
when finished, while it had also been found that
the methods adopted in welding large forgings
were in many instances open to much objection.
With a view to the improvement of the methods
of construction, and to the prevention, so far as
possible, of the use of defective forgings, the
Committee decided to appoint Officers who, from
their special training, should possess the qualifi-
cations necessary for the careful inspection of all
large forgings during the process of manufacture.
§

CHAPTER XX.
#PON the opening of the Royal School of
Naval Architecture and Marine Engineer-
| ing at South Kensington in 1864, pro-
was made for the training there of students
from private establishments. Few, however, availed
themselves of the opportunity thus offered for obtain-
ing a scientific acquaintance with the principles of
their profession, and as a consequence the educa-
tional resources of the School were chiefly devoted
to the training of Admiralty students. The transfer
of the school to the Royal Naval College at Green-
wich in 1873 did not make any difference in this
respect; and, as it was yearly becoming a matter of
greater importance that the theoretical principles of
Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering should
be more carefully studied in Shipbuilding and Marine
Engineering establishments, the Committee of the
Society resolved in 1877 to grant the sum of 4 IOO
per annum towards the maintenance of two private
students at the College, viz., one in Naval Architec-
ture and one in Marine Engineering.
In 1878 the grant was increased to 4, 150 per
annum, in order to establish an annual scholarship of
tº NJ
gºš.
3%


g
| royº
§§
Ammals of Z/oyd's Aegister. I 27
*
450 a year, tenable for three years, to be competed
for by private students of Naval Architecture or
Marine Engineering at the Royal Naval College.
The Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, who had
also founded a similar scholarship, accepted this offer
of the Committee, and issued regulations as to the
competition. Only British subjects are eligible, and -
the candidates have to undergo a competitive exami-
nation in mathematics and the principles of their
profession.
It is to be regretted that no candidates have
proved themselves to be qualified for either the
Admiralty or Lloyd's Scholarship. The Committee
have at different times appointed graduates of the
Royal Naval College as Surveyors to the Society,
and at the present time there are nine of the Society's
Surveyors in different parts of the kingdom who were
trained at that institution.
º

CHAPTER XXI.
ºN 1877 the Committee, upon the invitation
§§ %: of a number of leading Yacht Owners
ºlº and Builders, undertook the special
classification of yachts, and issued Rules and
Regulations for their construction. The necessity
iſ *.*.*.*.*.*.*, * ~ *
- º
for a system of classification for yachts similar
to that which had been applied so long, and with
such satisfactory results, to merchant ships, suggested
itself to gentlemen specially interested in yachting.
Classes had been assigned for many years prior to
that date to yachts which had been built in accor-
dance with the Society's Regulations for the construc-
tion of merchant vessels; but it is obvious those
Regulations were not suited to vessels of the former
description.
The matter did not, however, take any definite
shape until 1877, when, through the instrumentality of
Mr. Dixon Kemp, a Committee of Yacht Owners and
Builders was formed, with the object of taking steps
to institute a Yachting Registry. It was ultimately
decided that advantage should be taken of the existing
organisation and staff of Lloyd's Register, and the
Committee of this Society consented to undertake the


1884–85 YAC HT R. E G IS TIE R. THI
1. 2 3 4. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 || 12 || 13
Official - Rig TONS. DIMIENSIONS. º: of sº BUILD. Port *3 tº, § %;
Yachts' Names, &c. *:::::...] Tham: *:::::ient. !!?, #. re Builders. Where. Owners. belonging # # #|fºr Hºnd
*...* | Thºma, Repairs of Wessels, &c g to £3; "Salºof
ames. I Me'surmint Length bran, Depth if Classed. • ** | Designers. When. ſº CO § {Tast Survey.
31 >{{|Thistle ScwSch 209'8018695|251514.1 |C.I.2Cy:26"&52"–33"|Blackwood Pt.GlasgwPukeofhamilton,KTLondon Cws. | #100A)
85067 Iron 7E. Hals|Lapthorn&| 369-07 |2|Džs 80lb. 112HP.] & Gordon 1881 LLOYD’s A.&C.P. 5,83
W.D. P. V. 3 Masts Cem.81|Ratseys,82| 544 - Blackwd& Gordon, P.Gls|Blackwood & 6mo. 3. Luoxin's AC.11,82
2 >{{|Thistle Yawl 26-17. 54-0|12.0 9.9 ..................... Stow&Son|Shoreham W. Orr Ewing Greenock Shm. |15 A l
81765 C.5,810.F. Lapthrn 81| 32 |Roof Lizon Kemp 1881 LLOYD’s A.&C.P. 5,81
V.K.T.H. 5mo.
3 Thistle Cutter | – | ... ... ... . ..................... Goodall St.Helen’s W. Murdoch Lymingtºn
Swmmer8 4. 21:0) 8.0 {};
18
4 × Thora Cutter | 32:37, 66.6|13.3 10&12yrsMat. Fife&Son Fairlie John Ferguson Greenock Lth. |12| A–
818ll C.7,80c.f. Lapthrn 82 50 Beams part Chestnut W. Fife,sen. 1880 5,84
5mo.
5 Thought Yawl 23:18 50'9|ll'3' 8-5 ..................... J.Harvey & Wivenhoe Maj. Harlowe-Turner|Falmouth
78189 Lapthorn&| 27 |alt.53by Hatcher J. Harvey 1852
C.Ratsey
6 Thought Schoonri — a tº e g tº e s e e © tº . Bevan Swansea Charles Gold Swansea
Pike,79 8 || 30-0 8.2 1873
7 Thought Cutter | — ** * * * * * * * * | * * * * * * * , H.Totam Queenstºn|Capt. James Beatty Queenstºn
Beatty,76 6 28'5 7-0|| 4-7 PI.Totam 1876 *. --- *
8 Thyra 3Masts|ScwSch 54.59|106:415.4 7.9|C.I.2cy.16326-18"|A.D.Lewis London Delabere P. Blaine London Cws. A-
73652(late Elsbeth) Iron|Lapthrn 76 8613 len.20ft.81 by 20HP. ****** &Co. 1876 s.s. Cws.No.1–81–4yrs 4,81
S.G.M.B.]_53.Hās Cem.— 112 White, Cowes|J.Penn & Sons,London
9 Thyra Cutter | — ... ... ... [..................... |Fife&Son ||Fairlie Archibald Colville Glasgow
Lapthrn 81| 20 47-7|996 6.8 W.Fife&Son 1875 sº
40 Tiercel Schoonr 67-30|79-818.7|10-3] ..................... Camper & Gosport W. F. Stutfield Prtsmouth/Gos. 16 A-
62167 C.79C.F. Lapthrn 78] 114 |Roof 12&16yrs Mat. Nicholson 1868 H.T. Gos.79 5,79
J.C. W.K. Cmpré Mehsm 6mo.
Zºo face £age 12
9.

Åg
Ammals of Lloyd’s Register. I 29
duty. A Register Book, devoted exclusively to this
description of vessel, has since been issued annually,
and has met with a large measure of success, the Sub-
scribers thereto, who numbered about 320 on the first
issue of the volume, having risen to nearly 1,000 within
the space of six years. The Book contains very full
particulars of all British Yachts from the largest to
the smallest, whether classed or not, and, as much
information as can be obtained of those owned
abroad; also a list of British and Foreign Yacht
Clubs, and coloured plates illustrative of their
respective Flags, an index of Signal Letters, and an
alphabetical list of the names and addresses of the
OW116.1°S.
Owners have largely availed themselves of the
advantages of classification of yachts by the Society,
no less than about 600 vessels having come under
the inspection of the Society's Surveyors since the
institution of the Yacht Register. The symbols of
classification are similar to those employed in the
classing of merchant ships. The Rules provide for
the construction and periodical examination of wood,
iron, and composite Yachts.
As another indication of the tendency of the
Society's operations to spread beyond the limits of
ordinary sea-going Mercantile Shipping, attention
may be called to the frequent requests which have
been made during late years for the Survey and
Classification of Fishing-smacks, Trawlers, &c., to
which vessels a particular class, “for fishing purposes,”
has been assigned.
ſº
\,*
§
-
is
§:
£º+
sº
Š3)
§*
|
*

CHAPTER XXII.
rººt has already been remarked that a column
7 * N: containing “ the feet of the draught of
ºlº water when loaded” was inserted in the
third earliest copy of a Register Book, dated 1774–
75–76, and this column was continued down to the
time of the establishment of Lloyd's Register on its
present basis in 1834. No information is obtainable
as to how and by whom the load-draught was deter-
mined; but, as the draught is given in all cases in
round numbers, it appears probable that it was fur-
nished, not with the object of placing any limit on the
loading, but rather as an index to the size of the
vessels.
On the institution of this Society in 1834, the
record of draught of water was not inserted in the
Register Book, and no step appears to have been
taken by the Society in connexion with the subject
of the load-line until 1870. In that year, on the
introduction into the Rules of provision for the con-
struction of vessels of the awning-decked type to meet
the requirements of trade, such vessels were required,
in order to prevent overloading, to have scuppers
through the sides, and ports to discharge water at
J
g
;
-


—i-
sº
e
Ammals of Zloyd's Register. I3 I
the main deck, so that in no case could they be laden
to the level of that deck. In some instances, how-
ever, the ports and scuppers at the main deck were
permanently closed by the Owners, to enable the
vessels to be loaded deeper. Upon this fact becoming
known to the Committee, they determined, in February,
1873, to suspend the characters of all awning-decked
vessels having the main-deck scuppers closed.
In August of the same year the scuppers in such
vessels were allowed to be closed, provided a load-
draught agreed to by the Committee were inserted
in the Register Book and on the Certificate; and, in
the Rules issued in 1874, the load-line was made
compulsory for all new awning-decked vessels. . As
the practice of closing the scuppers at the main deck,
without a fixed load-line being assigned, still con-
tinued, the Committee, in December of the following
year, resolved that a load-line should be determined
by the Society for every awning-decked vessel classed
in the Register Book. This decision was followed by
the requirement that a diamond-shaped mark, with
the letters L, R, placed one on either side of it, should
be painted on the vessel's sides at the draught
approved by the Committee.
So important a step as the enforcement of a fixed
load-line, retrospective in its action, was not allowed
to pass unchallenged. A well-known firm of ship-
owners, owning several vessels of the awning-decked
type, declined to comply with the Committee's require-
ments ; and, on the characters of their vessels being
expunged from the Register Book, they commenced
a test-action against the Society in respect of one of
R 2

g-3
I 32 Ammals of Z/oyd's Register.
them, damages being laid at £1,000. The case was
decided in the Society's favour upon all material
points. In summing up, the Judge observed that —
“The Pursuers' case depends on the validity of their
proposition, that the facts averred by them imply a con-
tract between them and the Defenders with respect to
the . . . . whereby the classification of that vessel on
the Register shall be preserved so long as the Rules and
Regulations of the Association in force at the date of the
original registration in 1872 are complied with. I can-
not sustain this proposition.”
And added that—
“It would be a grave misfortune, and greatly impair
public confidence in the Association, if a Court of Law
were to hold that they were under implied contract
with respect to all ships already classified which com-
pelled them to continue the classification after they had
become satisfied that it was undeserved, and therefore
misleading.”
The judgment was appealed against, but was
upheld, on appeal. The right of the Committee to
make such alterations in the Society's Rules as expe-
rience may show to be necessary, and to apply the
same retrospectively, was thereby fully established.
The importance of this decision, as affecting the
freedom of action of the Society, cannot be over-
estimated. It is, perhaps, not too much to say that,
had the verdict been for the Pursuers, the Society's
influence for good upon the Mercantile Marine would
have been greatly curtailed.
In the issue of the Society's Rules in 1870, which
contained for the first time a reference to awning-
decked vessels, provision was also made for the con-

: wº
..?
º

•
.
gº
Annals of Lloyd's Register. I 33
struction of spar-decked vessels “for passengers only.”
No scuppers were required to be fitted to the main
deck of these vessels, but the freeboard considered
suitable was indicated. This freeboard was, however,
in no sense compulsory, and the Rule disappeared in
the following year, when the description of vessel to
which it was applicable ceased to be constructed.
In the meantime, while the Society had been
taking steps to prevent improper loading of awning-
decked vessels, the Board of Trade obtained
powers from Parliament to detain overladen vessels
as unseaworthy, and in November, 1875, the Board
applied to the Committee for assistance in laying
down elementary principles concerning freeboard and
draught of water. Representatives were eventually
appointed, and a Committee formed, consisting of
nominees of the Society, of the Board of Trade, and
of the Liverpool Underwriters' Registry.
The Committee met, but it did not appear that
opinions upon the subject of a load-line for all
vessels were so matured as to give the hope of an
agreement being arrived at by its members, and the
Committee was accordingly dissolved.
Among the members of Lloyd's Register Com-
mittee, however, a growing desire was manifested
to grapple with this intricate subject, and many
discussions took place regarding it. They ultimately
arrived at the conclusion that a certain percentage of
surplus buoyancy for each particular ship would form
the proper basis for a load-line. To ascertain the
practice in regard to loading vessels in this country,
the Society's Surveyors were instructed to take note
jº
3V.--
->
~
Yº!
c
tº
%.
I 34 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
of the immersion of vessels at the various ports, and
their reports upon the subject were duly forwarded
to the Committee. At the request of the Committee,
many of the principal shipowners furnished particulars
of the draughts to which they loaded their vessels.
This information was being accumulated for a con-
siderable time preparatory to its being analysed, with
a view to the construction of Tables of Freeboard,
when in August, 1880, the Board of Trade inquired
of the Committee whether the measures adopted for
fixing a conditional load-line for awning-decked ships
could with propriety be extended to other classes of
vessels.
The Committee, having by this time received much
valuable information from their Surveyors and the
Shipowners with whom they had communicated, and
having besides in their sole possession full particulars
of the strength and mode of construction of the
various vessels, instructed Mr. Martell, the Chief
Surveyor, to frame Tables of Freeboard suitable for
every type of vessel.
Mr. Martell, who had already given much atten-
tion to this subject, and had, so long before as 1873,
prepared Tables of Freeboard, based upon the prin-
ciple of reserve buoyancy, which he laid before the
Royal Commission on Unseaworthy Ships, proceeded
to give effect to the Committee's instructions. So
laborious, however, was the undertaking, it was not
until January, 1882, that the information obtained had
been exhaustively analysed and preliminary Tables
framed and submitted to the Committee.
The principle on which the Tables for Flush-

&
&
_2
º,
g
ū
§
Annals of Zloyd's Aegister. I 35
decked Steam and Sailing Vessels were prepared
was that of allowing a fixed percentage of the total
bulk of the vessel above the load-draught as reserve
buoyancy; and to render this principle practicable for
vessels already built, and for which no accurate
drawings were obtainable, the method of employing
coefficients of fineness, derived from the registered
under-deck tonnage and the principal dimensions,
in connexion with the moulded depth, as previously
employed by Mr. Martell, was adopted. For spar-
decked vessels, the basis was one of strength of
construction, and the freeboard arrived at was that
which calculations showed would admit of vessels of
this type being strained at sea no more than vessels
of the same dimensions of the three-decked type.
The basis of the Tables was accepted by the
Committee; but, prior to approving the scale
of freeboard proposed, the Committee submitted
the Tables to the judgment of Shipowners, Ship-
builders, and other competent persons throughout the
country, and appealed to them for information as to
their own experience in the loading of vessels.
In response to the Committee's invitation, a very
large amount of valuable information was obtained,
and, after the same had been carefully analysed,
the Tables were further modified. As amended, they
were again laid before the Committee, and, after
much deliberation, were finally approved and issued
to the public in August, 1882.
The Committee, at the same time, intimated that
they were prepared to undertake the duty of assigning
suitable freeboards to all types of vessels, classed or

#3
|
.
*.
- …--
#)
º
&
I 36 Ammals of Zloyd's Aegister.
unclassed, for record in the Register Book, if requested
by the owners to do so, on the basis of the approved
Tables, and that each vessel would be dealt with on
her merits. To carry their decision into effect, the
Committee determined to provide a column in the
Register Book for the record of freeboard and moulded
depth. -
The Tables have now been in operation for some
two years, and the measure of their success may
be gauged by the fact that during that period the
Committee have assigned load-lines to nearly 1,000
vessels, in addition to more than 200 awning-decked
vessels which have a fixed load-line as a condition of
classification.
& Ølº//?
º º Alſº
- º § º ºf Iº ſº ) § 23-
*@(ºf §) 23:
- * } º * atºº
ºº: & --
ºf *: A-anWº.
*ſº



CHAPTER XXIII.
§ºn the autumn of 1882 the important subject
§ ſº of the representation of outports on the
# Committee of Lloyd's Register again occu-
pied considerable attention. The arrangement then
existing, it will be remembered, had been in operation
since 1864, when the privilege of being represented on
the Committee was first conceded to outports. Under
that plan there were fifteen outport members out of a
General Committee of forty-one members.
During the interval that had elapsed since the
introduction of that arrangement, great changes had
taken place in the Mercantile Marine of the country
and the relative importance of ports. Some ports
which were then comparatively insignificant had
acquired great importance, whilst entirely new centres
of shipping had also sprung up.
The Committee, therefore, felt that the time
had arrived to take into careful consideration the
advisability of re-adjusting and enlarging the repre-
sentation of the outports, in order that the constituent
parts of the Committee might be brought into closer
accord with the altered conditions of the Mercantile
Marine.


}
3.
I 38 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
Accordingly, a special Sub - Committee was
appointed to inquire into the whole subject, and to
report thereon to the General Committee, and full
statistics bearing on the question were obtained. This
Sub-Committee were occupied with the subject for a
long time, and after very full deliberation they decided
to recommend the General Committee to raise the
maximum number of members from forty-one to fifty
—the additional members thus created to be distri-
buted amongst the outports.
This proposal came before the General Committee
at a special meeting, on the 26th April, 1883, when it
was finally adopted. The extension of the represen-
tation of outports on the Committee was carried out
in such a manner as to preserve as far as practicable
the existing relative numbers of Merchants, Ship-
owners, and Underwriters, in accordance with the
original constitution of the Society.
It will be observed, from the particulars given
below, that the arrangement of electoral districts is
one which practically embraces the whole of the ports
in the kingdom. In any case of a district which
comprises several ports, the election of the member
or members is entrusted to the delegates from local
bodies, such as Shipowners' Societies or Chambers of
Commerce. Under the latest modifications of the
Rules relating to representation on the Committee,
the various members are thus apportioned:—
London : Twenty-six members—namely, eight
merchants, eight underwriters and eight shipowners,
and, in addition, the Chairman of Lloyd's and the
Ji
Annals of Lloyd's Register. I 39
Chairman of the General Shipowners' Society, as
eac-officio members.
Liverpool : Eight members—namely, four to repre-
sent shipowners and four to represent underwriters.
Glasgow : Four members—namely, one to repre-
sent shipowners, one merchants, and two under-
writers.
The Tyne District: Three members—namely, one
to represent shipowners, one merchants, and one
underwriters.
Hartlepool, Stockton, and Middlesbro' District :
Two members—namely, one to represent shipowners
and one underwriters and merchants.
Sunderland : Two members—namely, one to re-
present shipowners and one underwriters and mer-
chants.
Cardiff, Newport, and Swansea District : One
member to represent shipowners and merchants.
Leith, Dundee, and Aberdeen District : One
member to represent shipowners and merchants.
Greenock : One member to represent ship-
owners and merchants.
Hull : One member to represent merchants.
Bristol : One member to represent merchants.

CHAPTER XXIV.
*-** *
nº HE Committee have always given a liberal
ſº º consideration to the circumstances of
sºlº officers who, from advanced age or other
cause, have found themselves unequal to the duties
required of them; and provision has been made to
enable such officers, on their retirement, to pass their
declining years in comfort. Nor has the generosity
of the Committee stopped with the officers, but in
very many cases it has been extended to the widows
and families of officers who have died in the Society’s
service. This practice was continued until the year
1872, when Rules were adopted requiring all officers
who entered the service after that time to assure their
lives in the sum of 4 1,000, the Committee under-
taking, on behalf of the Society, to pay a part of the
premiums.
Mr. Waymouth, the Secretary, feeling strongly
that the operation of the Life Assurance Rules was
not satisfactory, and that the absence of a settled
scheme for the retirement of officers when incapaci-
tated for the performance of their duties was pre-
judicial to the true interests of the Society, drew up
a Memorandum on the subject, which he brought
3.



*g
%
©,y
Ammals of Zloyd's Register I4 I
informally under the notice of some members of the
Committee in March, 1883. His representations were
favourably entertained, and he was authorised to pre-
pare a scheme embodying his views for the Com-
mittee's consideration.
The Committee subsequently gave the subject
a very lengthened and careful consideration, and,
after various proposals had been discussed, Rules,
framed in accordance with Mr. Waymouth's sugges-
tions, providing for the superannuation of the
Society's servants, and for the granting of annuities
to their widows and orphans, were adopted on
the 14th February, 1884, subject to the verification
by an actuary of the estimated cost of the operation
of the scheme. The accuracy of the estimates sub-
mitted to the Committee having been substantially
confirmed by an actuary, the Pension Scheme was
finally approved, and the regulations relating to
life assurance were cancelled at a special meeting of
the General Committee on the 7th June, 1884.
According to the Rules adopted by the Committee,
every officer in the Society, on attaining the age of
60 years, or earlier if incapacitated by accident or
disease, is entitled during the Committee's pleasure to
a pension regulated by length of service and amount of
salary; and in addition provision is made for annuities
according to a definite scale to widows and orphans.

CHAPTER XXV.
rººHE Society's Register Book has continued
ſº idºl to receive such alterations and additions as
ºlº experience has suggested, and its value to
the commercial community as a book of reference has
consequently been greatly enhanced. ..In the volume
for 1874 the practice of recording unclassed vessels was
revived. As previously stated, the Register Book, as
issued in 1834, contained a record of all British ships
of 50 tons and above, whether classed or not, but a
few years after those unclassed were omitted, and
from 1839 till 1874 the Book consisted of classed
vessels only.
In the latter year it was determined to include
all unclassed vessels of IOO tons and upwards
registered in the United Kingdom, and those
of large tonnage owned abroad. Then also, for the
first time, were introduced useful particulars of the
machinery of steamers. Two years later an alpha-
betical list of the names and addresses of the Owners
was added, and this information has been found of
much service as a Directory of Managing Ship-
owners. And so with succeeding years; scarcely one
has passed without some addition, more or less im-
f
º : I
wº
M-
º *A
F-



STEAMERS in Roman letters. LLOYD'S REGISTER, SAILINg SHIPS in Italic letters. 1884-85
NOR
2. 3. 4. 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 14
:aſ Ships' Names. Masters, &c. ºegist'd Registered Moulded Engines of Steamers. - # 3 ##|Character,
§. Steamers Tonnage Piºnº, §: Builders of Engines. Built. Port É Āššiºned.
1 in Roman letters and zºo lines = §: É. É 5 . Materials Where. Owners.” * § 3. # # ".and
Internatin --- --~~~ º 3 l R - f Shi s, &c., Iºſers’ When. - E 33 Also Date of
º ºn. $ºg..ºſs }. É # º, 1.ft. in. *; É. c ...” en º # fºś.
301 KNorham Castle J.Sampson 698|177432-1|18:018 n 5|..................... Glasgow 1869|T.Skinner&Co. Glasgºw Lon. 19. A 1
60427 Bk Comp. 7.33 R.Q.D.42%.F.25ft Iron frame planked A.Steohen 3 SS 4mo. HT.Cly.79A.&CP. 1,84
K.Q.T.P. Y.M.5,810.F. Roof 672 | SS. Lon&4
2 |Norman Williamson 50| 99.3|18:l 8:3| 9 || 1 |CI2Cy13%"&23"–18", Paisley 1877|J Yºlº Glasgºw Gls. a 90 ^!
78552. Scw$r Iron 1.35|RQD.40ft. B.D.6ft. 651b. 25 HP.H. M'Intyred C10mo. 3.3.Cly.No.1– A.&CP. ,84
3B.Hās Cem.77|| 107|FIlfº.1 D4 drp.78 W.Kºng.800.6/asgow | LMC.284 F.P.T.
3 * = J.N.Rowell 597|210-630-1|16:3|17 m 3|C.I.20y.26"&52"–30", Newcastle 1879|G.E.Macarthy Newcstl|Nwc. m. 90/\!
80553 ScWST Steel 945 |P.43ft. F27ſ. 65lb. 100HP.C. Mitcheſ/3 Co.9mo, s.s.Mwc.No.1–84 A.&CP. ,84
S.R.V.D. 1.0%(Steel)2/r B. 4B.HøsCem.79 780|B.D.42%. drp.84 Wal'snd SlipwyCAwe: ; LMC 1.84 D.B.a.3%.E.3 B.108ſt. -
4 ×Norman Macleod Seouller 334|202-732.219:120 m 2 ..................... Port Glasgºw 1876|C.W.Turner P.Lyttltn Lon. p 100A1
72420 Bk Iron 86 0 |R.Q.D.38ft.F.20ft drp.80 Murdoch 3 |8mo. 3.3.Cal. No.3–80 | N.Z. A.&CP. 12,83
Q.D.B.M. 1B. Ha Cem.76 804||Dž2?r B. Murray
5 KNorman Monarch A. Laws 970|255-5|32-0239| *... yº . 5 º London Npt. r 90 ^!
70432 S I 1 4 S 2 || F.367%. \ |65lb. |R. Dizong Co. 3mo. PpIIlg.00.(Lººſ. A.&CP. 2.
wºº `" *, *, cºlº, a Złichardson333, Hpt. MS 5.80 BS.5.82 || 3.3.Liv.No.1–80 DB2.74%
6 F-Prince H.Straeton| 840|242.033-1|16:5|17 m 3|C.I.20y.29"&55"–36", Blyth 1882|J. Knott N.Shlds NWC. o 100A]
84873 Scw Sr Iron 4B.Høs] 319|RQD.94ft BÍ).50ft|1 millº 80Ib. 125 HP. Høysná'Soulsøyl Om. D.B.a.73% f.57ft. A., &CP. 11,83
W.P.R.N. l. Dž(Ira)3 Weſ frames Cem.82|1045 F.29ſ. Black, Hawthºrn 3 CGłs L.M.C.],83 3%. E.3 B.33f.286/ms FPT29ts APT 38ts
7 *|Normanby S.L.B.Sorensen 664|220:427.814.9 C.I.20y,32"&60"—36", Renfrew 1874|Ong Ken Ho Singapr Sng. m
70621 Sew Bg Iron 97.6 |11)^3 spar dº 22°3 65 lb. 160HP. Henderson, 7mo. 3.3.Syd. No.1–79 A.&CP. 12,82
W.L.K.M. Spar deck 5B.H.'s Cem.74. 953|3tr B. drp.75&77 Hadrºn, Clàrn 30. Raf. Cov/born & Co. Spar deck
8 HNormandy LeManchee 786|232.831.917-8 CI.2Cy28%"&53"-33", W.Hartlyool 1877|J.Mesnier Havre (Cff. o 90A1
ScWST Iron 1238|R.Q.D.89%.F.34ft. 73]b. 110HP.R.Irvine & Co. 12mo. s.s.Cff. No.1–82 |A.&CP. 9,83
4.B.Høs Cem.77| 992|IDA(Iron)2, B. Blair&C.(Lām)Słężn I.MC,5,82 D.B.a.76ft f.78ft.A. P.T.
9 – Thomson 446|181'226-017-7 ſ C.I.20y.20"&36"-21"|Glasgow 1867|T. Aitken Leith
55124 SCWST Iron - || 5 9 6 |60HP. Randolph,
581 Rand/ph, Elderó C.G/& Elderó Co.
310 Hºl- Hemmings 240|231:027-7|10:6 C.2Cy:46"&83"-60", Glasgow 1882|Lon. Brighton Newhvin Gls. Al
- 79.176 PadStim Steel 579 |R.Q.D. 142ft. | 101b. 350HP.J. Elder 3:00. 6mo. &S.Coast Rail.Co. º LA&CP 8,82
iſ M. D.P 4. R. Høs Cem.82 449|2 Džs J.E/derg Co. Glasgow *LMC,8,82 load line 8ff. For English Tºwn? Aurposes
1 + Normanton Walker 1533|291:237-327.4 C.I.20).37"&70–45", Newcastle 1882|W.Milburn&C London Lon. s 100A1
| 87017 SewSr Iron 6B. Has Cem.82 23.6 ſ 11 Dž(Irm) & spard/ 90lb. 300 H.P. Cºngº, Macº- limo. DB2.80ſ ſºft. 3-2.É.3-3. Pascº - 1,84
W.P.R.D. Spar deck ºp.150tsA.P.1.29ts” (ptiron)3 ºr 8. *37. Hawthorn, Woºntº Boºst & 3-iſºciº 38/733.2% Spårº
2 + Norma W. Reid 1050|218-5348.21-0 ----- ......... Glasgow 1868 Hendry, Greenck Lon. *All
62074 BK Iron *ś 2Džs Barclay, Curiel Omo, Ferguson&Co. A.&CP. 1,84
K.T. F. B. I B. Hø Cem.68|| & Co. s.s. Hul. No.3–81
3 * Norseman P.Mitcheſ' 86|120-020.0 9.4|10 m 10.I.2Cy.17"&30–22"|Paisley 1883|G.Youngjun. Glasgºw Cly. c 100A]
--- - 1 94 || R.Q. D.42%.F.līfſ 70lb. 40HP. J.F.//ey/023-0.11m0. 2.83
877 35 Sow Sr. * nº. Cem.83. 157 % 'f.F.lif W. King & Co. Glasgow ...”. In 0 F.P.T.23/07's LA&CP 12,83
4 +4|= W.H. Lacey 827|262-832-223-5 C.I.20).33"&62"–42", London 1865|Westrns. Brazilian London Sld.
51290. SowST Iron 13.68|P.80%. 80lb.160HP.NE&B80|C. Lungley 7mo. TelegrphCo (Lim.) 5,80
N.L.M.H. 5B. Høs Cem.651219|2D/33%r B. G. Clark, Sunder/and [...MC5,80 3.3. Sld. No.3–80 -
5 *|= Williams/2876||392-044-017-729 m 9|C.I.20y 48"&85"–60", Birkenhead l882 British & Liverpºl Liv. y |100A1
86260|Scw 4 Mºss Iron 9 B.Høs Cem.82|43.86 32.9| 4 m 880]b. 500HP. Laºrd Bros. 18mo: | North Atlantic LA&CP 12,82
3D/s (1Irn 31pt Irn)3 &wn.dk (Irn) 2283|Freebº to alon, dž12 m 3|Laird Brs. Bºžen head *LMC 12.8% StmNav.C.(Lim.) Aww.dec.
- Cell. DB.294 f.7 004: FP780's APT.60ts M.T.44ft| 130tons
6 ||Norseman 4. Mair lig| 87-721:9||109 .................... [Banff 1873|J.W.Simpson |Banff Bnf. 9. A l
62467| Sr. c.f. Wood. 12 g|1D/. Wał30% 5mo. Cont. Bnfl/ſay82–| 6 7,82
D. W. D.P. 125 A.&CP.
7 H- Kitchen 599||173:328°5|18-9 * * * . Hull 1864 Cotesworth, Liverpºl Liv. *AN]
5] 059 Bk Iron 630 |ll)/.2%r B. Hazm ºr Ira Wºs 10mo. #. A.&CP. 7,82
H. V.C.D. 1.B. Hø Cem.64 618 3.3.Liv. No.3–77 s.s.I.iv. No|1–8]
8 *|North Lidston||1296,220-437-122-624 m 3 ... Birkenhead 1868|G.D.Tyser&Co London Lon. *AN]
58907| S Iron ### º” 4 in 7 G.R. Clover&C.8mo. s.s.Ion. No.3–81 A.&CP. 9,83
H.G.M.I. 1B. Hø Cem.68 Džs -
9 –American H. Hamilton||1676|283-035:223.5 |..................... Dumbarton 1856|M.J. Hamilton London Lon. w|100A1
13519 S Iron 1715|P.16ft. F.56ft. Denny& Bros. &Kerr A.&CP. 6,84
L.H.J. F. 1B.H., Cem. 1569|2Dž.3%r B. s.s.l. iv. No.3–74 |ss. Mel. No!2–82
| 320 FINorth Anglia Mumford||1359|275-736-224-6 G.I.2Cy33"x64"–42"|Newcastle 1883|H.Roberts&Sn London Nwe s 100Al
87.148 ScwRn Iron 29.81 ||P.28ff. B.D.54ft. 80lb. 200HP.Palmrs’0(Lim)|7mo. T.A. &CP 7,84
H. W. W.F. 2D/3(1Ira)3/r B.6B.Häsſem.83|1953|F.28%. Pºwers'C.(Lºn.) Noel ºu.M.C.8,83 DB.a.180ft.f50ſºu E44//539ts FP744. Its M7.10ſ.
Že 12th, 13th, and 14th Columns left blank, indicate that the Vessel has never been Classed in the Register Book.
ºne...ºne Qlassed by this Society, but that the Class has been withdrawn at owner's request.
- In Column 14 a bla
in the Register Book; a red line with date und
A, that the Vessel is built of Iron.
the figure 1 indicates defects in engines or boilers of a Steam Shi
in Table No. 22
The note * (this, *
, or in black (O) in masts or rig
signifies that the Vessel was built under Special Survey.
L.M.C.–Machinery Certified
- ºd by the ºngºgar-Surveyors to Lloyd's Register.
Surveyors to Lloyd * Register. + indicates Special Sºrvey of Machinery or ºf
drp.--Damage repairs, of Machinery.
B. His.-Bu %.
ºr it (thus, is sz.), indicates that the Class pas withdrawn from non-compliance, at that date, with the Society's Rules.
3. "A) that the Vessel has been built with heavier plating than the Rules now require.
ing of a Sailing Ship, imperilling the Ship's safety.
Cem.—Cemented.
A ring in red (
In Column
Asp.—Asphalted.
H.&M.S.–Eoilers and Machinery Surveyed and reported to be satisfactory by the
!ers during construction, (thus, 3-L.M.C., 4-NE.8B.)
In Colwºn 13 three dots < * * indicate that the Vessel was of
The letters a, b, c, &c., in Column 13, indicate the letters and equipment numbers
ck line with date under it (thus, 3,52) indicates that, at that date, the Vessel, from reported defects, was not entitled to a Character
The broad
º ) over
, the H
Engineer-
ºrp.-large repairs.
To face page 143.

Åg
Annals of Lloyd's Register. I43
portant, having been made to the mass of particulars
which make up the Book, the latest being the
insertion in the 1883 edition of the particulars of Dry
Docks and patent Slipways at all ports throughout the
world.
A specimen page of the current edition of the
Register Book shown on the opposite side illustrates
the vast improvements introduced into the work since
1834, a page of the volume for which year has already
been reproduced.
The reports of survey which are being constantly
received from the Society's Surveyors all over the
world now amount to about 8,000 in a year. These
are duly dealt with by a Sub-Committee of Classifica-
tion who meet twice every week for that purpose.
The numerous alterations and additions arising from
these surveys are made known to the Subscribers to
the Register Book at frequent intervals. In the case
of those resident in London, the old practice of posting
the books weekly with types is still followed, and a
staff of one Superintendent and twenty-two Posters
with five Messengers is employed in the Society's
office for that purpose. Similar information is con-
veyed to Subscribers in the Provinces and abroad by
means of Supplements issued fortnightly.
As a comparison between 1834 and the present
day it may be interesting to state that the number
of Subscribers in 1834 was 721, and at the present
time is nearly 3,500. The largest vessel classed
in the Society's Register Book in 1834 was the ship
George the Fourth, 1,438 tons, classed 12A1; while
the largest in the current issue is the screw-steamer

:C
§
*&
º
I44. Annals of Lloyd's Register.
City of Æome, 8, 144 tons, classed 100A1. More-
over, in 1834, comparatively few vessels were above
1,000 tons, and by very far the largest number
ranged from 500 tons down to 50 tons; while
at the present time there are no less than I 95
vessels above 3,OOO tons classed in the Society's
Register, their collective burthen being 747,470 tons.
Of these, 14 vessels are above 5,000 tons, and have a
collective tonnage of 78, I 14 tons; and 62 vessels are
above 4,OOO tons, and have a collective tonnage of
287,227 tons. * -
§

C H A R M A. N.
FRom 1835 To 1881.
-
ELLIoTT AND FRY. BAKER STREET, LONDON, W.

3–v
ſº-ºº:
* *
---
amºa.
E-3
amº
ſº-mº
£-
2.
Eº
#
º
s
F.
Nk=-
É
ſ
º&;º:
-§ -
-£º-
º--
§
º-
l
CHAPTER XXVI.
#S already stated, Mr. Thomas Chapman was
# elected to the office of Chairman in the d
year 1835. This position he held unin-
y from that time until 1881, and it is
impossible to over-estimate the value of his services
to the Society during this long period. Apart from
the excellent judgment he displayed at every conjunc-
ture, his urbanity of manner and conciliatory disposi-
tion, combined with the tact with which he guided
the deliberations of the Committee, rendered him
peculiarly fitted for the important position of Chair-
man ; and to his personal influence, during his long
presidency, the Society owes much of its great and
continued prosperity. }
Upon the occasion of Mr. Chapman's being
elected to the office of Chairman for the forty-second
time in 1876, the Members of the Committee generally
evinced a desire to manifest, in some way that
would be gratifying to Mr. Chapman the personal
regard and esteem they entertained for him, and also
their high appreciation of the distinguished ability
L
* 2% ** f
| 9. 2) #
Q)}.
Kºź (ºr 9. 3. Cºlº
rºws º
“4 - – ----— -------
},
i
i
.
.


I46 Ammals of Lloyd's Register.
with which he had discharged the duties of Chairman,
and of the very eminent services rendered by him to
the Society and through it to the Mercantile Marine
of the country during a period of upwards of forty
years. It was therefore determined, in May, 1876, to
present to him a piece of plate bearing an appropriate
inscription. The presentation was made at a dinner at
the Albion Tavern, Aldersgate Street, on Wednesday,
the 6th July. --
The Right Hon. George J. Goschen, M.P., in pro-
posing the toast of “Prosperity to Lloyd's Register,”
on that occasion, attributed “the great public con-
fidence placed in the Society to the able manner
in which it has been presided over, the single-
ness of mind with which the Committee and Exe-
cutive performed their duties, and the integrity of its
Surveying staff.” A strong feeling had also been
shown by the Members that they should subscribe
for a portrait of the Chairman, and his consent to
sit for it having been obtained, Mr. E. J. Gregory,
A.R.A., was chosen to execute the painting, which
now adorns the Board-room in the Society's
office.
The presentation made by the Committee
offered a fitting occasion to the Surveying staff to
give an expression of their own regard for the Chair-
man, and a suggestion to this effect having been
made by the Chief Surveyor to his colleagues, it was
received by them with hearty approval, and the
whole staff of the Society's Surveyors at home and
abroad combined to mark their esteem for the Chair-
man. The clerical staff of the Society, animated with

§:
Annals of Zoya's Register. 147
like feelings, also determined to ask his acceptance
of a testimonial at their hands. On the 5th of October,
1876, these presentations were made, and the Chair-
man, in accepting the same, gave an interesting
account of the Society's career during the long period
of upwards of forty years that he had presided
over it. r - . .
Mr. Chapman continued to fill the office of Chair-
man until 1881, when the claims of advancing years
induced him to retire, after rendering about forty-
seven years of most excellent service to the Society
and to the Mercantile Marine of the country.
On Mr. Chapman's retirement, Mr. W. H. Tindall,
son of the late Mr. W. Tindall, who was so pro-
minent a Member of the Committee at the
formation of the Society, was elected to the office of
Chairman. - -
Mr. W. H. Tindall had been a Member of the
Committee since 1856, and had acted for eleven
years as Deputy-Chairman, in which office he was
succeeded by Mr. Michael Wills, a member of twenty-
one years' standing.
Mr. Tindall and Mr. Wills still occupy the
above - named offices, while that of Chairman of
the Sub-Committees of Classification is filled by
Mr. T. B. Walker, who has presided over these
Committees since the year 1870, and has been a
member of the General Committee during twenty
years. - -
Chairmen, and Chairmen of the Sub-Committees of
Classification since the formation of the Society in
I, 2
The following is a list of the Chairmen, Deputy-
º
Nº?
;
y & is


:
;
148 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
1834; also the periods during which they respectively
filled their several offices:—
*º-sº & NAMES. | FROM | UNTIL
( D. Carruthers .................. 1834 | 1835
Chairmen T. Chapman F.R.S., F.S.A. 1835 º
W. H. Tindall.................. 188: { time.
Crawford D. Kerr ............ 1834 1835
| H. Blanchard .................. 1835 1838
William Tindall ............... 1838 1853
S. Ellerby ..................... I853 1857
§. Duncan Dunbar........... ... 1857 I86 I
George Marshall............... I86 I 1871
W. H. Tindall.................. 1871 I88I
º 1 \\7: present
Michael Wills .................. - I88I { time.
Chairmen of (John Robinson ............... 18 34 I860
Committees ) W. C. Harnett, F.S.A. ...... I86d 1870
of Classi- present
fication. T. B. Walker .................. 1879 | time.
In looking down the list of gentlemen who have
sat upon the Committee during the past fifty years, we
See many names which occur year after year. For
instance, Mr. George Allfrey, Mr. George Hanson, and
Mr. John Robinson, who were members of the Pro-
visional Committee in 1834, continued to serve for
thirty-six, twenty-seven, and twenty-six years respec-
tively. Of the Permanent Committee, whose names
appear in the Register Book for the year 1835,
Mr. William Tindall, Mr. George Whitmore, and
Mr. George F. Young, M.P., were also members
during eighteen, twenty-six, and thirty-two years
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 149
respectively. As seen by the above list, Mr.
Tindall was Deputy-Chairman during fifteen years
of the time that he served upon the Committee.
With other names, too, there occur those of Mr. W.
Harnett, F.S.A., who sat from 1839 until 1870, during
ten years of which he was Chairman of the Classifica-
tion Sub-Committee; Mr. G. Fenning, who was a
member during thirty-five years; Mr. G. Hankey,
who sat for a period of thirty years; and Mr. W.
Wilson Saunders, F.R.S., whose term of membership
extended to thirty-two years. Besides the above,
other prominent names occur, such as those of Mr.
Duncan Dunbar and Mr. George Marshall, both of
whom occupied the office of Deputy-Chairman.
Amongst the earliest officers of the Society, we
find the name of Mr. Nathaniel Symonds, who
acted as Secretary to the Committee until January,
1837, when he was succeeded by Mr. Charles
Graham, who had previously been in the service
of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty.
Soon after Mr. Symonds's appointment followed
that of Mr. Henry Adams, who had in 1815 entered
the service of the Register known as the Green
Book, and who still (1884) occupies the position of
Chief Clerk in this Society's office,—forming a living
link between the Association which took its rise in
the middle of last century and the present Society.
Somewhat later Mr. George B. Seyfang (the late
Secretary) was elected, he having been in the employ
of the Society known as the Red Book for some
years previously. The Superintendent of the posting
of the Register Book and one or two of the Posters
§
3)}:
3–4°
I5O Annals of Lloyd's Register.
*
appear also to have been taken from the staff of the
latter Registry. - - - - . .
Mr. George Bayley was the earliest of the
Society's principal Surveyors, and he continued to
serve the Committee in that office from his appoint-
ment in 1834 until his resignation in 1844, when
the Committee determined that it was essential to
the efficient control and superintendence of the
Surveyors' department that a principal Surveyor
should be appointed of high qualification. The
gentleman selected by the Committee was Mr.
A. F. B. Creuze, F.R.S., who continued to occupy
the position until his death in November, 1852. Mr.
Creuze was a member of the first Royal School of
Naval Architecture, and was associated with Messrs.
Chatfield & Read, members of the same school, in the
preparation of successful competitive designs for ships
of war, and in writing a most able and comprehensive
Report to the Admiralty upon Naval Construction.
Mr. Creuze was also the author of a separate treatise
on Naval Architecture, published in the seventh
edition of the “Encyclopaedia Britannica.” While he
was in the service of the Society, an application was
received from the Admiralty, and granted by the
Committee, for permission to be given to him to
design a frigate for the Royal Navy. Mr. Creuze
was also one of the judges appointed to decide upon
the merits of the several improvements in naval
architecture which were shown in the Great Exhibi-
tion of 1851. -
It may here be remarked that in May, 1855, the
services of Mr. Graham, who had been Secretary since
-$—
-
º
…º
:



- f iš }
tº 2
$ &
f *~~-:
1837, were unfortunately lost to the Committee through
Annals of Lloyd's Register. 151
the death of that gentleman; and he was succeeded in
his office by Mr. George B. Seyfang, who had been
a Clerk in the London office of the Society. Mr.
Seyfang was an able Secretary, and continued to fill
this important and responsible office until his death,
which occurred in 1872. & -
After the death of Mr. Creuze, the Office of Chief
Surveyor was jointly filled by Messrs. J. Martin
and J. H. Ritchie. Mr. Martin entered the service
of the Society in 1841, having previously been
trained in Her Majesty's Dockyard at Chatham; and
Mr. Ritchie, who had been in business as a ship-
builder, was elected in 1842.
The preparation of the Rules for the Construction
of Iron Ships in 1854, and the revisions and ampli-
fications of those Rules in 1863, were made under the
direction of these gentlemen, assisted, as they were,
by an able staff of Surveyors, both in London and the
outports. Much credit is due to them for their com-
pilation of these early Rules, which had to be framed
on practical experience and information collected from
reports received from the Society's Surveyors.
So highly were the Society's two principal Surveyors
esteemed by their professional brethren, that, in the
address delivered at the opening of the Institution of
Naval Architects, in the year 1860, they were referred
to in the following terms:—“The principal Surveyors
to Lloyd's famous Register Offices are likewise known
to be gentlemen of marked ability and most ample
experience, and they also are with us.”
They were at the same time elected as Members
1.
% ºty J
&
-- 3-4 y;

I 52 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
of Council; while Mr. Chapman, the Chairman, and
Mr. Duncan Dunbar, the Deputy-Chairman, were
elected as Vice-Presidents of the Institution.
Messrs. Martin and Ritchie were the Society's
principal Surveyors until the year 1870, when Mr.
Waymouth was associated with them in the perform-
ance of their official duties. Mr. Ritchie retired in
1871 and Mr. Martin the following year, each
gentleman being granted a pension by the Committee.
Upon their retirement, the duties of their office
remained under the sole charge of Mr. Waymouth.
On the death of Mr. G. B. Seyfang, in 1872,
Mr. Waymouth was appointed Secretary, and was
succeeded as Chief Surveyor by Mr. Martell, whose
office has grown in importance and responsibility with
the expansion of the Society that has taken place
during the last ten years. At the same time the
office of Assistant-Secretary was created, and con-
ferred upon Mr. R. Gillespie, who had been in the
service of the Society as a Clerk since the year 1839.
Another addition to the staff was made in 1874,
when Mr. Parker was selected by the Committee to
be the head of the engineering department, which
was instituted in that year.
As instances of the confidence which has been
placed by the Government of the country in the
Society and its officials, the following facts may be
cited :—
As already stated, the Committee in 1848, at the
instance of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty,
authorized Mr. Creuze, then the Society's Chief Sur-
veyor, to design a large frigate for the Royal Navy;
* - 23
sº
& º:
{s
;
Ammals of Zloyd's Register. 153
and in 1865, upon a question being raised in Parlia-
ment as to the strength of H.M.S. Royal Alfred,
then in process of conversion into an armour-plated
block ship, the matter was, upon special application
from the Admiralty, referred to Mr. Martin and
Mr. Waymouth, two of the Society's principal Sur-
veyors at that time.
In the year 1871, Mr. Thos. Chapman, the Chair-
man, served upon the Royal Commission appointed
to take evidence and report upon the circumstances
leading to the loss of H.M.S. Megaera. In
1873 Mr. George Duncan, a member of the Com-
mittee, sat upon the Royal Commission relating to
Unseaworthy Ships; and in 1876 Mr. Duncan and Mr.
William Young, another member of the Committee,
were two of the Royal Commissioners on the Inquiry
into the Spontaneous Combustion of Coal in Ships.
Upon the invitation of the Lords Commissioners
of the Admiralty, Mr. B. Waymouth, the Secretary,
in 1880, served upon a Committee to inquire into the
circumstances relating to the loss of H.M.S. Atalanta;
and later in the same year, Mr. John Glover, a member
of the General Committee, Mr. T. B. Royden, a
member of the Liverpool Committee, and Mr. Way-
mouth, were three of the Royal Commissioners
appointed to report upon the operation of the
Tonnage. Laws.
At the present time Mr. James Laing and Mr.
William Gray, members of the General Committee,
Mr. T. B. Royden, of the Liverpool Committee,
and Mr. B. Martell, the Society's Chief Surveyor,
are serving upon the Departmental Committee
35

I 54 Annals of Zºya's Aegister.
- appointed by the Board of Trade to investigate
and report in regard to the question of fixing
a proper Load-line for Merchant Ships; whilst in
the Royal Commission, which has just been appointed
to inquire into the Loss of Life at Sea, we find the
names of Messrs. Henry Green, James McGregor,
L. C. Wakefield, and John Warrack, all members
of the General Committee, and Mr. T. B. Royden,
of the Liverpool Committee of the Society.
*—
* º
§

s Ş N N
- 1')
> * & sº
gNº.
ºsºsº
***.
CHAPTER XXVII.
#|ND now, in bringing to a conclusion this
i short account of the rise and progress of
Jºël LLOYD's REGISTER OF BRITISH AND FOREIGN
SHIPPING, it remains but to glance briefly at the
position which the Society at present occupies in the
estimation of the public.
That the growth of the Society's business has
been co-extensive with the perfecting and extending of
its organisation will be evident when it is stated that
the Shipping built under the Society's inspection
in the United Kingdom and elsewhere during the last
few years amounts to:—
In 1879, 501 vessels of 521,338 tons.
,, 1880, 48O 3 y 5I 7,664 ,,
,, 1881, 582 y 5 757,802 ,
,, 1882, 682 , , 989,002 ,
,, 1883, 848 , , I, II 6,555 , ,
While out of the total number of merchant vessels
built in the United Kingdom during the same period,
including those of every type and nationality, about
3.
r
-
*
—t--"





























I 56 Annals of Lloyd's Register.
90 per cent. have, on the average, been surveyed and
classed by the Society. •.
The extent of the Society's progress is indicated
not alone by the large amount of shipping which
comes under its inspection, but also by the per-
formance of new duties and the assumption of new
responsibilities, such as have marked the later years
of the Society's existence. *
When constituted on its present basis in 1834, the
Society concerned itself only with the Survey of
Shipping within the limits of the United Kingdom,
and had only sixty-three Surveyors. It has from
time to time made one addition after another, until
now its staff of Surveyors numbers one hundred and
seventy-five, and its ramifications have been extended
to most of the important ports in both hemispheres,
and may be said to encircle the globe.
While growing in extent, its duties have also
increased in complexity with the spread of scientific
knowledge, and there is now comprised within its
sphere of operations a great variety of duties, each
calling for the exercise of the highest skill and of
special training.
For instance, in addition to the Survey and
Classification of Wood, Iron, Steel, and Composite
Vessels, perfected from time to time as experience
suggested,—the Society now carries on the Inspec-
tion during and after construction of Engines and
Boilers of Steam Vessels by a large staff of experienced
Marine Engineers;–it controls and regulates the
testing of Anchors and Chains at eight out of the nine
principal Proving-houses in the country, under the
%
4.---
*_^* **- :- - -AºS2.&
§J
*
-**-
* T ×
*.
º* * *
.
iS Wº(ºf
4%
*
A mnals of Zloyd's Aegister. 157 Y
provisions of the Chain and Anchors Act of 1871 —it
undertakes the testing of Steel intended to be used in
the construction of Ships and Boilers, and performs a
like duty in the Inspection of large Ship and Engine
Forgings and Castings;–it provides for the Survey
and Classification, under Special Rules, of Yachts, and
also of Vessels built for particular purposes;–while
the most recent, and one of the most important,
instances of the development of the Society's respon-
sibilities is to be found in the promulgation by the
Committee, two years ago, of Freeboard Tables, by
which the Society undertakes to assign maximum
Load-lines to Vessels of all types.
While much depends upon the Committee as the
governing and directing body, their labour would be
of little avail if they had not able and intelligent
officers to give effect to their instructions. The
Society's staff of surveyors, strengthened as it has
been from time to time by the appointment of men
possessed of high scientific culture and wide practical
experience, comprises a body of Officers whose collective
knowledge and experience in all that pertains to Naval
Architecture and Marine Engineering, it is universally
admitted, it would be difficult to equal; and, by trans-
ferring the Surveyors occasionally from one part of
the country to another, such a uniformity of practice
at the several ports is attained as cannot fail to be
advantageous to all concerned.
The Society, founded upon voluntary principles,
and deriving its strength, not from legislative enact-
ment, but from the confidence which it inspires in the
Shipping and Mercantile community, has gone on
. . º.
* sº
§ s?
$3));
, 3/25,
Y
*g
I58 Annals of Zloyd's Aegister.
from year to year growing with the growth and
strengthening with the strength of the Mercantile
Marine. During the last ten years of its existence it
has progressed by leaps and bounds, until at the
present moment it can claim to be a thoroughly
Representative and truly International Registry of
Merchant Shipping.


*
*
-ºf Tº
#
*xr



COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT.
1884–85. …”
William Henry Tindall, Chairman,
Michael Wills, ZXeputy-Chairman. -
Thomas B. Walker, Chairman of the Suð-Committees of
* Classification, -
MEMBERS ELECTED IN LONDON.
H. J. Bristow, James Park,
John Corry, A. O. Robinson,
Solomon I. DaCosta, Wm. Frederick Saunders,
James Dixon, Charles R. Tatham,
George Duncan, John Henry Tod,
John Glover, George Dorman Tyser,
Henry Green, Leonard C. Wakefield,
George Lidgett, Arthur Oates Wilkinson,
H. E. Montgomerie, John Willis,
Frederic B. B. Natusch, William Young.
Henry Nixon, -
Rt. Hon. George J. Goschen, M.P., Chairman of the
Committee of Zloyd's.
William Strang, Chairman of the General Shipowners'
Society.
MEMBERS ELECTED AT THE PRINCIPAL OUTPORTS,
FOR LIVERPOOL :
IH. T. Wallace, Chairman of the Ziverpool Committee.
J. H. Worthington, Deputy-Chairman ditto.
John S. Allen,
Donald Kennedy,
John Rankin,
William Adamson,
Walter Easton,
Thomas Low,
James McGregor.
Ralph M. Hudson,
SUNDERLAND { J º Laing.
HARTLEPOOL ſ William Gray,
DISTRICT {}; Hall.
BRISTOL–John Evans.
GLASGOW
Thomas R. Shallcross,
C. B. Vallance,
John Williamson.
LEITH DISTRICT-John Warrack.
GREENOCK–Dugald Macdougall.
| R. S. Donkin,
CARDIFF
J. D. Milburn,
E. H. Watts.
5...}Col. E. S. Hill, C.B.
TyME
DISTRICT
TRUSTEES.
George Allfrey,
George Duncan,
William Henry Tindall,
HULL–Henry J. Atkinson,
John Henry Tod,
Thomas B. Walker,
Michael Wills,
SECRETARY.- Bernard Waymouth.
ASSISTANT-SECRETARY.-Richard Gillespie,
* -
} *A*
"sºlº -
z * --~~< ** --- ºr -se, sº-, *, *-* * ~~~~< ********** ***
2.
!
3–4
º
{ “2-
•º
Annals of Zloyd's Register.
161
LIVERPOOL BRANCH,
k CoMMITTEE.
H. T. Wallace, Chairman.
J. H. Worthington, Deputy-Chairman.
John S. Allen, James Poole,
Samuel Cross, John Rankin,
David Fernie, Thomas R. Shallcross,
Donald Kennedy, C. B. Vallance,
Henry Lenton, John Williamson.
Thomas B. Royden, Chairman of the Shipbuilders'
Association (ex officio).
SECRETARY—John Frederick Light.
zºść,
§ Yº:
$º º * ſº
sº
g
- º sº
ºš Sºś Yº-Yº ( Go §/
º NY Sº N º
gº
> * >>. % gº gº
º
* --
{ *
$.
*
*






I62,
Annals of Lloyd's Register.
L IST OF SU R V E Y O RS.
The SURVEYORS at the following PORTs are exclusively the Officers
of the Society, and are not permitted to engage in any other
business or employment whatsoever.
LONDON.
Benjamin Martell, Chief Surveyor.
Harry J. Cornish, }*:::::::: to Chief
Thomas Edwards, Surveyor.
William Parker, { *
James T. Milton, \ Assistants to Chief
ſ Engineer Surveyor.
David Purves,
Angineer Surveyors
ABERDEEN
ABERYSTWITH ...
BANGOR
BARROW and WHITEHAVEN ...
Angineer Surveyor
BELFAST
BIDEFORD
BRISTOL
CARDIFF and NEWPORT * * *
Ship and Engineer Surveyors
DUBLIN
DUNDEE º tº e dº
Angineer Surveyor.
FALMOUTH tº ſº e
Engineer Surveyor
GLASGOW
William C. Davey.
Senhouse Martindale.
John W. Miles.
James H. Truseott.
Thomas C. Read.
Philip Jenkins.
Edward C. Champness.
E. J. Tierney.
Thomas S. Warren.
J. T. Roberts.
George R. Mares.
H. Hand.
ſ George E. Wilkinson.
\ Charles E. Stromeyer
º
º
º
Thomas W. Kettle.
William John.
Thomas Devonald.
John Lawrence.
Charles Buchanan.
Duncan Ritchie.
James Turpin.
Charles Fittock.
H. M. Williams.
Henry T. Tyrrell.
J. G. G. Rule.
A. E. Keydell.
George Kendall.
John Mugford.
George P. Cooper.
John Sturrock.
William Bowden.
Lawrence Moreton.
William T. Mumford
Thomas J. Dodd.
George Stanbury.
Thomas J. House.
Charles Fowling.
Charles Edwards.
Charles E. Burney.
Herbert W. Dove.
William Andrews.
---
-N-
*t
-
*
3.
%tº
-
Zist of Surveyors. 163
Engineer Surveyors
Ship and Engineer Surveyors ...
Inspector of Forgings
GREENOCK ... .
Engineer Surveyor
HARTLEPOOL ...
Angineer Surveyors
HULL ... tº tº e tº º e
Angineer Surveyor
LEITH ...
Ship and Žngineer Surveyor
LIVERPOOL
Fngineer Surveyors
MILFORD HAVEN
NEWCASTLE
º
Ængineer Surveyors
Ship and Engineer Surveyors
PLYMOUTH
QUEENSTOWN ...
SOUTHAMPTON...
SUNDERLAND ...
Fngineer Surveyors
Inspector of Forgings
• * ~ *-* ~ * ~ -, --ºr-º-º-ºrº --~~ *-***** *-*
º, tº e º: Davidson.
{ James Mollison. *-
Walter E. Robson.
G. L. Hindmarsh.
John Sanderson.
George Newcomb.
Christopher Besant.
John Dawkins.
S. J. P. Thearle.
Andrew C. Heron.
Frederick W. Bonniwell.
Thomas Phillips.
Joseph Thomson.
James Bain.
James Sankey.
James McNeil.
John B. Stevens.
William Paulsen.
William J. Darling.
"" (john F. fight.
|: C. Wheeler.

(Richard J. Reed.
Joseph Keen.
William Bath.
William Moverly.
Charles Skentelbery.
Peter McGregor.
J. E. Stoddart.
James D. Warlow.
Thomas H. Cooke,
Thomas Shilston.
J. W. Scullard.
Robert Williamson.
tº g tº Henry J. Boolds.
James Sibun.
J. F. Walliker.
Richard Hirst.
R. W. Coomber,
John H. Heck.
Edward Elliott.
J. T. Head.
James L. Sinnette.
| John Brockat.
Jesse Williams.
William Johnstone,
T. H. Sandry.
William Allison.
Patrick Salmon.
G. A. Milner.
Henry Cameron,

3.
I64 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
SWANSEA ... e tº is § 3 tº ... Thomas Ashton.
The SURVEYORs at the following PORTs do not hold appointments
as the exclusive Servants of the Society.
GUERNSEY tº ſº tº tº tº º ... . ... George T. Sullock.
IPSWICH ... ... tº º g ... William Taylor.
LYNN ... g tº º . . . . . . . ... William F. Beaumont.
ORKNEYS ... tº $ $ e q is ... James Mowat.
PENZANCE ... * * * tº º ſº ... Hugh Tregarthen.
RAMSGATE ... tº § tº $ ſº tº ... Edward Jones.
SLIGO ... gº tº wº e is ſº e tº º ... William Pollexfen.
WATERFORD ... $ tº º tº $ tº ... Andrew Horn.
WEXFORD g e. g. e tº tº º tº ... Robert Sparrow.
COLONIAL AND FOREIGN SURVEYORS.
Aºrazzee.
BORBEAUX ... e tº a gº i º ... Jules Vandercruyce.
Fngineer Surveyor * * * ... A. Donzelle.
HAVRE, Shift and Engineer Surveyor. A. Le Laidier.
ARSEILL %2% and Engineer Sur- r, g
M ES, Shi? o S Francis Westerman.
Z/č/07". . . . . . . . . . . Ú º g we tº
NANTES † ºn tº ... ... ... Auguste L. Guibert.
Aelgium.
BELGIUM ... tº tº gº sº tº a ... Heinrich Paasch.
Fngineer Surveyor tº g tº ... Francis Demblon.
- J/o//aſad.
AMSTERDAM ... • * . . . . . ... D. D. Borchers.
Fxclusive AEngineer Surveyor ... W. F. D. van Ollefen.
ROTTERDAM ... tº º e & tº ... Jan C. W. Loos.
VEENDAM ... tº gº tº & s tº ... H. P. Hazewinkel.
Germany.
PIAMBURG tº dº ſº * * * * 9 º' ... Emil Padderatz.
Angineer Surveyo tº tº º ... J. A. Libbertz.
Assistant Surveyor at ROSTOCK ... W. Cordes.
Assistant Shift and Zngineer Suz-
zeyor at fºrgºs * * * }F. H. T. Thomsen.
& Denmark.
CoPENHAGEN, Shift and Engineer Sur- } P. Fred. Kindler
zeyor tº º e © tº tº & tº tº e > tº § £º
- AVorway.
BERGEN, Ship and Engineer Surveyor... E. Hougland.
JCist of Surveyors. - I65
Sweden.
GoTHENBURG, Ship and Engineer Sur. } Carl Axel Möller
Zeyor. .. g a e • * * © - e. º
Spain and Portugal.
BARCELONA, Shift and Engineer Sur- J. J. Browne.
veyor tº & 9 • * * * * * -
BILBAO... © tº º •'s • ... . . . . . J. T. de Ugarte.
CADIZ, Shift and Engineer Surveyor ... James Cochrane.
LISBON, Shift and Engineer Surveyor... J. Westwood.
Afaly and A ustria.
GENOA... ... • . . º, º ºr ... Francesco Schiaffino.
Jºngineer Surveyor & ſº º ... Francis Westerman.
LEGHORN tº º tº º tº º © º º ... Costantino Gori.
TRIESTE . . . . º, º ºs ... . ... Elias Florio.
Ængineer Surveyor e 2 º' ... Frederic Schnabl.
Assistant Surveyor at FIUME ... Ignazio Bonetich.
Pitto at VENICE ... Matteo Fabro.
AJiffo ał LUSSINO ... Antonio E. Tarrabocchia.
Malta,
MALTA, Shift and Engineer Surveyor W. Hinchcliffe,
- Aussia. • -
SEBASTOPOL, Shift and Engineer Sur-
zeyor tº Q tº ſº tº º ... } John E. Corry.
- British AWorth America.
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND ... ... Richard Sloggett.
QUEBEC tº e ºs & e tº • * > ... . John Dick.
ST, JoHN • • e - © tº e tº ... Charles R. Coker.
Ożałed Słażes.
NEW YORK, Principal Surveyor for the
Užffed 3. *%. Surveyor } Thomas Congdon.
BALTIMORE ... • * > © tº e Edward H. Sanford.
Fngineer Surveyor • 3 & ... Richard Wells.
BOSTON, Shift and Engineer Surveyor... Oliver L. Shaw.
PHILADELPHIA, Ship and **)
Surveyor ... John Haug,
British Guiana.
DEMERARA ... . . . . • Q & ... Alexander Duncan.
South Africa.
CAPE TOWN ... to ſº tº e q tº ... James Anderson.
PORT NATAL ... - e - tº g tº ... Alexander Airth.
N
t
\
§
Is
--- * —s 3. * s:
5%.
*9%) .
I66 Annals of Zloyd's Register.
& East Indies. ‘,
BOMBAY * * * . . . . . . . ... A. C. Clarke.
- Engineer Surveyo . . . . ... James Moir.
CALCUTTA ... © tº º ... ... D. McKellar.
MAURITIUS ... ... ... " ' "... Jöhn Cowin.
SINGAPORE .... ... . ..." ... Charles Fittock.
Angineer Surveyor * ... Robert Park.
. . . Java. . . . * -
BATAVIA, Ship and Engineer Surveyor William Fargie.
Assist. Ship Surveyor at CHERIBON M. Priebee.
SAMARANG ... • . . . . . . . . . ... A. J. Herckenrath.
SOURABAYA ... ... . . ... ... P. Vader.
... . . . Philippine Islands. * * *
MANILA, Shift and Engineer Surveyor... Frederick H. Sawyer.
. . . . China. . . . .
HONG KONG ... -...- ... ... Edward Burnie. `
Engineer Surveyor ... ... Andrew Johnston.
SHANGHAI. . . . . • * * * * * * ... C. G. Warburg.
Fngineer Surveyor § 4 & ... H. Sonne.
- Australia, Tasmania, and Aveze, Zealand. . . .
ADELAIDE * * * tº ſº & * * g. ... William Begg.
MELBOURNE ... tº tº º tº ſº e ... Douglas Elder.
SYDNEY • * * * * * * tº $ & ... Robert F. Pockley.
BRISBANE tº a g tº $ tº tº ºr tº ... William B. Brown.
HoBART (Tasmania) .. tº it tº Donald Macmillan.
AUCKLAND, N.Z. ... . . . . ..., M. T. Clayton.
CHRISTCHURCH, N.Z. ... * * * ... William Watson.
DUNEDIN, N.Z. . ... . ... ... James Ure Russell. . .
WELLINGTON, N.Z. ... ... ... William Bendall.
WYMAN AND SON5, PRINTERS, GREAT QUEEN STREET, Lon Don, w.c.
º]
------….. --->|-> -º-º-c-----------> -->~~~~~~~~~...~~~~2 --- ~~~~~~~~ : *.*.*::::::::-> ** *--~~~~~~~~ * *
-------- ~~~~~----------~~~~~---- ~~~~4–6
&

UNIVE

}
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . - -
views-raise sº-v-2--~~~~...~~~~~…~~~~ -v --~ : *-ºs-s --- - - -** ºr sº. .s.º. cº ºr... v.
*** - a -º- * * * * > ---------------- - - - - - --~~~~~- -- - - - - - - - - ?
...< ºv
. . . . - - ------~~~~ *-ºs---