184 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
[Feb. 29, 1896. 
By Mr. Choate: 
Q.— Up at New Rochelle? When did she go to New Rochelle after 
the Cup races? A.— She went there the next day, I think— yes. 
Q. — Had she been lying where you have been in the habit of seeing 
her up there? Have you seen her several times? A.— All summer, 
yes; but not since — 
Q. — Not since then 1 A.— I have seen her ; but she is not lying where 
I could see her from my house. 
Q.— These marks that were put on by Mr. Herreshoff and Mr. Wat- 
son remained as they were put on by them? A.— As far as I can say, 
certainly. 
Q.— You know of no change? A.— I know of no change. 
Mr. Choate— I want to correct one error I made. It seems that Mr. 
Leeds said it was shortly after 8 that Mr. Leeds and you went aboard 
and not 8:30. You said about 8 o'clock? 
Mr. Iselin— I said about 8, yes. 
By the Chairman: 
Q —Who bad charge of the Defender during the night of Friday, be- 
fore the first race? A. — Capt. Haff. 
Q.— He was on board? A.— He was on board. 
Q.— Who had charge of the Hattie Palmer that night? A.— Capt. 
Taylor, I think his name is. 
Q— He was on board through the night? A.— Yes; so far as I know. 
He was supposed to be. 
By Mr. Whitney: 
Q.— How near did you lie to the Defender Saturday night? A.— It 
might have been a hundred yards. Perhaps not quite so much. Near 
that. 
By the Chairman : 
Q— Where was the Hattie Palmer Saturday night? A.— When she 
first came up to Bay Ridge she was alongside the Defender, and as far 
as I know she stayed thereuntil between 9:30 and 10 o'clock. The 
crew got all their meals on board the Palmer; the Defender did not 
arrive thereuntil after 8 o'clock; they got their supper and put their 
cots aboard; I believe it was 9:30, but I am not positive of that. 
Q.— Then where did the Palmer go, if she went anywhere? A.— The 
Paimer, I think, went into the Atlantic Club House, or near there. I 
think so. 
Q —How far from the Defender? A.— That would be half a mile at 
least, or three-quarters of a mile, I should judge. 
Q— But Capt. Haff remained on board the Defender Saturday night? 
A. — Yes. 
By Mr. Whitney: 
Q— You sailed the races prior to the Cup races without any ballast? 
A.— Yes. 
Q. — Had she been measured before this? A.— Yes; she had been 
measured in the trial races with the Vigilant. 
Q. — Was she measured fortheGoelet cup race? A.— No; she was 
oc. I believe Lord Dunraven stated she was. 
Q.— What did her measurement show— the first measurement? A.— 
She was 8S 85 100 ft. 
Q.— That was her first measurement? A. — Yes. 
Q.— Her second measurement was Friday, the 6th, was it? A.— 
Yes. 
Q.— I see Lord Dunraven says that according to Mr. Hyslnp, the offi- 
cial measurer, the Defender was some Gin. shorter when measured for 
the Cup races than when measured for the Goelet cup race. What do 
you say ? A.— That is not so, according to Mr. Hyslop's measurement. 
There was a difference of f orty-hundredths of a foot. 
By Mr. Rives: 
Q.— She was longer at the time of the trial races? A.— Yes. 
By Mr. Askwith: 
Q.— You say she was not measured for the Goelet cup? A.— Yes, I 
said so. 
Q.— Had you found her to be in her best trim then ? A.— I do not 
know what her best trim is yet. 
Q.— Did you frequently, in the course of the summer races, alter her 
trim? 
Mr. Iselin— In what way? 
Mr. Askwith— By ballast. 
A. — No, there was no ballast on board to be changed. 
Q.— By bringing, in an extra tank, or extra furniture? A.— No. 
Q.— Was she sailing then on her designed trim? A.— No. she was 
sailing shorter, very little; the difference between 88.85 and 89. 
Q.— Had you found the trim that she was then sailing on unsatis- 
factory? A.— No. You can always improve these boats, in my 
opinion. 
Q.— Did you think it wise to improve a boat by taking out all her 
fittings two days before the race, and by having lead put into her on 
the night before the race, and your men working the whole night? A. 
— You are not stating the facts as they were. The men were not work- 
ing all night. 
Mr. Choate— I have not heard of it. 
Mr. Iselin — I have not heard of it either. 
Mr. Askwith— I put in some affidavits showing that knocking was 
going on the whole night on the Defender. 
Q— Were many of your men on board the Defender that night— or 
how many? A. — I think there were forty men sleeping on board that 
night. 
Q.— On the two? A.— No; not on the two. 
Q.— On the Defender alone? A.— On the Defender alone. 
Q.— On Friday night ? A.— On Friday night. Fully forty men. 
Q.— Were some of those men of yours on board the Hattie Palmer? 
A. — None of the regular crew. I had, besides the regular crew — 
Q.— You were not there, so you could not say what the men were 
doing. But do yon know whether it was your own men or other men 
who were moving the lead into the Defender? A.— I cannot state that, 
because I was not there. 
Q— You g»ve no orders upon the subject? A.— I gave orders to have 
the lead stowed; yes. 
Q.- -Did you know that the pigs of lead were to be sawed in two ? A . 
— Yes. Not sawed, but cut. 
Q.— How were they cut? A.— Cut with an axe. That is the way they 
were cut. It was with the use of an axe. 
Q.— Roughly cut with an axe? A.— Roughly cut with an axe. 
Q— To be fitted into the partitions of the Defender's skin? A. 
Yes. 
Q.— The night before the race? A.— The night before the race. 
Q —You had not attempted any such alteration of that kind during 
th« whole summer? A. — No. 
Q.— The America's Cup race was the first race that you tried such an 
alteration in— or rather your agents did? A.— Yes. 
Q — You took out 7,C001bs. of fittings, of tanks— was not that the 
amount? A.— Yes ; as near as I could get at it. 
Q.— You suggested that you put in 6,0001bs. of lead? A.— Yes. 
Q —Was it a usual thing to lighten up a vessel the night before a 
race? A.— I do not know whether the lightening up of the vessel was 
usual. She would have more stability, in my opinion, with the 
fi.OOOlbs. in the keel than she would have with 7,0001bs. in the cabin. 
In other words she might be an improved boat. 
Q —Would not the result of putting in 6,0001bs. instead of 7,0001bs. 
be to lighten the vessel up and to lower her center of gravity? A.— 
Yes, the difference would be the l,0001bs. in weight. 
Q.— Well, but that would be the effect, would it not? 
Mr. Iselin— To lighten the vessel ? 
Mr. Askwith— And to lower her center of gravity? 
A.— Yes. 
Q.— Is it, in your experience, usual and a wise thing to alter a ves- 
sel's flotation and alter the center of her gravity at the last moment? 
A.— When the difference is so small, in my opinion, it would not make 
any difference. 
Q.— What was the advantage of doing it? A.— The advantage if 
any, would be that she would carry her sails better. In case of a 
blow she would carry her sails better with the weight lower down 
Q.— You wouid have no opportunity of seeing whether the vessel 
could be improved? A.— No; but I know that from the fact that she 
would be. 
Q— Can you tell me why the lead was cut up ? A— Yes. 
Q— Why? A. — Because it was too long to go between the frames of 
the vessel. The frames were 20in. apart, and the lead is about 28in • 
each pig about 28in. long, 
Q.— Can you tell me why it was not stowed away before night? A — 
Yes; because we had no time to stow it and cut it before that time to 
my knowledge. ' 
Q,— You knew on Oct. 25 that Lord Dunraven had made a request 
for remeasuremeut and marking; did that astonish you very much? 
Mr, Iselin— On Oct. 25? 
Mr. Askwith— Yes; when you read it in the paper? 
A.— Yes. 
Q.— You did not take any action upon the report which you saw in 
the paper? A.— Not at once. 
Q.— You waited until his own story came out? A.— I did. 
Q,— Did that appear to you to add anything very different from 
what had been said in the report to the New York Y. C. ? A.— Yes- it 
had an entirely different aspect, in my opinion. 
Q.— Was Mr. Latham Fish not accepted by you as a representative 
man, to go on your behalf upon the Valkyrie? A,— He was accepted 
in this sense: That the committee asked me whom I would like to 
have, and I said, "Any one among your committee would be perfectly 
agreeable to me." But he was not supposed to be representing me 
He was representing the New York Y. C. 
Q,— Did you not look to him as the person to look after your inter- 
ests upon the Valkyrie? A,— In the way of seeing that there was fair 
play, yes; and that the sailing rules were obeyed, and all that sort of 
[b*ng, yes. 
Q —He made no communication to you? A— None. 
Q„— ihat at the time of the race Lord Dunraven had made no 
suggestions that your boat was sailing at a lower immersion? A.— 
None. 
Q.— Did you take any active part in the designing of Defender, be- 
yond an agreement or arrangement with Mr. Herreshoff that he was 
not to exceed 89ft. 
Mr. Iselin — I do not know what you mean by an active part. 
Mr. Askwith— You are not, I mean to say, a designer yourself, but 
you take an amateur interest in designing? 
Mr. Iselin— I do. 
Q.— Did you assist him at all in designing? A. — No. I wish I knew 
enough to assist him; he knows so much more than I do. 
Q.— Did you leave the preparation of the plans entirely to him, or 
did you look at them as they were proceeding? A.— No, I looked at 
them after they were completed. There was more than one plan 
made. 
Q— Do you know whether the working plans of the Defender are in 
existence? A.— Yes; I should say they were. I am not positive of it. 
I do not suppose Mr. Herreshoff would burn them up or destroy 
them. 
Q.— The Defender was measured, I suppose, in the course of sum- 
mer, for some of these races? A.— Yes; I have already stated that 
she was measured for the trial races. 
Q.— Only for those? A.— That is all. 
Q-— This furniture and these traps and tanks must have weighed a 
great deal. Did you keep on adding to them in a casual manner, 
without testing the weight that was actually in the boat, or did you 
fit her up with a certain number of tanks and a certain amount of 
furniture, and not add to those during the summer? A.— They were 
not added to during the summer. 
Q.— In any of these races, at the time when she was fitted up with 
her furniture, did you stiffen her at times by loose ballast? A.— Never. 
By Mr. Rives: 
Q.— You kept adding to your sail area during the summer, did you 
not? A.— Yea; I did. 
Q.— The boat was a little too stiff, In your opinion? A.— Yes, in our 
opmion she was too stiff to compete with a boat like the Valkyrie. 
The Chairman— I did not hear that. 
Mr. Iselin— She was, in our opinion, too stiff to compete with a boat 
like the Valkyrie. 
By Mr. Askwith: 
Q.— When was her sail area altered? A.— It was immediately after 
the Goelet cup race. 
Q.— Had you seen any plans of the Valkyrie at that time? A.— No; 
I had heard a great deal about them. 
Q.— You have heard that they have been missing ? A.— No. I never 
heard of that. 
Mr. Choate— Are you in search of them? 
Mr. Askwith— I am not the owner of the plans. 
Q. — Did you weigh the amount of furniture and tanks that you took 
out? A.— We weighed the furniture and partitions and those things, 
but we did not weigh the tanks, because Mr. Herreshoff had that data. 
Q. — He had what? A.— He had the data of the weighing of the 
tanks. He had that information. 
Q.— He had that given to him, that they weighed about so much? 
A.— No, not given to him.— He had calculated it. 
Q — He had calculated it? A.— I suppose so; he calculated every- 
thing. 
Q.— No closer steps were taken to ascertain the exact amount of 
ballast that was taken out— the amount of material that was taken 
out? A. — No, I do not see bow he could take any other steps. 
Q.— When you examined the Defender on the morning of Saturday, 
where did you look at her hold forward? A.— Two different places: 
aft and about amidships. I mean to say, aft, that is, coming down 
just at the bottom of the companionway. 
Q — Where was the lead stowed? A.— The lead was stowed right on 
top of the keel and between her frames. 
Q. — Whereabouts in the boat? A. — Well, it was a little aft of amid- 
ships. Part of the lead was a little aft of a partition that came be- 
tween the Bail room and cabin, which partition was left at that time. 
Q.— Did you count the pfgs of lead? 
Mr. Iselin— that morning? 
Mr. Askwith— Yes. 
Mr. Iselin — No. 
Q.— You were said by the last witness to be in the habit of exam- 
ining your boat before races, to see whether there was anything extra 
in her. Was that the purpose of it? A.— To see it there was any 
water in her, yes. 
Q.— Did you examine her, or do you examine her, with any idea of 
possible suspicion? Was that the object of examining her? A.— No; 
it was not. 
Q — You have heard, or there was a rumor, that there has been at 
times suspicion in yacht racing? 
Mr. Iselin— Of overloading with ballast? 
Mr. Askwith— With ballast, yes. 
A. — Yes, sir ; I have heard of such things. 
Q.— It is not unknown that frauds have, according to rumor, been 
committed, although perhaps no definite complaints have been made? 
A.— Well, I have never heard of any particular case that I can think 
of now. I have heard of such things, but of no particular case. 
Q.— But it is not such an utterly unheard of thing in the yachting 
world, any more than in the racing world? A.— Yes; it is much more 
unheard of in the yachting world. 
Q— But it does exist? It is rumored, at any rate, to exist in 
both? A. — Yes. 
Q.— If this statement of Lord Dunraven had been brought to your 
notice upon Sept. 7, should you have been inclined to have treated it 
as absurd and preposterous? A.— No. I do not know what you mean, 
exactly. 
Q.— Perhaps I put it vaguely. I mean, put it in the words that are 
said to have been used by Lord Dunraven, in making his statement 
about the yacht Defender: If those had come to your notice, should 
you have been inclined to treat that as a complaint? 
The Chairman — What words do you refer to? 
Mr. Askwith— The complaint upon Sept. 7, which was conveyed to 
the Cup committee. 
The Chairman— Do you mean the statement that the vessel was im- 
mersed 3 or4in. more? 
Mr. Askwith— Yes. 
A. — The charge of fraud, you mean? I would have refused to have 
sailed any more races with Lord Dunraven. That is the step I would 
have taken. 
Q.— I am not asking you that question. I ask you this: You would 
not have treated that as a light statement to have had made to you? 
A. — No, not any charge of fraud. 
Q. — Taking the statement in the exact words that were put down, 
you would not have treated that as a light statement if it had been 
made to you? A.— Not if Lord Dunraven had made it in writing. 
Q.— If it had been made to you in words, if it had come to your 
knowledge in any manner, upon that day, should you have treated it 
as a light statement? A — No. 
Q. — It was a matter that affected the absolute race itself and the 
interests of both boats; is not that so? 
Mr. Iselin— The result of the race? It would have affected the result 
of the race? 
Mr. Askwith— No; I am not saying it affected the result of the race; 
but it would have affected the race? 
Mr. Iselin— In what way? 
Mr. Askwith— Such a statement as that, that the boat was sailing 
more deeply immersed than when she had been measured. If that 
had been known to you, it would have been a matter, in your opinion, 
which would affect the race. Your boat would have been disqualified, 
I^presume, if it had been found out to be the fact? 
Mr. Iselin— Yes, if it had been found out so. 
Q. — And it would certainly have been a sufficiently serious matter 
for you to desire an investigation ? A. — Yes. 
Q. — You have only the merest and most distant acquaintance with 
Lord Dunraven? A.— Yes. 
Q.— I mean, you did not know him before this race? A.— Oh, yes. 
Q.— You did? A— Yes. 
Q.— You have met him before? A.— I met him in 1893. 
By Mr. Rives: 
Q.— You met him for the first time in 1893, did you say? A.— Yes. 
Q.— That was when he was racing against the Vigilant with Valkyrie 
It? A.— Yes; I met him in 1894 also. 
By Mr. Askwith: 
Q —You met in the yachting world here, then, and you met him 
when he was out yachting in 1893? A,— Yes; I was sailing the Vig- 
ilant. 
By Mr. Rives: 
Q.— You sailed the Vigilant in 1894, too, at Cowes? A.— Yes; I sailed 
in the Vigilant in 1894 at CoweB. 
By Mr. Askwith: 
Q. — This conversation was just an interchange, and no more, of 
orainary remarks of one person to another? A.— Ordinary civilities, 
yes. 
Q.— The tanks upon the Defender were movable tanks? A. —You 
could get them out, yes. They were put in there, but you could take 
them out the same way they were put in. 
Q.— Were they fixed tanks, according to the design? 
Mr. Iselin— What do you mean by fixed tanks? 
Mr. Askwith— Well, when you say you could get them out, were 
they sort of breakers? 
A.— They were put in there so that the/ could be taken out at any 
time we wanted to. We could take them out. 
By Mr. Whitney: 
Q.— Fastened to the boat, were they? A.— They were fastened so 
that they could not roll about from one side to the other. They were 
under the floor— under the cabin floor. 
By Mr. Askwith: 
Q-— They were not permanent fixtures? 
Mr. Iselin— What do you mean by permanent fixtures? I do not see 
how a tank can be a permanent fixture. 
Mr. Askwith— I suppose you can always take a tank out somehow? 
A.— You could take these tanks out. 
By Mr. Rives: 
Q.— How were they fastened? Were they bolted to the ribs of the 
Ship, or something like that? A.— I could not say how they were 
fastened. Mr. Herreshoff can tell you that. 
By Mr. Askwith: 
„Qu~ G ? u J P n tel1 me whether they were similar to the tanks on the 
Vigilant? A.— No, I could not. I could not recollect now exactly 
what those tanks were. * 
Q.— Were they near the centerboard trunk? 
Mr. Iselin— On the Defender? 
Mr. Askwith— I mean to say, on the Vigilant. 
t A.— Yes; I think they were near the centerboard trunk; they must 
have been somewhere near there; I do not remember; that was in 1803 
Q.— I suppose Mr. Herreshoff would know a great deal more than 
you, really, of the question of weights? A.— Yes. 
Ry Mr. Whitney: 
Q.— What did you mean by saying that you found when she came 
out she had too much stability to beat the Valkyrie? A —She was in 
my opinion, a much stiffer boat than the Vigilant, and I knew how 
Vigilant compared with the Britannia, and also heard how Valkyrie 
compared with the Britannia, and I could form my conclusions from 
that. I also knew what lead I had in my keel -the weight of the lead 
and approximately the size of the Valkyrie's sail plan I could make 
up my mind from that information. 
Q.— What kind of weather did you fear? A.-I feared light weather 
in the races with the Valkyrie. 
Q — What change would you have made in the boat at the time of 
the race, if you could have made any? A.— I would have lightened 
her. 
Q.— Speaking of your experience, how many yachts, small and 
large, have you yourself built, do you remember? A.— Yes; I have 
built six yachts, small and large. I commenced yachting when I was 
about 16 years old, commencing with small boats, and have been at it 
ever since. 
By the Chairman : 
Q — You have spoken of a number of races that you were in during 
the summer previous to this. Did you have many with the Vigilant? 
A.— Yes; we had, in fact, all of them except one with the Vigilant 
Q.— Were you always successful in your races with the Vigilant' 
A.— Yes. We never lost a race, except by breaking down. We never 
lost a race where we finished. 
Q.— Were any of those races in what you would call heavy weather? 
A.— Only one. It was one of the trial races. On one race from Hunt- 
ington to New London. It was blowing hard that day; also on one 
of the trial races. The rest of the weather was very light; very mod- 
erate. 
Q — In comparison with the Vigilant how did the Defender act as 
between heavy weather and light— that is to say, in which did she' be- 
have the best, as compared with the Vigilant? A,— She behaved the 
best in heavy weather, in strong breezes. She was a better boat in 
heavy weather. 
The Chairman— Have you anything further ? 
Mr. Choate— I have three or four questions, suggested by the cross- 
examination. 
By Mr. Choate: 
Q — To a question, not followed up, you answered that Lord Dunra- 
ven's publication had, to your mind, a very different aspect from the 
matter as stated in the committee's report; an entirely different 
aspect. What did you mean by that? A.— His first communication 
to the Cup committee was merely a verbal one, and the boats having 
been remeasured, and Lord Dunraven having sailed the second race 
I considered that he accepted that measurement and had no further 
reason for complaint. 
Q.— Was this substitution of 6,000 for 7,0001bs. taken out made after 
a full conference with Mr. Herreshoff? A.— Yes. 
Q.— And on his advice or his concurrence? A.— Yes: we both agreed 
to that together. & 
Q — You said that the object of your habit of examination before a 
race was not to satisfy suspicion. What was your object? A —My 
object was to see whether there was any water in the bilge. 
Q — You say that you would not have treated Lord Dunraven's 
Statement about the extra immersion of 4in. as a little matter if it 
had come to your knowledge when it was made? A,— Well I would 
have treated it as a gross insult to me at the time. 
Q.— You would have regarded it as a charge of fraud? A.— I would 
have. 
Mr. Choate— We will call, for one moment, Mr. Louis F Merrian 
Louis F. Merrian, being called as a witness on behalf of Mr Iselin 
testified as follows: 
By Mr. Choate: 
Q— You are secretary of the concern of Mayor, Lane & Co., dealers 
in plumbers' supplies, and so on ? A.— I am. 
Q — And were in last year, last summer? A.— Yes, Bir. 
Q.— Did you make the sale to Mr. Thorne of the two lot* of lead of 
which the bills have been put in by Mr. Iselin? A,— It was made 
through the house. 
Q— And these are correct statements of the weight, and prices and 
amounts? A. — Yes, sir. 
Q— And no other lead was furnished by your house for the De- 
fender? A.— No other. 
Q.— What was the size of these pig3 of lead? I see they weighed 
just about lOllbs. What were their dimensions? A.— Two feet five 
inches was their length, and 4%in wide, and 2%\a. thick. 
Q.— It is a standard measurement? a. — Yes. 
Q.— You have the receipts for the delivery of these two lots on 
board, have you? A. (Producing papers J—Ves, sir. 
Mr. Choate— I want to see the dates. Sept. 4, received the forty-two 
pigs, and Sept. 5, received the twenty-one pigs. That is all. 
Mr. Askwith — I have no questions to suggest. 
Mr. Choate— We will call Capt. Haff, if he is here. 
Henry C. Haff, being called as a witness on behalf of Mr Iselin 
testified as followed: ' 
By Mr. Choate: 
Q.— How long have you followed the seas? A.— Well. I have followed 
the water, off and on, for about thirty-five years. 
Q — How long have you been specially in the yaching business' A 
—Well, for the last— since 1866, mostly. I have been some three or 
four years out of it. 
Q.— Will you name a few of the yachts that you have commanded? 
A.— The Onward, Fannie, Mayflower, Titania, Volunteer, the Colonia. 
Vigilant, Defender. 
Q.— The Vigilant was not the American Vigilant, but the English 
Vigilant, was it not? A.— Yes; she was the American Vigilant she 
was on the other side when I was sailing master of her 
Q.— You brought her over? A.— No, sir; I sailed her over there. 
Q.— When were you employed by Mr. Iselin in regard to the De- 
fender? A.— In February last, I think somewhere about February 
Q.— Did you command her all the time, on all the trips she made on 
all the races? A.— I was what is called the sailing master of her yes 
sir. 
Q.— Did you employ her other officers and crew? A— Yes sir - I 
did. 
Q.— Will you state what the officers were and what was the comple- 
ment of men? A.— We had a mate, second mate, two quartermasters 
on the start and thirty men. 
The "Field" and the Dunraven Charges. 
The London Field, of Feb. 8, discusses the Dunraven Inquiry in its 
leading article as follows: 
The decision of the committee appointed by the New York Y 0 to 
inquire into the alleged alteration of trim of the Defender was a fore- 
gone conclusion; but we must confess that the report of the commit- 
tee impresses one with a sense of its impartiality, as far as they could 
deal with the evidence placed before them. The committee declare 
that the charge is "completely disproved." We think, however the 
strongest term which ought to be applied is "not proven." It is very 
easy to perceive that it would be absurd to attempt to prove what the 
exact trim of a yacht was on a particular day, after the lapse of three 
months. Lord Dunraven does not believe it was even possible to do so 
the next day, because the committee had not taken precautions to see 
that no weights of any kind were removed from the yacht during the 
night. The Cup committee declare that they never received a request 
to station any watchers on board the Defender until she could he re- 
measured; but surely, when they received Lord Dunraven's statement 
that he believed she had sailed the race on Sept. 7 immersed 3 or 4in. 
deeper than when she was measured, they should have realized that 
something more was necessary than ordering the yacht to be remeas- 
ured the following day. The excuse we can make for them is that 
they justly believed in the honor of the owners and officers of De- 
fender, and therefore the idea of placing a "policeman" on board did 
not occur to them. 
All this trouble about the increased immersion would have been 
avoided if the committee had complied with Lord Dunraven's request 
to have the load line marked, as it is in this country. A3 far back as 
1694 he wrote asking that provision should be made iu the conditions 
for marking the load line of the yachts after measurement ' and the 
Cup committee replied that the rules of the New York y g already 
