12 
FOREST AND STREAM 
[July 2, 1S98. 
GOSLING. 
From photo by N. L. Stebbins. 
"inverse taxation" or premium; also, that lightness of 
construction, or factors dependent thereon, might also 
be considered. 
If you will sufficiently interest yourself to answer these 
inquiries, and especially to formulate for its benefit a 
definite rule of measurement, it will be very much ap- 
preciated by the committee. It is inviting expressions 
of views from several of those who have shown the 
greatest interest in the subject, and as soon as possible 
as it receives them it will endeavor to make some 
proposal for final consideration. Yours very truly, 
(Signed) C. W. Wetmore, 
For the Race "Committee. 
From the replies received by the committee, which are 
far too voluminous to be published in full, we make the 
following extracts, arranging them in order as answers 
to the different questions: 
Question 1. — "It is my opinion that racing qualities 
should mainly be considered, but no vessel should be en- 
couraged that cannot keep the sea. These two qualities 
are in my opinion perfectly consistent. We want a meas- 
urement rule which will lead a designer to produce a 
good type of boat. A boat over 40ft. l.w.l. of the fin 
type is unwholesome, and to make racing popular we 
must make it clear that an honest man can build an 
honest boat, sail her for several years, and then find a 
market for her as a cruiser." 
"The old argument seems to me to hold good, that 
speed is only relative, and that our conception of speed 
and size is framed only from the measurement rule. I 
feel very strongly that if racing is to prosper with us in 
Canada the type of boat that is most successful therein 
must at least be of a kind suitable for ordinary cruising 
and sailing purposes, and if it were possible to make 
the most successful racers the most desirable cruising 
boats, racing would receive a tremendous impetus." 
"A good rule should as nearly as practicable put a just 
value upon every element or feature of recognized ad- 
vantage to speed, the use of which is permitted; its pur- 
pose should not be to favor the production of any special 
kind of yacht, or of any special feature of yachts, except- 
ing in so far as to make practicable the production and 
the successful racing of such vessels as will most readily 
meet the desires and requirements of the owners; and 
such as will most likely be built and raced in the largest 
numbers. * * * An assurance needs to be given to the 
owner who would build that, if his ideas are reasonable, 
he may have built and may race with a prospect of suc- 
cess a vessel of adaptation to his wants and conveni- 
ences." 
"The essentials (which a rule should encourage) are 
speed, reasonable accommodation, utility outside of mere 
match sailing, durability, and final conversion to some 
useful end. It is impossible to put any exact valuation 
upon each of the qualities, but, comparing the leading 
yachts of 1896 with those of 1890, I think that it would 
be fair to say that where a gain of 5 per cent, has been 
made in speed it has been accompanied by a loss of at 
least 20 per cent, in accommodation, utility and durabil- 
ity, and upward of 50 per cent, in sale value when out- 
built for racing. 
"In making such comparison it must be considered 
that no small part of the gain in speed during this 
time is due not to extreme features of design, but to 
legitimate improvements in construction, sail making and 
rigging, especially the latter. Making due allowance for 
the advance in this direction, it would seem that the actu- 
al gain in speed over a racing triangle has been purchased 
at a very heavy cost in the substitution, for instance, of 
Niagara and Drusilla for Minerva, Gossoon and Glori- 
ana. In the races, apart from the boats, the increased 
speed has not improved the sport, either through making 
it in any degree more exciting or interesting, or adding 
to the number of competitors — quite the contrary being 
the case. 
"I do not consider it necessary or desirable to attempt 
to legislate in favor of essentially cruising boats; but I 
think that the time has come for a positive statement 
that the object of measurement legislation is the pro- 
duction, not of the fastest yacht without regard to other 
considerations, but of the fastest yacht under certain re- 
strictions tending to produce the other qualities men- 
tioned above, these restrictions being as few as possible." 
Question 2. — "This is a difficult question when con- 
sidered, as is now necessary, from a racing standpoint. 
Taking a concrete example, I should favor such legis- 
lation as in the present 42ft. R. M. class, for in- 
stance, as wottld not stop at the penalization or possibly 
the exclusion of the bulb-fin Drusilla, but would place 
such semi-fin craft as Norota and Canada under some 
penalty as compared with boats of the type of Minerva 
and Uvira, of materially greater interval space on a re- 
duced draft. * * * To answer this question in more com- 
pact form, I should define a 'wholesome' type as one 
that, with a high degree of speed, combined a reasonable 
amount of internal space and headroom, moderate instead 
of extreme draft and sail area, and a freedom from the 
freak features of form and keel contour seen in the latest 
yachts." 
"I find it difficult to define the 'wholesome' boat, but, 
broadly speaking, should think it was that type that 
would be intelligently selected for pleasure sailing in the 
absence of rules." 
Question 3. — "Arbitrary limits appear to me proper, or 
at least desirable, on certain factors of speed. Draft 
should be encouraged to a reasonable and convenient 
limit, and is only objectionable when it is excessive. Any 
tax upon it should therefore only start at the 
minimum limit and be of such value that it would prac- 
tically prohibit a draft beyond that considered desirable. 
These requirements appear to be difficult to accomplish 
with anything but an arbitrary limit. The same argu- 
ment also applies to the ratio of midship section to the 
circumscribing parallelogram if this factor is to be used 
to promote displacement." 
"I am not in favor of arbitrary limitations save in ex- 
ceptional cases, for, instance, in the matter of draft. We 
know by long experience that when certain limits are ex- 
ceeded there is no gain whatever save in soeed in racing; 
vessels are seriously restricted in the choice of harbors, 
docking facilities, etc., and owners are put to consider- 
able unnecessary inconvenience and cost. Within these 
natural limits, which "I should place at about 10ft. for 
yachts of 51ft. R. M., and under 12ft. for all larger, we 
have in the past produced excellent vessels, capable of 
general use and quite fast enough for all racing. In 
exceeding these limits of recent years, we have pro- 
duced craft with greatly exaggerated sail plans and 
materially less accommodation than of old; the harm to 
the sport at large far exceeding the mere gain in absolute 
speed. * * * I see no objection, should it seem desir- 
able, to supplementing any formula with some limit of 
draft based upon a practical inspection of the charts and 
of the harbors frequented by large and by moderate- 
sized yachts. I should much prefer, however, that such 
a formula might be found as would of itself prevent the 
undue development of any one element, making it un- 
necessary to deal specially with each." 
Question 4. — -"Any failure to properly tax a feature of 
advantage to speed really compels its use. All such fea- 
tures should, as fairly as possible, be taxed at their esti- 
mated value for speed; and if this is not practicable, they 
ought, for the common benefit, to be cither handicapped 
or strictly interdicted. * * * 1 doubt very much if the yacht- 
ing public would tolerate any attempt to put beam and 
draft into a formula as objects of direct taxation; I also 
doubt if, in the present state of knowledge, any just 
value can be assigned to either of these, as they are re- 
lated not only to each other, but to the l.w.l. of the 
vessel. I do not see that at the present time it is either 
necessary or desirable to take draft into account at 
all, neither do I see it to be necessary to take beam 
by itself. What does seem to me to be a very urgent 
need is that the function of the weighted lever, acting on 
the buoyancy which supports the vessel, should have a 
value put upon it; that the length of lever which can 
be used without tax should be made measurable by and 
apportioned to the size of the body, from which it is 
dependent. The effect of this would be that for a small 
body a short lever only is allowed, for a larger body a 
proportionately longer lever. 
"The rule I would suggest would not take direct cog- 
nizance of draft, independent of beam, or of beam alone, 
but would in practice be a check upon an excessive 
lever unaccompanied by displacement, whether such 
lever assumed the form of excessive beam, with the crew 
to windward as the weight, or of excessive draft with a 
lead bulb. I. would leave the designer free to determine 
for himself what beam and draft he will use, as he does 
at present, only bringing under the influence of the rule 
the relation between the sum of these two dimensions 
and some function of the area of the midship section." 
"After inspecting a very large number of formulas 
proposed abroad in the past half dozen years, I am at a 
loss to suggest any one as promising to attain the end in 
view; nor can I say what elements should be taxed. 
These formulas as a rule include L. and S. A., with the 
addition of girth or some element designed to encourage 
1VL 
■ 
