262 Naval War of 1812 



port at the load water-mark ; then measure from top 

 of said plumb-line in parallel direction with the 

 water to perpendicular point immediately over the 

 load water-mark of the fore-part of main stem; 

 subtract from such admeasurement the above dis- 

 tance; the remainder is ship's extreme length, from 

 which deduct 3 inches for every foot of the load- 

 draught of water for the rake abaft, and also three- 

 fifths of the ship's breadth for the rake forward; 

 remainder is length of keel for tonnage. Breadth 

 shall be taken from outside to outside of the plank 

 in broadest part of the ship either above or below 

 the main wales, exclusive of all manner of sheath- 

 ing or doubling. Depth is to be considered as orie- 

 half the length. Tonnage will then be the length 

 into the depth, into breadth, divided by 94. 



Tonnage was thus estimated in a purely arbitrary 

 manner, with no regard to actual capacity or dis- 

 placement; and, moreover, what is of more impor- 

 tance, the British method differed from the Ameri- 

 can so much that a ship measured in the latter way 

 would be nominally about 15 per cent larger than 

 if measured by British rules. This is the exact 

 reverse of the statement made by the British naval 

 historian, James. His mistake is pardonable, for 

 great confusion existed on the subject at that time, 

 even the officers not knowing the tonnage of their 

 own ships. When the President was captured, her 



