FOREST AND STREAM 
787 
of draft. There are other advantages which the ordinary 
eloop yacht will have over such a boat as is drawn in the 
paper referred to, which, to my mind, is of the greatest 
importance, both in smooth water and in rough, The 
main one is speed, which I have not seen taken into ac¬ 
count by any writer. A fast vessel ean be worked to wind¬ 
ward against a heavy sea better than a slower one, al¬ 
though the slower one may be a dryer sea-boat, 
Undoubtedly the little Corinthian would he a very com¬ 
fortable little craft, as tipset her you could not—certainly 
an excellent quality—and 6he would hare good accom¬ 
modations for so small a craft; but I think her designer 
claims too much for her. He says lie will have over six 
feet standing room under skylight. According to the 
drawing he will have but five feet under deck, with but 
two feet of level floor to stand on. Then he must have 
a deep skylight; and how much better is that than a 
“mansard ?” I think, too, she will draw more water, and be 
less out of it, thau he claims for her. She will be well 
out if she is six inches less. 
But I am more interested as to speed and seagoing 
qualities than anything else. It is evident that the de¬ 
signer thinks she will bo fast, which to me is pre¬ 
posterous. In practice, in this country, at least, such 
vessels, or even a modification of them, have never been 
known to be any match for the ordinary centreboard 
boat; and the reasons are plain, if you look at the prin¬ 
ciples governing the action of the -water upon bodies pass¬ 
ing through it, as well as the action of bodies upon the 
water. In the first place, then, no body or boat with a 
great vertical curve in the bottom lines can be 
made, to pass through the water easily. In these very 
deep boats the bilge is a great distance below the deck, 
and you have to cut both ends up to her deck, or nearly 
so. In the drawing under consideration take the vertical 
lino drawn through her, intersecting the lower part of 
the bilge, and you have a line with much more curve 
than the ordinary sloop-yacht. Tile “straight fore and 
aft” theory is one extreme, and this is the other, but the 
worse of the two. A medium will pass through the water 
much easier than either. 
I object also to the lower part of her frames being 
made concave, especially forward. The water must pass 
from the bottom of her keel upward toward the surface 
as the boat passes along. Such a shaped frame the water 
cannot pass over easily. Aft they must be somewhat 
concave, in order to give the right shape to the water- 
lines, the water operating differently on the boat apt from 
what it does forward. This concave bottom also creates 
a suction in the hollow, which also is detrimental to 
speed. 
I object also to a raking stern-post. Tbo rudder cannot 
act on a fair principle, but when turned, tends to draw the 
stem of the boat downward if she is moving through the 
water, and the greater the speed the more it pulls down. 
Then, again, the great draft of these boats is against 
speed. It is a well known fact that any body will pass 
through the water much easier near the surface than at 
a greater depth. The water, of course, has to bo displaced 
as the vessel moves forward. On the surface she dis- 
E laces but just the water equal to her own immersed bulk, 
lit as you go down deeper slie has not only to displace 
water equal to her own immersed bulk, but alBO all the 
water between that and the surface has to be moved. Tbo 
power required to move the water but a few inches at the 
keel of these deep boats will move it many feet at the 
surface. Engineers are well acquainted with this prin¬ 
ciple. In blasting rocks under water, by simply placing 
cans of explosives on the rock and exploding them, the 
weight of water above offers such powerful resistance 
that the rock is shattered before the water can be moved. 
But no such result can be obtained near the surface. The 
principles in operation here are the same as in a moving 
vessel. 
There is still another obstacle to speed in deep boats. 
Mr. A. C. Smith, in one of his lectures before the Sea- 
wanhaka Yacht Club, says, in substance, that it is not 
the boat that takes the most hold of water that necessarily 
does the best work in going to windward ; but the object 
should be to get the best results with the least hold of the 
water, as the friction of the water does much to retard her 
progress. The less surfaoe you get, the less friction. This 
is true, and he might have added that this unnecessary 
hold of the water requires power to force it through ; 
hence motion is retarded on that account. It is also 
found by experience that you can have too much hold of 
the water, as well as not enough. Often it is found that 
a boat does better with a part of her board than she doe6 
with all of it down. With a centerboard this can be re¬ 
gulated, but with a keel you have to drag it all whether 
you need it or not. Narrowing the boat will not help her ; 
she would have less power and would require more bal¬ 
last, when she would only settle deeper in the water, and 
require as much or more power to force her through. So 
much as to speed. 
Now as to sea-going qualities, I think the little Corin- 
thian is not a fair type of the English cutter or of some 
of their imitations here. I think she is wider, with not 
so much deadrise as they have, and higher out of water, 
consequently will make a better sea boat. People may 
and do differ as to what qualities constitute a good sea 
boat. Now if going through the sea instead of over it 
constitutes the best kind of a sea boat, then the English 
cutters and the imitations here are the best, but not for 
me. It is a notorious fact that these deep, uarrow boats 
do not lift readily in a sea way ; they go through the 
waves, not over them, the crew having to hold on to 
prevent being washed overboard, while at the same time 
a wider and more buoyant boat will be comparatively 
dry. For this there are several causes. In order to be 
understood as to the principle 1 wish to illustrate, I will 
take an extreme example. Take a piece of plank eight 
or ten inches wide, two inches thick, and two feet long : 
cut one edge thin and sharpen the ends. Now set it up 
edgewise in the water and it will represent your deep, 
narrow boat; again, lay it on the Bide and it will repre¬ 
sent your wide and flat boat. Now place some weight 
suddenly on the board up edgewise, and see how quickly 
it will go down. Put the same weight on the same board 
lying flat on the water and observe how slow it moves 
downward, thereby showing a greater resistance than 
when in an upright position. Just so with the boats. A 
wave rises suddenly under the bow equivalent to placing 
weight on top. One is so narrow' ana sharp that the wa¬ 
ter cannot take hold of here to lift her readily, hence it 
- rises up and over her before she can lift so as to keep 
' above it. The other type being broader and flatter, the 
water as it rises takes more hold of her and carries her 
up with it, so keeping her above it. Hence she is a dryer 
boat. And this is not all. Your deep, narrow boats of 
course will not upset. But the Bame natural laws or prin¬ 
ciples that keep her from upsetting also prevent her from 
rising quickly in a seaway. The principle, as is well 
known, is one of leverage. You have your ballast way 
down in her keel. The surface of the waiter is the ful¬ 
crum, the mast the lever. Now, if the boat heels that 
lead must be swung upward and to windward, or the 
boat mnst be thrown over and to leeward. Just so when 
she rises forward on a wave ; the ballast must be swung 
forward and upward, or the boat must be thrown back- 
vard and her stern downward. It is like swinging a 
heavy weight at the end of a long stick. Her movements 
in rising and falling forward must necessarily be slow on 
that account, while with the flatter and shoaler boat, 
whicii has her ballast inside of her, it is hut a matter of 
lifting the ballast up and down, and the boat will readily 
adapt herself to the conformation of the surface of the 
water. Hence the water has less opportunity to get on 
her deck. Still another factor is in operation hero in 
favor of the wider boat being a dryer one, particularly 
when the boat is moving quickly through the water, for 
the greater the speed the more powerfully it operates. I 
allude to the flaring bow. Deep, narrow boats cannot 
have the flare on the liarpins that a wider and flatter 
boat may have. Years ago “South Side” boats were 
built very full forward. As most of them were cat-rigged 
it was thought they must have buoyancy forward to keep 
them from running under, but it was found that a sharper 
boat with a flare would run her bow out of water when 
the full boat would “pitch pole.” So with yachts in 
being driven through a heavy sea. With a flare there is 
a constant tendency to run her bow' out of water, but 
with no flare the reverse is the case. Now as to the 
amount of ballast a boat should carry, Mr. A, C. Smith 
makes some comparisons favoring light ballast. Among 
the rest he says the Mohawk beat the Dauntless in a 
heavy sea, though of inferior model, and with but forty 
tons of ballast, while her competitor has much more. I 
think he is mistaken as to the result while going to wind¬ 
ward hut correct as to going before the wind. The rea¬ 
sons for this are very plain. In the first place the Mo¬ 
hawk is much the larger boat, and then sne has the ad¬ 
vantage of being a centre-board boat, and so ought to 
have, beaten the Duntless any way. Her light ballast 
was in her favor going before the wind. But I cannot 
agree with Mr. Smith as to light ballast being the best 
in going to windward in a seaway. My experience 
proves to me that any boat needs a heavy amount of bal¬ 
last to work to windward well, particularly in a heavy 
sea, because the resistance of the water to the boat’s pas¬ 
sage through it is very unequal at times. Every sea that 
strikes her “ kills” her headway in a measure; but if she 
is ballasted heavily it acts like a balance wheel to ma¬ 
chinery in keeping up a steady motion. It should be 
placed as near midships as possible, leaving the ends free 
to rise and fall, as on a pivot, and the boat will be lively 
in a seaway. Something should be said also as to rig, as 
that has much to do with a vessel being a good sea boat 
or not. It may be taken for granted that all the deep, 
narrow yachts being built for heavy weather are also 
rigged for that purpose, while the greater part of the cen¬ 
tre-board yachts being built more for speed are also rigged 
for that purpose. Hence they have too long spars and 
too much sail for heavy weather. Rig them for it, and 
ballast them properly, and I think they will make as good 
sea boats as the other type. But I think a medium be¬ 
tween the two will make a better boat than either of the 
others in any weather. 
To illustrate what I have said, I will make some com¬ 
parisons of the performances of several yachts. Take the 
sloop yacht Arrow. She is an embodiment as far as could 
be done consistently with the work she was required to do, 
of all the principles advocated above. Look at some of 
her performances in company with other yachts. Take 
the regatta of the New York Yacht Club m June, 1876. 
Surely the water was lumpy enough on that occasion for 
any amateur or old salt either. Her competitors were the 
Vindex, Grade, and Acidic, The Vindex and Addic. are 
about tile size of the Arrow, but the Grade is much larger. 
They all started several minutes ahead of the Arrow, but 
she passed them all before reaching the Southwest Spit. 
The Grade and Addie got but a little way outside of the 
Hook, and were obliged to return ; the Vindex followed 
on, she being one of the deep, narrow, sea-going boats, and 
a keel boat, and rigged for heavy weather. The Arrow is 
not rigged for heavy weather, being required for fast sail¬ 
ing, chiefly; she has heavy spars and large sails. But 
with this disadvantage she beat the Vindex nearly fifteen 
minutes, taking but little water on deck and none in her 
cockpit, while the sea swept the deck of the Vindex from 
end to end, and the man at the wheel was leg deep in 
water all the way from the Hook to the lightship. 
Again, look at her performances with the rest of the fleet. 
Fourteen yachts started ahead of her ; the time they star¬ 
ted ahead ranging from twelve minutes down, yet she was 
the first round the Spit, third round the lightship, and 
fourth home. It could not be expected that she would 
sail with the large schooners in such a wind and sea, It 
was free wind nearly all the way out and all the way back, 
yet but two schooners beat her out and but three home. 
These were the Idler, Palmer, and Wanderer. Others of 
the best schooners of the fleet were in this same regatta, 
as the Madelene, Tidal Wave, Rambler, Alarm, Restless , 
Estelle, Comet, but they all came in behind the Arrow. 
She has sailed seven races since then, fully sustaining her 
reputation as in this one, coming in first boat in all of 
them hut one, and that was a Corinthian race, which 
means she was sailed by a crew who knew nothing about 
the business, but only one schooner, the Estelle, beat her 
even then. The following extract is from the New York 
World of June 9th, 1876, in an account of the regatta 
spoken of above. “ The third yacht to round ” (thelight- 
sbip) “ was the sloop yacht Arrow, a most wonderful ves¬ 
sel, and easily the fastest sloop in this country. Fora ves¬ 
sel so disproportionate in size, to have hung on to a yacht 
like Palmer in such weather as that cf yesterday, is some¬ 
thing that has never been done before hi the history of 
yachting here.” The Wayicard is another of the same 
type, though smaller, and she has done equally as well. 
1’he Addie V. was another, before being altered, winning 
the Bennet Cup without allowance of time over five of 
the largest and fastest Bloops at that day, one of them be¬ 
ing the Grade, as first built, and the Addie V. was the 
smallest of the six. Still farther back we have the Man- 
ersing, another of the same type, which several times beat 
the famous Julia, although more than twenty feet shorter. 
But the Arrow and the Wayward are the latest improve¬ 
ments of the type. One of your correspondents says a 
good model for a small yacht is not “ worth shucks” for 
a large one. True enough, but why ? Because in order 
to get sail enough on a large yacht to make her go, if of 
the same proportions as a small one, her spars would have, 
to be so long, and reach bo far overboard that it would be 
difficult handling them. But the main reason is, that a 
large yacht, to be a good sailer, must go through the water 
much faster than a smaller craft; consequently she must 
be much sharper and narrower or she will pile the water 
up forward so she would not go. 
(To be continued.) 
Hoosick Falls, Oct. 27th.—Editor Forest and Stream ■ 
—Being a constant reader of your valuable paper, and 
seeing an article called the “ Hanlan and Courtney Race,” 
in which Mr. Hanlan receives all credit as being’the best 
sculler in the world, and Courtney no word of praise, I 
for one, will say I do not see why a man, or even his own 
backers—whoever they may be, or of what stamp—would 
be so corrupt and mean as to cut their own sculler’s boat 
when he had nothing to lose and something to win, as 
he was to get $2,000 if he lost, and $6,000 if he won. It 
looks to me as if the boats were cut by the other party. 
Courtney gave Hanlan a postponement ': why not extend 
the same courtesy to Courtney until he might get another 
boat? Mr. Courtney may be in bad company, but I think 
they tried to buy him off, and, failing in so doing, 
watched their opportunity and destroyed his boats. He is 
the best man who has ever pulled a race with Hanlan, and 
Hanlan, being champion, wanted to win, and found money 
had no temptation, as Courtney was going to row for ail 
he was worth. I cannot see how Hanlan won any money, 
as it was given in this way : ($6,000) Six thousand dollars 
prize, providing there was a race ; and, if Courtney would 
low him, even though defeated, he should receive $2,000. 
Please tell me how Hanlan won? There was no race. 
How was he entitled to any money? C. H. V. 
Hanlan won in consequence of the generally accepted 
rule among Bportsmen : “ Play or pay,” Courtney has re¬ 
fused to accept tho articles recently forwarded him by 
Hanlan, because they contained a clause to the same ef¬ 
fect. If “ Play or pay ” is fair for One, it is for the other. 
Tile fact is, Courtney has no wish to meet Hanlan ; or, at 
least, his actions can only be interpreted in that way, 
$nr£ and 
THE FUR TRADE OF TO-DAY. 
WHERE THE SKINS COME FROM AND THEIR COST—THE 
FASHIONS AND PRICES FOR THE COMMINO SEASON. 
T HERE never was a time when furs were iu so great 
a demand as now. Animal life of every kind, in 
Europe, Asia, Africa and America, is slaughtered in in¬ 
creasing proportion for the hides alone. For this pur¬ 
pose thousands of hunters and trappers are employed, 
and great companies have established themselves and 
distributed their agents. The Hudson’s Bay Company in 
North America has its posts strung all the way through 
the Canadas from Nova Scotia on the Atlantic to British 
Columbia on the Pacific coast. At these posts it collects 
immense numbers of the skins of bears, wolves, foxes, 
minks, otters lynxes, beavers, fishers and muskrats, 
and those of martens (known as Hudson’s Bay sables), 
and sends them to its headquarters in London. The Alaska 
Commercial Company, chartered by the United States, 
flays a hundred thousand seals a year and ships their 
skins direct to London. The great firm of C. M. Lamp- 
son & Co., London, receives from America furs similar 
to tlio-o imported there by the Hudson’s Bay Company, 
and also skins of the sea otter, the raccoon, the skunk 
and the opossum from the United States, Other fur 
companies with large capital are seated in various quar¬ 
ters of Europe. The yearly production of raw furs 
throughout the world is worth from $18,000,000 to $22,- 
000,000, and the whole amount of the fur trade, including 
manufactured goods, is valued at about $100,000,000. 
The great fur-marts in Europe are London, Leipsic, 
and Nijni Novgorod. At these points semi-annual sales 
(or fairs as they are termed) take place ; and here 
the representatives of leading fur houses from all parts 
of Europe and America meet to make their purchases 
during the months of March, April and May. The fur 
trade of Leipsic alone is estimated at $6,500,000 a year. 
Sable and raccoon fur is the great staple in Russia ; red 
fox in Turkey and the Oriental countries ; skunk in Po¬ 
land and adjacent provinces; muskrat in Germany, 
France and England. 
New York is of course the principal fur-mart in this 
country, and the main depot of the shipping trade. Here 
are no organized companies. The business is carried on 
by private firms of large means and long experience. The 
business directory of the city gives the names of more 
than a hundred and twenty furriers and fur merchants, 
forty-three of whom (indicated by a *) are importers alia 
wholesale dealers:— 
M, Amon, 433 Broome. I H. Jentes & Brother. 397 Grand 
M.M. Backus & Co., 768 Broad- George Kessel, 234 East Forty! 
- 1 seventh. 
Stephen Keatnnits, 400 Broome. 
'Edward J. King & Sons, 126 
Broome. 
'George King & Sons. 83 Mercer. 
Jacob H. Kirchboff. 194 Elm. 
Louis Klein Imum, 367 Grand. 
Julius lvnolsel, 53 Bleeekor. 
Herman Kohn, 417 Broome. 
John Konvalinka, 38 Maiden 
bmp. 
Leopold Lang, 143 Grand. 
John B. Leciair, 550 West Fifty- 
second. 
J. Levy, 498 Broome. 
tLowerre & Co., 496 Broadway. 
'William Macnaughton,63 Cedar 
Moritz Wahler, 849 Broadway. 
Nicholas Marlnkovitz, 181 br'm. 
Simon Mantner. 49 Crosby. 
I 'Mantner & Schweitzer, 70 
I Greene. 
I 'Morris Mehcry, 199 Hroome. 
| *B. Mishco, 438 Broome street. 
way. 
d'Helt & WmiUV^ AO* AlllttlAUHAUS. 
Bernhardt Manuel, 249 Bowery. 
'Bernhardt Si Brow, 18 Wooster. 
Herman F. Binseii, 664 Eighth 
avenue. 
'F. Boos & Brother, 449 Broad¬ 
way and 29 Mercer. 
*1 & A. Boskowitz, 165 Mercer. 
Edward C.Boughton,33 Howard. 
Adolph Bowsky, 320 East Filly- 
first. 
James Brand, 85 Beekman. 
Hieronimns Breisaeher, 40 How¬ 
ard. 
*C. E. & L. Bresler, 431 Broome. 
'Isaac I). Brodek, 38 West Broad¬ 
way. 
'Brodlo Brothers, 44) Maiden 
lane. 
Philip Brody, 29 Greene. 
Sylvester Brush & Son, 68 
Green 
&US, Oimiotti, 37 BJeecker. 
