FOR very many years the question as to the fairest mode of calculating the tonnage or carrying power of ships has been a vexed and important one. It would, of itself, be one of much less importance were it not that dock-dues, harbour-dues, and similar charges on ships are all based on their tonnage. Hence the mode of calcu- lating the same is all important to the shipowner, and, indeed, almost equally so in a national point of view, by making it the interest of the shipowner to give his vessel such a form as would entail a mini- mum expense in the shape of dock-dues and other charges, rather than with a view to her swiftness or good sea-going qualities.

. Prior to the passing of the Mercantile Marine Act of 1854 this was especially the case; and we cannot, perhaps, more clearly point out the evils of the pre- existing system than in the words of the following extract from an article on the above quoted Act in the January number of this Journal in 1855.

" Part II., sections 20 to 26, establishes an improved measurement for tonnage.

Perhaps there has been no more fruitful cause of shipwreck and consequent loss of life than the imperfect systems which have hitherto prevailed for calculating and defining the tonnage or burthen of merchant vessels. The manner in which this effect has been produced will pro- bably be known to most of our readers, but doubtless not to all; we will therefore shortly explain it.

" In itself the mode of calculating ton- nage would not have affected the question of shipwreck, but in consequence of all rates, dues, tolls, and taxes on shipping being proportioned to the registered ton- nage and not to the actual burthen of ships, it has been the interest of the shipowner to build his craft of such a form as should give her the smallest registered tonnage with the largest actual burden; and the anomaly has become common of ships whose actual burthen or capacity for cargo has far exceeded, and even almost doubled, that at which they were registered. But the form of hull required to ensure this end has been the worst conceivable for speed of sailing, and the consequence has been that, with the exception of a few vessels, such, for in- stance, as those in the fruit trade, our merchant ships have become notorious as worse sailers than those of any other nation; and no encouragement has been given, until the last few years, to the naval architect to improve his models and introduce a superior class of vessels.

"Now it will be evident, even to a landsman, that a vessel's safety may often depend on her sailing powers; that where one ship will work off a lee shore another will drift helplessly on to it; and that where one will fetch the port of safety in a gale, another will drift to leeward of it.

Such, indeed, has been the effect, to an enormous extent, of the premium that has hitherto virtually existed on bad sailing ships. It is therefore obvious that any change in the mode of calculating the tonnage which should remove the induce- ment to build ill-sailing vessels must be indirectly preventive of loss of life from shipwreck." In 1869 a Merchant Shipping Bill was prepared of a very complete character, which consolidated and repealed no less than thirty-four previous Acts. It has not yet, however, advanced beyond the stage of a Bill, the time of Parliament having been so fully occupied that, not- withstanding its importance, it has up to the present day been unable to take it into consideration.

Its 14th clause, under the heading of " Measurement of Tonnage," states that— "The gross tonnage of every ship shall be deemed to be the cubical contents of the hull of the ship, and of every covered-in space on the upper deck; and in cases where cargo is carried on deck, of a certain space thereon not covered in. And the contents of such spaces shall be determined in the manner specified in the regulations contained in the second schedule to this Act. : " The net or register tonnage of sailing ships shall be deemed to be the gross tonnage as above described, less the space occupied by sea- men and apprentices, and appropriated to their use. The register tonnage of ships propelled by steam or other power requiring engine-room shall be deemed to be the gross tonnage as above described, less the space occupied by seamen and apprentices, and appropriated to their use, and also less the space occupied by the engine room and adjoiniog coal bunkers. And the contents of the said crew-spaces and engine- spaces, and the deductions on account thereof, shall be determined in the manner specified in the tonnage regulations of this Act." The measurements for tonnage in this Bill being much more in detail, and of more scientific character than hitherto enacted, are proportionally more accu- rate, and therefore more fair as a basis on which to found dock, harbour, and fiscal dues, but they have not yet become law, and they are too complicated and numerous for insertion in this article.

Again in 1873 a Royal Commission on unseaworthy ships was nominated, at the instance of Mr. Plimsoll; it was presided over by the DUKE OF SOMERSET, and the DUKE or EDINBURGH, Mr. ROTHEBY, Mr. BRASSEY, M.P., and Mr. MILNER GIBSON were amongst the members. The Com- missioners commence by stating that, owing to the extent and number of the subjects included in their inquiry, their report must be considered a preliminary one only, but that it would show the difficulties by which the inquiry was surrounded, and might prepare the Tray for the legislation that might be necessary.

On the subject of "Measurement for Tonnage " they remark— " The present law, under which a ship is taxed according to her registered ton- nage, is in some respects unfavourable to the seaworthiness of ships.

" All closed-in spaces are measured for tonnage, with certain exemptions for engine-room and space for the crew.

"This law is a direct inducement to carry cargo on the open deck, and it leads to other difficulties and inequalities not unattended with danger to life. An awning deck, it is said, affords protection to the seamen, and adds in some cases to the safety of the ship; but if this space is liable to be taxed for tonnage, the owner cannot fairly be required to give it as accommodation to his sailors, without obtaining some extra freight by putting cargo in it.

" On the other hand, it is stated that these awning decks are contrivances to evade payment of dues, and ought not therefore to be exempted from tonnage.

" A revision of tonnage regulations, an abolition of all exemptions, and a re-ad- justment of dock dues throughout the country, would, it is said, remove many sources of dispute, and facilitate the establishment of an uniform system of tonnage among maritime nations.

" Tonnage measurement is, however, connected with so many complex ques- tions, and touches so many local interests, that no change, however favourable to the commerce of the country, and to the greater safety of navigation, could be made, until the subject has been more fully discussed and investigated." In 1873 a "Merchant Shipping Acts Amendment Act" was passed as an intermediate measure to meet some pressing requirements of the Mercantile Marine until the comprehensive Bill of 1869-70 could be again brought forward.

It did not, however, make any enactments as regards measurement for tonnage.

In 1874 the Royal Commission on un- seaworthy ships made their final Report.

In 1876 another Merchant Shipping Act was passed, and it was enacted that it should be construed as one with the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, and the Acts amending the same, and that the whole might be collectively cited as "The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1876." We commented on this Act in the number of this Journal for November 1876 (No. 102). Its enactments, however, ranged under twelve heads, had chiefly reference to the safety of ships, and did not include any re-adjustment of " tonnage measurement." But we now come to the important inquiry by a Royal Commission into the present operation of the law for the measurement of tonnage, which is the subject of this paper, and on the result of which inquiry the next legislation on the subject may be guided.

The Commissioners appointed to con- duct the inquiry were the following:— 1. C. M. NORWOOD, Esq., M.P., Hull, Shipowner, Chairman.

2. SIR JOHN STOKES, KO.B.

3. SIR E. J. REED, K.C.B., M.P., for- merly Chief Constructor of H.M. Navy.

4. THOS. GRAY, Esq., one of the As- sistant Secretaries of the Board of Trade.

5. JAS. P. COBBY, Esq., M.P., Ship- owner.

6. ROBT. CAPPER, Esq., of Swansea, especially representing dock interests.

7. THOS. D. HORNBY, Esq., Chairman of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board.

8. WM. PEARCE, Esq., Shipbuilder and Engineer of the Clyde, of the firm of John Elder and Co.

9. T. B. BOYDEN, Esq., Shipowner and Shipbuilder, Liverpool- 10. H. C. ROTHEBY, Esq., Wreck Com- missioner.

11. JNO. GLOVER, Esq., Shipowner and Ship-broker, London.

12. BERNARD WAYMOUTH, Esq., Secre- tary of the Committee of Lloyd's Register of British and Foreign Shipping.

Of the above twelve gentlemen, the first nine were unanimous in their assent to the recommendations contained in the Report of the Commission, the last three being dissentients, and giving their reasons for dissent.

The terms of Her Most Gracious Majesty's reference to the Royal Com- missioners are these:— Whereas, We have deemed it expedient that a Commission should forthwith issue to inquire into the present operation of the Laws for the Measurement of Tonnage, and to report to Us— Whether the principle of the present law is fully and properly carried into effect; and Whether the terms of the present rules are suitable to the present state of shipbuilding; and to report Whether the law is fair in its operation as between those who pay and those who receive dues on shipping; and as Between the different classes of those who pay such dues; and to report Whether, having regard to the great changes which have taken place in the character of merchant ships, there are any defects in the form, the build, or the user, of such ships which can be traced to the present Law of Tonnage, or which any amendment of that law would remedy; and to report Whether, having regard to just principles of taxation, to the convenience and furtherance of trade, to international arrangements, and, above all, to safety, it is desirable to make any, and what, alteration in such law.

A perusal of the above list of subjects for inquiry, consideration, and report, will suffice to show that the space at disposal in this Journal will not admit of more than a summary of the course of the inquiry, and the conclusions arrived at by the Commissioners, with such few com- ments as may occur to us on the same.

The first nine members of the Com- mission above enumerated adhered to the principle of the present system of room- age or space measurement, excluding in the net or register tonnage all spaces unavailable for cargo, or in other words, that are not freight-earning.

Of the remaining three members, Mr. GLOVER, whilst declining to sign the Report, in reality scarcely differs from the majority of the other members except in minor details; but Mr. WAY.MOUTH and Mr. ROTHERY differ from them in toto, and from each other. Both propose what is termed a Dead Weight or Displacement Tonnage system, Mr. WAYMOUTH that the actual weight of a ship without cargo, in tons of 20 cwt. each, ascertained by her exact displacement of water to her light water line, being taken as a starting point, and her cargo weight, shown by her additional displacement between her light and load lines, representing her taxable liability. Mr. ROTHBET, on the other hand, advocating the total displace- ment of ship and cargo to her maximum load line as liable.

These are not new proposals; the question of calculating tonnage by weight ascertained by displacement instead of by cubical stowage space was long ago pro- pounded, and it is evident that neither system, looking to the diversified forms of ships, space devoted to propelling pur- poses, and the great variety of cargoes, heavy or light, bulky or compact, and of varying costliness, can ever form a basis for harbour and dock, canal and similar charges, that shall fall equally on all interests. The question stiJl remains whether or not tonnage in any shape is a suitable basis on which to levy dues or taxes of any description. Whether the ship and cargo would not more fairly be separately taxed, the latter in proportion to its money value on shipment or dis- charge, on the dock or harbour quay or wharf, and the former on the length of quay space occupied by the ship, or by her value, or by both combined.

It appears to us that some such system would be much more plastic and free from the rigidity, unequal pressure, and consequent frequent unfairness of any tonnage measurement, which latter might well be left to express the simple size and carrying capacity of a ship.

(To be continued.) The following is an epitome of the Report embodying the principal subjects of the inquiry, and the opinions of the Commissioners on the same:— 1. Uses to which tonnage is applied.—The tonnage inscribed on the certificate of registry of a British ship constitutes the measure of her contribution to light dues, and to harbour and dock charges in British and many foreign ports.

It is the measure of the amount to which a shipowner may become liable for any damage caused by his ship. It also has most important mercantile issues in connection with the pur- chase, sale, hire, and chartering of ships.

4. Present basis for tonnage measurement. 17 & 18 Viet., o. 104.—The statute under which tonnage is admeasured is an Act passed in Your Majesty's reign, known as " The Merchant Shipping Act of 1854," and the basis for tonnage adopted therein is a roomage or space ton of 100 cubic feet; and the tonnage is the roomage of the internal cubical capacity of the ship below her uppermost deck, and of permanent closed-iii spaces on her uppermost deck, avail- able for cargo, stores, passengers, or crew, ascer- tained by the formula known as "Sterling's Rule." The aggregate cubic space in the ship thus ascertained (designated in units of 100 cubic feet) constitutes her gross tonnage. This system was adopted in 1854.

5. Net or register tonnage ascertained by de- ductions from gross tonnage. SO & 31 Viet. c. 124, s. 9. Deductions for crew space allowed to all descriptions of vessels.—The net or register tonnage, upon which (with slight exceptions) all tonnage dues and charges upon ships are levied, ia ascertained in the case of sailing' vessels by deducting from the gross tonnage the tonnage of spaces exclusively appropriated to the accommodation and use of the crew.

The provisions in the Act of 1854 in repsect of crew-spaces have been modified and extended by the Merchant Shipping Amendment Act, 1867.

6. Allowances to steamers for propelling power.

—In addition to the deduction for crew space (allowed to all descriptions of vessels), the gross tonnage of steamers is further reduced by an allowance for spaces occupied by and necessary for propelling power.

The deductions for propelling power which the owner of a steam vessel is entitled to claim are specified under section 23 of the Act of 1854.

9. Difficulty of applying present rules to modern shipbuilding. Water - ballast, double bottom systems.—As an instance of the difficulty of applying the present rules to the progress of modern shipbuilding, our attention has been called to the novel principle of construction of water-ballast double bottoms.

10. Development of steam power.—It is proper when adverting to the great changes since 1854 in the dimensions and forms of ships, and of the material used in their construction, that we should also notice the rapid development in the application of steam power to merchant vessels consequent on the general adoption of the screw propeller, and the great economy in the con- sumption of fuel and in the space necessary for carrying it, effected by the use of steam at greatly increased pressure, and of the high and low pressure cylinders in what are called " com- pound engines." Increase of steam vessels between 1854 and 1880.—The progress in the production and use of steam vessels is shown by the following statement of the number and tonnage of sailing and steam vessels above 50 tons, registered under The Merchant Shipping Acts, which be- longed to the United Kingdom (exclusive of the Isle of Man and Channel Islands), 1854 and 1880:— Steam.

total.

Saiiing.

Num-! Ton- ber. ! nage.

Num- Ton- ber. nage.

; Num- Ton- | her. i nage.

1854 937 1880 3,786 290,239 15,553 3,609,294 16,490 3,899,583 2,688,769 11,569.3,546,528 15,355 6,234,297 [We •will merely observe on this head that the immense development of steam power, and consequent continuous increase in the number of steam vessels, has much complicated the question of an equal distribution of taxation both amongst and as compared with sailing craft.—ED.

L-B. .A.] 20. Present tonnage fates do not operate against seaworthiness.—The operation of the law of ton- nage, as it affects the seaworthiness of ships, has occupied much of our attention. The de- cided preponderance of evidence is to the effect that considerations of a saving of tonnage dues do not operate with shipowners in the building of a ship in the form and of the dimensions most suitable to their purpose, and we have no distinct instance adduced to us to the contrary.

But whether this be so or not, we have received abundant and unanimous testimony that in con- struction, design, speed, economy, and safety, the British merchant ship of the present day is not only vastly superior to the British ship of a date prior to the present law of tonnage, but that great improvements • have been effected within the last ten years. We have before us the fact that under the old tonnage law, by which the depth of a ship was not measured, but was assumed to be about half the breadth, ships were made abnormally deep; and if not actually made dangerous thereby, were a very bad type of ship.

21. Open spaces on decks considered.—It has, however, been represented to us by persons, whose opinions on the subject are well entitled to respectful consideration, that greater safety at sea would be secured if open spaces on the main deck of ships were covered-in, which they assert would be done were not the owners dis- couraged by the operation of the law, which requires that such covered in spaces be measured into and increase the- tonnage of, and conse- quently the charges upon the ship.

24. Tonnage laws not intended to influence construction of skips.—It seems to us that the law for admeasurements of tonnage was not in- tended to raise, and should not raise or deter- mine in itself any question of seaworthiness or fitness, nor favour any particular arrangement, construction, form, or design of a ship.

[This has never been asserted, but only that tonnage measurement as a basis of taxation, prior to 1854 if not now, made it the'pecuniary interest of shipowners to build bad ships.—ED. L.-B. J.] 27. Proposals and suggestions for clumge in the basis of tonnage system.—Proposals have been made to us by persons of experience and autho- rity for a radical change in the basis of tonnage.

These proposals come to as in various forma: 1. That it should be the amount of dead- weight cargo (in tons of 20 cwt.) which a ship could carry on a fixed, load-line.

2. That it should be the weight of the dis- placed water between a fixed light-line and a fixed load-line (which is practically equivalent to the above), the tons in weight (or the equivalent in cubic feet, calculated at 35 cubic feet to 20 cwt.) being reduced by a divisor so as to give a result approximating to present register tonnage, adding thereto, in the case of passenger ships, a proportion of contents of the space used by them.

3. That it should be the cubical contents or the displacement of the hull of the ship below a fixed load line.

A suggestion has also been made, that ton- nage as a basis on which to measure the contribution by ships for harbour and dock accommodation is unnecessary, and that the simple and more equitable basis on which to levy those dues would be the extent of water and quay space occupied, as shown by the length, breadth, and depth of the ship, and the time the spaces and accommodation are occu- pied by her.

28. Gross tonnage as a basis of taxation.— Another suggestion is that gross tonnage (under the present system of measurement), without any deductions whatever, should be the basis of taxation, and that dues on steamers should be levied at a lower rate per ton than on sailing vessels.

29. Difficulties involved in inquiry committed to Commissioners.—Before considering these pro- posed new systems, as well as the suggestions for the amendment of the existing law, we would advert to the wide scope of the inquiry com- mitted to us, and to the great difficulties which surround the subject arising from the variety of types of ships, their many differences in form, construction, dimensions, and material, the varied uses and employment to which ships are put, the specialities of the ports to which they trade, and of the seas which they traverse, the diversity of the cargoes, animate and inanimate, which they carry, and, lastly, the inequalities arising out of the mode of propulsion.

31. International engagements. 25 & 26 Viet., c. 63, ». 60.—Our international engagements as to tonnage form another important element of consideration.

The Merchant Shipping Act Amendment Act, 1862, s. 60, enables Your Majesty by Order in Council to declare that when it is made to appear to your Majesty that the rules concerning the measurement of tonnage of merchant ships, for the time being in force, have been adopted by and are in force in any foreign country, the ships of such foreign country shall not be re- measured in British ports, but shall be deemed to be of the tonnage denoted in their national papers to the same extent and for the same purposes as the tonnage denoted in the certifi- cates of registry of British ships.

33. Advantage of an international system.

International Tonnage Commission at Constanti- nople in 1873.—The advantage of an uniform system of tonnage measurement for all nations is so evident that it need scarcely be insisted on.

Nevertheless the negotiations to bring about so desirable a result have lasted for many years, and only after long and patient discussion have they resulted in the present approximation to uniformity of practice. The requirements of the Danube Commission and the difficulties with the Suez Canal Company gave an impetus to these negotiations; and in 1873 an International Tonnage Commission assembled at Constanti- nople, on the invitation of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan, and comprised representatives of Germany, Austro-Hungary, Belgium, Spain, Prance, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Holland, Russia, Sweden, Norway, and Turkey. At this Commission rules were made for a common system of tonnage for vessels of all nations.

These rules, having been adopted by Turkey, became obligatory on the Suez Canal Company.

Such countries as did not at once make them their own law, issued to their vessels special certificates of tonnage for the Suez Canal.

Appendix No. 1, Enclosure A. in No. 17.— We annex the full report of the Commission, and it is only necessary for us now to remark that, as follows from the above extract, the present law in this country was adopted, viz., roomage or internal cubical capacity, but with the modification that all spaces that could be readily closed in on the uppermost deck should be measured into gross tonnage, and in addition to deductions on account of crew space, deduc- tions should further be made in respect of spaces necessary for purposes of navigation.

In respect of deduction for propelling space two alternative rules were adopted:— 1. The actual contents of engine and boiler- room plus 75 per cent, thereof for screw steamers and 50 per cent, for paddle steamers; 2. The actual contents of engine and boiler space and permanent bunkers; with the proviso that this deduction should not exceed 50 per cent, of the gross tonnage, except in the case of tug-boats.

34. Commissioners must determine wlrnt is the best practical system.—Keeping in view all these considerations, it is clear that we have to de- termine not only what might be the best system for measuring tonnage, but what under existing circumstances is the best practical system; and the advocates of any radical change have to show not only that the system they propose is in itself greatly superior to the existing system, but that it is capable of easy practical appli- cation.

35. Objects to be attained by any system.— The following seem to us to be the paramount objects to be attained by any system for ad- measurement of tonnage:— 1. Just principles of. taxation as between those who pay and those who receive dues on shipping.

2. Fairness as between the different classes of ships in respect of which such dues are paid.

3. The probability of its adoption in its en- tirety by the Governments of foreign countries.

4. That no encouragement be given to the construction of faulty or unseaworthy ships.

 Systems of tonnage discussed. None free from anomalies. Gross and register tonnage.— Considering the great complexity of the subject, there is probably no conceivable system which would attain these objects with absolute perfec- tion, nor which would be entirely free from anomalies and practical difficulties. We readily admit that the measurement of the internal cubical capacity, with a gross and register tonnage, is not an absolutely perfect system, and that under its operation some anomalies and inequalities exist, all of which cannot be completely removed. We further concede that in a plan by which the tonnage should be based on dead weight carrying, pure and simple, or on the displacement of the ship, either between the light and load lines, or below the load line only, or on the time and dock space occupied by the ship, there is an apparent simplicity which, whatever other questions might arise, commends itself, at first sight, to very favourable considera- tion. The complicated questions as to water- ballast double bottom spaces, as to the ad- measurement of awning-decks and other super- structures above the line of immersion, and as to the deductions for propelling power, would be avoided; and if all ships were designed and used for the carriage of dead weight cargoes, a system founded on. the capacity for carrying dead weight would undoubtedly give equality of treatment as between ship and ship.

41. Suggestion that tonnage is unnecessary, and other basis of taxation substituted.—There remains to be considered the suggestion that a tonnage for ships is unnecessary, and that pay- ment of dues and charges should be based on the dimensions of a ship (in the opinion of some persons the length and breadth only, and in that of others with the addition of depth also), and the time during which she occupies the water and quay accommodation.

The reply of dock authorities and others is that such a system would be an uncertain, complicated, and troublesome one to all parties concerned; that the accommodation required and afforded varies in respect to classes of ship and cargoes; that facilities for rapid discharge necessitate costly appliances, and are highly valued and readily paid for, in addition to ordinary dock rates, by ships under special circumstances; and, finally, that as quickness of discharge is more especially desired in re- spect to the most valuable ships and cargoes, payment by time would greatly favour one class of ship to the disadvantage of others less valuable.

42. Principle on which tonnage is, at present, ascertained, affirmed by Commissioners.—After carefully weighing all the considerations sur- rounding this complex and difficult subject, and having special regard to the following facts, First.—That the 39,000 ships, of all descrip- tions and size, constituting the British Mercantile Marine are now admeasured under a system based on internal cubical capacity, with deductions for crew and propelling space, and that the mercantile and shipping community are familiar therewith and base their transactions thereon; Secondly. — That all the chief maritime countries of Europe, the United States, the Suez Canal Company, and the Danu- bian Commission have adopted our system, and that it is very desirable for statistical purposes and uniformity of taxation that an international tonnage should be established; Thirdly.—That the dues levied in British and many foreign ports, and by the Com- missioners of Lights, are on our present tonnage, and that great confusion, ex- pense, and difficulty would arise on their adjustment to any other system; Fourthly.—-That many important financial engagements are based on dues levied under the present system; Fifthly.—That anomalies and inequalities would exist in any alternative scheme that has been suggested to us ; and Lastly.—That one of the meiits claimed fer those alternative systems is that they practically arrive at the present tonnage by other means; we have come to the conclusion that we cannot recommend a change in the law which would affect the principle on which tonnage is ascer- tained, viz., the contents of the internal capacity of a ship represented by a roomage or space ton of 100 cubic feet, with deductions for propelling space.

43. Present law requires amendment in several particulars.—We, however, are of opinion that the law is defective, and requires to be amended in several particulars, and we report that its principle is not fully and properly carried into effect; that the terms of the rules require amendment so as to make them suitable to the present state of shipbuilding; and that in certain particulars, to which we proceed to call attention, it is not altogether fair in its operation as between those who pay and those who receive dues on shipping, and as between the different classes of those who pay such dues.

Then follow sundry recommendations, amended rnles, &c., by the majority of the Commissioners who signed the Report.