5 
74 REPORT—1857. 
No. 3.—Rev. Dr. Woottey (Member of the Committee). 
To the Hon. Secretary of the Tonnage Committee. 
Portsmouth Dockyard, Feb. 27, 1857. 
Str,—I regret that so few members of the Committee have put us in 
possession of their opinions on the subjects on which we have to report; 
especially that no actual builder of ships has given us the benefit of his 
experience. 
As regards the report, I am of opinion that we should keep in view two 
objects :—1. The particularising of the useful objects which an interchange 
between shipbuilders of information with regard to ships actually built by 
them, might be expected to produce. 2. Those objects which an enforced 
registration ought to attain. 
1. On a careful consideration of the whole subject, I have embraced the 
decided opinion that it is hopeless to look for such information as would be 
useful in a scientific point of view from legislative enactment. There are so 
many points beside light and load displacement, indicated horse-power, &c., 
which must be known in order to form a sufficient scientific estimate of the 
value of a ship, that I fear an enforced registration of certain particulars 
would be found to be a delusion. Our scientific objects can best be attained 
by the voluntary association of persons interested in shipbuilding and the 
science of naval architecture. If the British Association would lend the 
sanction of its authority to the recommendation of the institution of a Naval 
Architectural Society, it would, I think, be conferring a greater boon on 
science than by any other means. 
Legislative interference is very much to be deprecated, except to serve an 
object in every way commensurate with the evils which all restrictions impose 
upon trade. We cannot too jealously guard against unnecessary restraints, 
and should be very chary of calling for Government assistance. The well- 
known maxim of Horace applies with great force to legislative interference 
with matters of this kind— 
Nec Deus intersit nisi dignus vindice nodus 
Inciderit. 
I cannot say that it appears to me that any adequate object has been pro- 
posed in the various answers to the eight queries of which I have received 
an abstract. On one point all seem agreed, viz. that absolute fairness in the 
incidence of tolls can only be secured by charging in every case on the actual 
freight. Short of this, and if it be not feasible to make the actual freight 
the basis of levying the dues, then I am of opinion that it is impossible to 
devise a general rule fairer than that which is now in force. 
I cannot see that the public are much interested in this question. The 
ownership of ships is in a sufficient number of hands to protect the public 
from anything like a monopoly, and to render the application of the princi- 
ples of supply and demand secure. The competition existing among ship- 
owners is a sufficient security that the carriage of goods will be fixed at the 
lowest remunerative price. No doubt the more science is brouglit to bear 
on shipbuilding the greater will be the economy, both as regards the first 
cost and the management of vessels, and owners will consequently be able 
to charge a lower price for the carriage of goods and passengers. But I do 
not think that the application of science is to be sought by legislative 
enactment. 
2. An enforced registration would have for its object—First, to secure 
fairness in levying Government dues (in case dues should continué to be 
levied on tonnage); and secondly, tu give a fair idea of the amount of ton- 
——-” | 
—S = = 7 
