ON THE MEASUREMENT OF SHIPS FOR TONNAGE. 79 
of levying such dues as to reimburse the proprietors of docks, harbours, 
rivers, lighthouses, &c. &c., for the expenses they may have been at in pro- 
viding such accommodation. 2nd. For the purpose of simplifying the process 
of transferring the property from one owner toanother. 3rd. The shipbuilder 
and shipowner might wish to know the efficiency of a vessel, but I cannot 
Conceive that any public registration is necessary for this purpose, as the 
shipbuilder or engineer has all the elements in his possession for finding, 
what may be called, the scientific efficiency, and the shipowner’s cash account 
will soon show him the mercantile efficiency, by the profits he is making 
upon his capital ; and I do not see that the public have anything to do with 
the question. 
8. The present system of tonnage admeasurement is more minute than is 
necessary, and of little or no use to the shipbuilder, as his designs, calcula- 
tions, &c. are based almost exclusively upon the weight of ship and cargo, 
and seldom upon her internal roomage. 
4. I am inclined now to take Mr. Russell’s view of this subject, and not 
to limit the load-draft of water. 
_ 5. I have not sufficiently considered this question. 
6. I cannot see any reason for making a distinction between vessels built 
of wood, iron, or of any other material, in their measurement. In the re- 
gistration, the material may be named; it would be useful to do so. 
7. Nominal horse-power is a useless term. It has no relation whatever to 
the power the machine may be exerting, and is a very round-about and even 
- indefinite way of expressing the size of a steam-engine, or rather of its 
cylinders. According to the Government ideas of the subject, even where 
‘every length of stroke (in paddle-wheel engines) has a different velocity for 
the piston to travel, the size of cylinders for a given power is quite indefi- 
nite. It is useless for the purposes of buying and selling, for the cost of 
construction does not vary as the nominal horse-power. Instead of nominal 
horse-power, I would substitute simply the capacity of cylinders, or area of 
Cylinders, X length of stroke. This is positive information, and would be 
useful in buying and selling, and might be inserted in the register of the 
vessel. A legal standard of power would remove some confusion which at 
present exists, and as the elements of such a standard are already recognized, 
viz. the lb., the foot, and the minute or second, there can be little difficulty 
in combining them, and calling the unit “foot pounds,” or “ ft. lbs.,” per 
minute or per second. A horse-power is already known to be 33,000 foot 
Ibs. per minute, and I see no good reason for changing this term. 
8. Sterling’s rule is very good, but all vessels, large and small, ought to 
_ be divided into the same number of ordinates, and five ordinates would give 
a near enough approximation to the capacity of the ship for all the ordinary 
purposes of trade. 
No. 5.—Mr. Cuartes Atuerton (Member of the Committee). 
General Summary of his Report. 
__ The foregoing matters touching the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854, have 
been thus generally gone into for the purpose of opening up those points of 
_ inquiry which bear especially on the limited duties assigned to this Com- 
“mittee by the British Association, namely, “'To inquire into the present 
- methods, and to frame more perfect rules for the measurement and regis- 
_ tration of ships and of marine engine-power, in order that a correct and 
_ uniform principle of estimating the actual carrying capabilities and working-. 
power of steam-ships may be adopted in their future registration,” and the 
