JVo..

Division
Range

Shelf
Received..

PRESKNTKI) TO THE

Libf of the University oiCalitaia

p^z^t^ ^r~

-&amp;gt;

CAUSES

OF THE

REDUCTION OF AMERICA! TOOAGE

AXD THK

DECLINE OF NAVIGATION INTERESTS,

BEING THE

REPORT OF A SELECT COMMITTEE

MADE TO

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES ON
THE 17TH OF FEBRUARY, 1870..

i/pvcA, j

WASHINGTON:

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.
1870.

41ST CONGRESS, I HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. &amp;lt; REPORT
2d Session. ( \ No. 28.

CAUSES OF THE REDUCTION OF AMERICAN TONNAGE.

[To accompany bills H. R. No. 12C1 and 1262]

FEBRUARY 17, 1870. Ordered to be printed.

Mr. LYNCH, from the Committee on the causes of the reduction of
American tonnage, made the following

1 .. REPORT. V ivT^-Y-v : ^!.

Tlie select committee appointed by resolution of the House of Representa
tives March 22, 1869, &quot;to inquire into and report at the next session of
Congress the causes of the great reduction of American tonnage engaged
in the foreign carrying trade, and the great depression of the navigation
interests of the country, and also to report what measures are necessary to
increase our ocean tonnage, revive our navigation interests, and regain for
our country the position it once held among the nations as a great mari
time poicerf have considered the subject referred to it, and agreed to the
following report :

Your committee, in prosecuting its inquiries, have, during the recess of
Congress, held sessions at the cities of New York, Philadelphia, Boston,
and Portland, receiving the statements of merchants, ship-builders, ship
owners, and insurance agents ; gentlemen having practical knowledge
and experience relating to the matter under investigation. The ship
owners associations of New York, Philadelphia, and Maine, and the
board of trade of Boston were represented at the sessions of the com
mittee, and presented the views of these various associations. Like
information and evidence have been received in the sessions of the com
mittee held at the capitol during the present session of Congress.
Circular letters have been addressed to gentlemen engaged in the
various branches of business connected with the shipping interests,
requesting a statement of their views on the subject under inquiry,
and also to American consuls at the principal ports of foreign countries,
asking them to furnish information in regard to the condition of the
mercantile marine of those countries.

The evidence elicited by these various modes of inquiry will be found
under the head of testimony taken by the Special Committee on Navi
gation Interests, and appended to this report.

The committee would call special attention to the exhaustive paper
furnished through the State Department by our consul at London, Hon.
Freeman H. Morse, and also to the tables of statistics prepared for the

II NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

committee by Mr. F. A. Walker, Deputy Special Commissioner of the
Kevenue, and by Joseph Niinmo, jr., of the Treasury Department, who
has made the condition of our shipping interest a subject of special
attention.

THE DECLINE IN AMERICAN OCEAN TONNAGE.

In order fully to comprehend the extent of the decadence of American
shipping and the causes which have operated to produce that
decadence, we must ascertain the points at which the prosperity of this
interest culminated, and trace it thence back to the source of that pros
perity, and forward to the present time of decay. It is obvious that
whatever causes may have existed prior to the commencement of the
late rebellion tending to produce the present condition of our shipping,
their effects did not become manifest until that period. Previously there
was a gradual, steady, and healthy increase of our ocean tonnage, fluc
tuating with the fluctuations of business, but constantly gaming until
the year- 1861.

The increase of our. tonnage engaged in the foreign carrying trade
from 1830 to 1840, was about sixty per cent, j from 1840 to 1850, seventy-
five per cent.; from 1850 to 1860, sixty per cent. This latter is the first
decade in which we find any reliable statistics of the registered tonnage
of Great Britain, to enable us to institute a comparison between it and
our own. In this decade the tonnage of Great Britain, employed exclu
sively in the foreign trade of that country, increased about forty per
cent. Our own tonnage engaged in the foreign carrying trade, reached
its highest point in 1861, being that year 2,642,628 tons, while that of
Great Britain was at the same time 3,179,683 tons, giving us the second
place in rank among nations in the extent of our ocean tonnage, while
we were the acknowledged superior of all in the proficiency which we
had attained in the science of naval architecture and in the efficiency of
our mercantile marine.

It is difficult to realize that our country, which in little more than
half a century ending in 1860, had reached the very foremost rank of
maritime nations, has in less than a decade lost half its merchant shipping
and all its maritime prestage, and that we now stand debating whether
we shall without a struggle yield all, and become the mere commercial de
pendency of the nation for whose advantage we have been thus spoiled
and reduced.

From 1861 to 1866 our tonnage engaged in the foreign trade decreased
from 2,642,628 tons to 1,492,926 tons, a loss of 1,149,902 tons, or more
than 43 per cent., while Great Britain, in the same time, gained 986, 715
tons, or more than 30 per cent. Even this statement does not show the
full extent of our relative loss as compared with Great Britain, a
very large percentage of the increase of the latter in tonnage
having been made in steamers, one ton of which class of vessels is equal
in efficiency to at least three tons of sail vessels, while by substituting

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

largely iron for wood, as building material, a still further advantage
was gained over us in her much larger class of iron vessels, doubly
as durable as those of wood. The increase of the steam tonnage
of Great Britain during the period alluded to, was 275, 988 tons, making
an addition in efficiency over our sailing ships of at least 500, 000 tons.
So that, taking into account the durability and efficiency of the ton
nage added by Great Britain to her merchant marine from I860 to 1866,
it would probably equal an increase of 50 per cent, of sail vessels.

RISE AND FALL OP THE MERCANTILE MARINE.

The following tables of statistics present a more forcible statement of
the rise and fall of our mercantile marine, and furnish a more striking
illustration the effect of the war upon our own shipping and that of
Great Britain, engaged in foreign commerce, than any other language
than that of figures can furnish.

Table shoiving the tonnage of United States and British registered vessels employed in the foreign
trade of each country, during the years, respectively, 1830, 1840, 1850, and from 1860 to
1868, loth inclusive.

Great Britain.*

Tear.

United States.

In the foreign trade.

Partly in home and part
ly in foreign trade.

Registered
sail.

Regist d
steam.

Total reg
istered.

Registered
sail.

Regist d
steam.

Total reg
istered.

Regis d
sail.

Reg d
steam.

Total
reg td.

1830

575 0. .6

1,419

576 475

1840

895, 610

4, 155

899, 765

1850

1, 540, 769

44, 429

1, 585, 198

2, 143, 234

45, 186

2, 188, 420

222,341

5,298

227,639

18CO

2, 448, 941

97, 296

2, 546, 237

2, 804, 610

277, 437

3, 082, 047

226, 556

29, 803

256, 359

1861

2, 540, 020

102,608

2, 642, 628

2, 866, 218

313, 465

3, 179, 683

219, 522

24, 924

244, 446

1862

2, 177, 253

113, 998

2, 291, 251

2, 993, 696

328, 310

3, 322, 006

246, 479

29, 463

275, 942

1863

1, 892, 899

133, 215

2, 026, 114

3, 246, 526

371,201

3, 617, 727

284, 413

33, 547

317, 9CO

18C4

1, 475, 376

106, 519

, 581, 895

3, 532, 242

456, 241

3, 988, 483

268, 125

36, 944

305, 060

1865

1, 504, 575

98,008

, 602, 583

3, 629, 023

523, 698

4, 152, 721

282, 295

43,225

325, 520

1866

1, 294, 637

198, 289

, 492, 926

3, 612, 973

553, 425

4, 166, 398

278, 167

47, 194

325, 361

1867

1, 369, 917

198, 115

, 568, 032

3, 641, 662

608, 232

4, 249, 894

190, 846

50,201

250,047

1868

1, 343, 703

221, 939

, 565, 732

3, 646, 150

619, 199

4, 265, 349

240, 921

52, 150

293, 071

* NOTE. This table includes Channel Island vessels hut not those of the British plantations. The
home trade signifies on the coasts of the United Kingdom, or to ports between the limits of the river
Elbe and Brest. The foreign trade signifies to ports beyond such limits.

Registered tonnage of United States, 1860 2, 546, 237

Registered tonnage of Great Britain (exclusive of colonial) . . 3, 082, 047

Total 5, 628, 284

Registered tonnage of United States, 1868 1, 505, 732

Registered tonnage of Great Britain, 1868 4, 265, 349

Total 5,771,081

If to this we add, for increase in steam tonnage 500, 000

6, 271, 081

It will be observed that notwithstanding the check caused by the
war upon the production of the crops of the South, which furnished so

NAVIGATION -INTERESTS.

arge a percentage of our exports, the aggregate tonnage of the United
States and Great Britain engaged in the foreign carrying trade has
increased about 14 per cent., while from the position of nearly an
equal in tonnage with that nation, our own tonnage had dwindled to
less than one-third of that of Great Britain.

The change of the business furnished by our own country in exports
and imports from American to foreign vessels is still more striking, as
will be shown by the following table :

A table showing the amount of American and foreign tonnage entered the ports of the United
States from foreign countries in 1830, 1840, 1850, and from 1860 to 186U, both inclusive.

Fiscal years.

American ton-
nage.

Foreign ton
nage.

American in ex
cess of fort- ign
tonnage.

Foreign in ex
cess of Amer
ican tonnage.

1830

967 227

131 900

835 327

1840

1 576 946

712 363

864 583

1850

2 573 016

1 775 623

797 393

I860 .

5 921 285

2 353 911

3 567 374

1861

5,023,917

2 217 554

2 806 363

1862

5 117 685

2 245 278

2 872 407

18G3 .

4 614 698

2 640 378

1 974, 320

1864

3 066 434

3 471 219

404 785

1865

2 943 661

3 216 967

273 306

1866

3 372 060

4 410 44

1 038 364

1867

3 455 052

4 318 673

863 61

1868

3 550 550

4 495 465

944 915

1869

3* 402* 668

5 347 694

1 945 C26

VALUE OF TONNAGE.

The estimated value of the tonnage of the United States engaged in
the foreign carrying trade was, in 1861, $108,347,748 ; the estimated gross
yearly earnings of which was 33J per cent., or $36,115,916. In 1869,
the estimated value of the same tonnage was $70,488,945, and the esti
mated earnings, $23,496,315 ; a net loss in yearly earning of this inter
est, of $12,619,601. (Table No. XIV of the Appendix.)

The increase in gross earnings of this class of tonnage from 1850 to
1860, $14,719,397, or 73 per cent. Taking the same ratio of increase
from 1860 to 1869, say 65 per cent., and we should have, in 1869,
$57,417,643. The actual amount of gross earnings is $23,496,315, or a
net annual loss, in consequence of the decline of our ocean commerce,
of $33,921,328.

Add to these the table showing the relative proportion in value of the
imports and exports by American and foreign vessels to and from the
United States, (table No. XV in Appendix,) and we have a complete
epitome of the deplorable condition to which our shipping interests has
been reduced . The following, from the table referred to, shows the total
foreign commerce of the United States in 1850, 1855, 1860, 1865, and 1869 :

Fiscal year.

Exports and im
ports in Amer
ican vessels.

Exports and im
ports iu for
eign vessels.

Total.

1850 .

6239 272 Q84

$90 746 954

&T50 037 038

1855

405 485 46

131 139 904

5 56 C r &amp;gt; HJ6

1860

507 247 757

255 040 793

1865

167 4:&amp;gt;2 872

437 010 14

604 41 *) ( &amp;gt;6

1869 .*.

289 950 272

586 492, 012

876 442 yiJ 4

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. Y

It will be seen by the foregoing that in 1850, 75 per cent, of our total
exports and imports were shipped in American vessels. In 1855, 75 per
cent, in American, and 25 per cent, in foreign vessels. In 18G9, 34 per
cent, in American to 66 per cent, in foreign vessels. Onr exports have
doubled since 1853, while the percentage carried in American vessels
has fallen from 67 per cent, to 34 per cent.

Could there be a more striking refutation of the assumption that
the revival of our shipping will follow the increase of our exports,
than is furnished by the statistics referred to. The increase of our ex
ports will only furnish an increased business to foreign ships unless we
put our own vessels in a position to compete with them on equal terms.
It is estimated that more than 60 per cent, of the registered tonnage of
the United States is engaged in the carrying trade between foreign
countries, on long routes carrying the bulky cheap freights, while, as has
been shown by the foregoing table, our own exports and imports are
passing in foreign bottoms, the freights going to enrich our commer
cial rivals, and to swell the foreign balances against us, which must be
settled in gold.

VALUE OF IMPORTS.

The following are the values of imports into the district of New York
during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1869, with estimated propor
tion in sailing and steam vessels :

Total value of imports $295, 137, 415

Of which estimated proportion in sail
ing vessels 57, 867, 025, or 19 T 6 oo 7 o P er cent

Proportion in steam vessels 237, 270, 390, or 80 T 3 ^&amp;gt; per cent.

Total 295, 137, 415

Estimated proportion in American
steamers 35, 441, 606

Estimated proportion in foreign steam
ers 201, 828, 784

Total in steamers 237, 270, 390

Or nearly seventy per cent, of the imports at the great commercial city
of the country in foreign steamers.

There are now running regularly, to and from New York, 89 foreign
steamships, the aggregate tonnage of which is 205,338 tons. The in
crease in this class of vessels, since 1860, has been 47 ships, 139,605 tons,
or more than two hundred per cent., and the number is constantly
augmenting to meet the increased demands of business. (See table
XXV in Appendix.)

Estimating the freights paid at eight per cent, of the value of the
cargoes and we have here paid to foreign carriers of goods to a single

VI NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

port, in round numbers, sixteen millions of dollars, while the amount
paid on outward cargoes will probably reach half that sum, making a
grand total of twenty -four million dollars annually drawn from our own
people to support the steamships of foreign nations, which steamships
constitute the naval reserve of those powers.

STEAMSHIP LINES.

At present the whole tendency of the freighting business of the
world is to seek direct routes, and by steam communication, to combine
mail and passenger with merchandise transportation. The long and
tedious voyages around capes are avoided by connecting oceans either
by ship canals or railways. The advantage of this change in the mode
of transportation, in addition to that of carrying passengers and mails,
is that it furnishes a way business that cannot be commanded by sail
vessels which can only carry advantageously between two points.

Great Britain availing herself of the use of steam has obtained con
trol of the chief of these direct lines of ocean communication, and in
doing so has occupied the shortest routes and those which, without
loss of time or distance, afford the most points to touch and tap the
trade belonging to them.

Between America, North and South, she has nine direct lines. Two
carry the mails between the United States, British America, and
England. Both lines start from Liverpool, touch at Queenstown, and
sail direct to New York. One, however, calls at Halifax. To feed these
lines the Cunard Company run a line from Halifax to Nassau, which is
subsidized. There are also &quot; way&quot; steamers, if we may call them so,
between Halifax and Newfoundland, the Bahamas and New York.
There is a line between Liverpool, New Orleans, and Balize.

Three lines sail direct from Southampton to the Gulf of Mexico.
One to Tampico, Mexico, another to Aspinwall, the third runs to
Puerto Cabello, in Venezuella.

There are also three lines sail for the Atlantic coast of South America.
One to Brazil, stopping at Kio de Janeiro, after calling at the lead
ing ports to the north ; another makes Buenos Ayres its stopping place.
The third runs to Montevideo. These lines sail from Falmouth and
Southampton direct, taking the shortest route across.

Panama is the starting point for four lines of British steamers. One
down the Pacific coast of South America to Valparaiso, touching at
all the chief ports. Another to the leading places in Central America. A
third is a local line running to neighboring points, and the fourth direct
to Wellington, New Zealand, connecting with an Australian line to
Sydney and Melbourne.

There are two lines along the West coast of Africa, both starting from
Southampton, one going to and from the Cape of Good Hope, touching
at St. Helena and Ascension, the other tapping the coast, from Cape
St. Vincent, Portugal, to Sierre Leone and other points.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. VII

Besides a number of short routes connecting different points, the greatest
line of all is that of the Peninsula and Oriental Mail Steamship Com
pany. Its point of departure is Southampton. From that port their ves
sels go to Gibraltar, through the Mediterranean, touching at different
points, as Malta, &c., to Port Said, through the canal, the Ked Sea, across
the Arabian Sea, to Bombay and Ceylon. At the latter place a line runs
to Australia; there connecting with a line already mentioned, running
from Panama, and thus making the circle complete. The general route of
the steamers takes in all the leading Indian ports, also Singapore.
Penang, Hong Kong, and Shanghai. By following the indicated routes
it will be at once seen that they leave out only two principal regions ;
Pacific North America and the lower portions of the Indian Archi
pelago. For the latter, short routes from point to point are being
organized, while it is understood that this great company propose to
unite the British steam marine at either end of our continental railroad
system, by establishing a competing line with the Pacific Mail Steamship
Company from Shanghai to San Francisco. This will inevitably be fol
lowed by another line from San Francisco to Panama. This extension
of lines of steamers has been procured mainly by means of liberal subsi
dies paid by the British and French governments for carrying the mails.

For the postal service they perform Great Britain pays to twelve of
her principal mail steamship companies, in the form of an annual sub
sidy, 903,750, or $4,392,244, besides the amounts collected for postage
over from other principal routes and a number of connecting lines,
amounting to enough more to make the entire payments at least
$5,500,000. Of this large sum about $2,000,000 is paid to the lines con
necting with the American Continents.

The French government is even more liberal than that of Great Britain,
and the effect of their policy is seen in the establishment of several lines
of the finest equipped steamships afloat, even rivalling the best British
lines. The French government pays several million dollars annually to
these lines. The French Transatlantic Company run three lines to
New York, to the West Indies and Yera Cruz, and to Gaudaloupe and
Aspinwall. It receives all the money paid for postage and a direct an
nual subsidy of $1,000,000. Besides these amounts, the French govern
ment loaned it $5,000,000 for ten years without interest, which is being
returned by the withholding ten per cent, of the postage paid. The
subsidies to the other steamship lines are on the same scale, having re
ceived a loan as part of their capital, and all are paid the amounts col
lected on mail matter which they carry.

Other chief lines start from Marseilles and run to the various Medit
erranean ports, the French colonies of Algiers; and one of the finest
appointed lines in the world, Me ssageries Imperiale, runs direct to Alex
andria and Port Said, through the Suez Canal, down the Eed Sea,
communicating with the French colonies off the east coast of Africa, and
thence to the leading ports in the Indian Seas direct to the two or three

VIII NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

points which yet remain in French possession, thence to Saigoon in
Cambodia or Cochin China. The present terminus is Shanghai.

By means of these lines France is tapping the chief sources of com
mercial prosperity : North America, the West Indies and Central Ameri
ca, Africa, and Farther Asia.

There are besides the great lines indicated others which are also ex
tending rapidly. From Hamburg and Bremen there are finely-appointed
transatlantic lines, which receive aid in heavy charges for carrying mail
matter from Great Britain and the United States, besides direct aid from
the North German government. Austria and Italy both have lines sail
ing from Trieste and Vienna, and carrying the mails for Mediterranean
ports. One or both these lines are pushing toward India and China.
Holland has a regular line to and from her East Indian colonies,
and Spain one also to the Phillipine Islands. All these govern
ments see the advantages derived from development of the &quot;through
route&quot; steamship system. Even Japan, just waking up to the influences
of Western material progress, is encouraging the formation of a mercan
tile steam marine, and owns and employs in her own waters, and in
trade with China, twenty first-class steamers, paying liberally for the
transportation of the mails between her own ports and islands.

In striking contrast with the activity displayed by foreign nations, is
the want of it manifested by our own. During the year ending June 30,
1869, there was paid by the United States, for ocean mail service,
$1,101,674, of which amount $336,163 was paid to foreign companies.

We have but two lines of mail steamers running on the Atlantic.
One, monthly, runs to Eio de Janeiro from New York, stopping at
St. Thomas and Pernainbuco, the other, Pacific Mail, from New York to
Aspinwall, making weekly trips. On the Pacific side we have from
Panama, one line to San Francisco, and from there to Yokohama, and
Shanghai. From the same port there is a semi-monthly line to Hono
lulu, Sandwich Islands, one to Vancouver s Island, carrying the mails
to Oregon, British Columbia, and the Puget Sound country, and one,
semi-monthly, to Mazatlan, Mexico. In all not more than thirty steam
ships are employed in this service, of which the Pacific Mail have
fourteen. The British Peninsula and Oriental Company alone employ
forty-nine large vessels, forty-six of which are mail carriers for the East
and Australia.

Thus it appears that our shipping has declined absolutely and rela
tively with that of other nations j that not only the carrying trade be
tween foreign nations, but between our own and foreign countries 5 the
business furnished by our exports and imports is being transferred to
foreign bottoms; and last, and most important of all to our prestige as
a maritime nation and our influence in the affairs of the world, that we
have allowed other nations to possess themselves of the most important
lines of steam navigation connecting distant parts of the globe.

In consequence of this decline of our shipping the business of ship-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. Et

building in the United States is at the present time at a complete stand
still. The yards are empty, the workmen out of employment, and what
capital has survived the wreck of disaster is either idle or turned to other
channels.

CAUSES OF DECLINE,

It has been urged by some that this depression of our navigation
interests is the result of general causes, such as an over-production of
tonnage and a depression in the business of the world. -

But such causes, if existing, would be temporary in their operation.
If the shipping of the world were temporarily in excess of the business
of the world, the equilibrium would soon be restored by the natural de
crease of ships and the ever advancing increase of commercial business.
The period of prosperity would, as it always has, speedily follow that ot
depression. The facts stated, however, show a decline of our navigation
interests running through a decade a period too long to be affected by
a mere depression of business or any over-production of tonnage.

Moreover, the decline has been wholly in the shipping of the United
States. While that of other nations has been depressed from the causes
alluded to, there has not only been no absolute decline, but, as has been
shown, a constant increase in tonnage and in the efficiency of their ves
sels. In 18G8, there were built on the Clyde alone 197 vessels, of 169,571
tons, more than one-half of which were steamers. The total of tonnage
built and registered in the United Kingdom in 1868 was 316,197 tons
a larger amount than was built in any one year prior to 1863.

It is obvious from the foregoing that the causes operating to produce
the present condition of the navigation interest are special such as
affect American tonnage only and, as your committee believe, may be
readily ascertained.

The steady increase of our shipping engaged in the foreign trade up
to the commencement of the rebellion, and the sudden and rapid de
cline from that point, leads directly to the conclusion that its decadence
is attributable mainly, if not solely, to incidents of the war. According
to the best available data, 919,466 tons of American shipping dis
appeared from our lists during the rebellion. Of this amount, 110,163
tons were destroyed by anglo-confederate pirates, while 803,303 tons
were either sold to foreigners or passed nominally into their hands and
obtained the protection of their flags. Here was an actual loss to the
private owners of less than five per cent., and a loss to the nation of
about thirty-seven per cent, of the total of American tonnage engaged in
the foreign carrying trade. The loss of this amount of tonnage would not
of itself have produced such disastrous results as wo have seen had
not the value of what remained been virtually destroyed by the peril in
which it was placed from English piratical vessels sailing under the
confederate flag. The risk of sailing under the American flag was so

X NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

great as to divert a large share of the carrying trade into foreign
bottoms, principally those of Great Britain.

That changes which have occurred in naval architecture and in the
materials of which ships are now being constructed operated anterior
to the rebellion, and tended to produce a revolution in the shipping of
the world, is undoubtedly true. Iron, as a building material for ships,
was fast superseding wood, and screw steamers were, as we have said,
crowding out sail vessels on all ocean routes where the carrying of pas
sengers and mails could be combined with the general freighting busi
ness. But it by no means follows that this revolution in the character
of the mercantile marine of the world would, if peace had continued, have
prevented us from maintaining with foreign nations our relative posi
tion as a great maritime power. Our people, with their sagacity,
enterprise, and aptitude for mercantile and mechanical pursuits, would
doubtless have perceived and availed themselves of the advantages
resulting from this progress in nautical mechanics.

Having invented the steamship and first navigated the ocean with
this class of vessels, and taken the lead of all nations in the science of
naval architecture, we should, it may be safe to assume, have held our
way against the world in competing for supremacy on the ocean, had
not our attention been diverted from the pursuits of peace to the pre
servation of our national existence.

The war not only deprived us of the advantages resulting from this
change in the character of commercial vessels and the currents of trade
affected thereby, but gave an impetus to all business connected with
ocean navigation, in the hands of our great commercial rival, and an
advantage over us, that but for the war she would not have possessed.
The business thus diverted into new channels could not be immedi
ately regained by American vessels even under the most favorable cir
cumstances. But the disastrous effects of the war did not cease with
the return of peace. They were rather aggravated by the burdens of
taxation which the war had left imposed upon all the industries of the
country, but which operated with peculiar hardship upon this particular
interest, inasmuch as it is subjected to the unrestricted competition of
untaxed foreign rivals, and this competition must be met not only at
home in our own ports, but in all parts of the world.

In a contest so unequal there can be but one result, and that is the
total loss of our foreign carrying trade and the destruction of our mer
chant marine. Under such conditions as these it is as impossible to re
vive our shipping interests, unaided by the government, as it would be
to build up our manufacturing interests by imposing a heavy tax upon
all raw materials, and at the same time admitting all manufactured ar
ticles free of duty.

REMEDIES.

The fact that our commerce is rapidly disappearing from the ocean
has been mathematically demonstrated. The causes which have brought

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. XI

it to this condition can be traced with considerable certainty, but the
remedy for the evil, the means best calculated to restore it, are more
difficult to discover and apply.

The committee, in endeavoring to find the best method of remedying
the evil, have considered the following proposed plans of legislation in
relation thereto, which have been urged upon its attention and re
ceived its careful consideration :

1. The readmission of the vessels which sought the protection of a
foreign flag during the war to American registry.

2. The modification of our navigation laws so as to admit foreign-
built vessels to American registry, either free of duty or on payment of
a moderate duty on the tonnage of such vessels.

3. The allowance of a drawback on imported material which is used
in the construction of vessels, or an equivalent to the drawback where
American materials are used.

4. Permission to withdraw from bond stores to be consumed by
vessels on voyages to foreign ports.

5. Exemptions of tonnage from all taxes other than by the federal
government. And

6. The granting of such government aid, by way of postage on mails
and by subsidies, as will insure the establishment of lines of Amirican
ocean steamers to the principal foreign ports of the world, thereby
enabling our citizens to participate in the profits of the trade created
by such lines.

REGISTRATION OF FOREIGN-BUILT SHIPS.

Your committee are of opinion that the readmission to American
registry of vessels placed under foreign flags during the rebellion is
against sound public policy. To allow citizens to avail themselves of all
the advantages conferred by our government during peace, and escape
all the risks of supporting it during war, by placing their property
at such times under the protection of a foreign government, would be a
dangerous precedent to establish. Most of the vessels which changed
their nationality were placed under the flag of a nation that, under the
guise of neutrality, was making war upon our commerce for the benefit
of its own. They identified their interest with those of our enemy, and
obtained all the advantages resulting from such connection ; to readmit
them now to the same privileges accorded to vessels which adhered to
the flag and fortunes of the country through all the perils and under
all the disadvantages incident to the war, would be to encourage desertion
in times when the country most needed the aid of its citizens.

The argument in favor of the policy of admitting foreign-built vessels
to American registry is based upon the assumption that the change
which has taken place in the character of commercial vessels from wood
to iron, and from sail to steam vessels, has given to foreign nations, par-

XH NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ticularly to Great Britain, such advantages in regard to the cheap con
struction of this latter class of vessels, as to make it impossible for us to
compete with her ; and that we are reduced to the alternative of either
purchasing our ships of her or of surrendering to her the carrying trade.
It is further urged that this trade contributes so greatly to the wealth
of a nation that we should secure it, by, purchasing and sailing foreign-
built ships ; to which end it is necessary that all restrictions to the
purchase of such ships should be removed from our statutes.

The opposite policy of allowing only American-built vessels the privi
lege of the American flag and register was adopted at the formation of
the government, and has been uniformly adhered to since, modified only
by the act of December 23, 1852, which permits foreign vessels wrecked
in the waters of the United States, and repaired in our ports, the repairs
amounting to two-thirds of the value, to take out an American register.
The best proof of the wisdom of this policy is the rapid and uninterrupted
progress which we attained as a commercial nation under its operations.
Great Britain became the first maritime nation of the world under a like
policy, which she never relaxed until her merchant marine was strength,,
ened beyond danger.

In order to understand and appreciate the practical operation of the
policy of admitting foreign-built ships to American registry, and its
effects upon the national wealth, we must consider somewhat in detail
the manner in which the shipping of a country and particularly that of
our own is built up and maintained. The shipping of the United States
has never been built, and only to a limited extent has it been owned, by
capitalists, but by men of moderate means, the lumberman, the mechanic,
the ship-master, and the merchant, each having an interest in the pro
duction, the sailing, and the freight of the ship, independent of the
profits to be directly derived from its earnings.

The lumberman to make a market for his timber, the mechanic to ob
tain employment in constructing, the ship-chandler for sale of his goods
in furnishing, the ship-master to obtain business in his profession, and
the merchant to secure the commissions resulting from the management
of the business, all unite in building, owning, and sailing vessels. To
use the expression of Mr. Loring, a practical ship-carpenter, largely in
terested in building and owning vessels, who testified before the com
mittee at Portland: &quot;The whole parish are often interested in building
and owning vessels.&quot;

This associated effort not only supplies the capital but the practical
knowledge and experience to construct and manage this description of
property successfully, and also furnishes an incentive to produce it far
greater than that of mere interest on investment of capital alone.

By purchasing our ships in foreign countries we transfer not only all
the labor necessary to construct them, from the taking of the timber
from the forests, and the ore from the mines, to the launching of the
ship, but also all the business of furnishing the outfits and supplies for

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. XIII

the voyage. It is estimated that more than sixty per cent, of the ton
nage of the United States engaged in the foreign carrying trade is en
gaged in freighting between the ports of foreign countries, and many of
these vessels never return after sailing from our ports. What advan
tage would it be to our country to have the real or nominal ownership
of this class of vessels, built, fitted, manned, and provisioned for their
voyage in a foreign port, touching only at the ports of the United States
to obtain an American register, and then pursuing their voyage, per
haps never to return 1 If such vessels were really wholly owned in the
United States it could be of no advantage to us.

It would not be tonnage, the production of which would aid in furn
ishing profitable employment to American mechanics and American
agriculturalists and help to increase our national wealth. It would not
multiply comfortable cottages nor create thriving villages of industrious
workmen around busy American ship-yards in time of peace. It would
be simply the investment of American capital in property out of the
country, the dividend from which only would be returned to us. It
would give no strength in time of war. Representing capital alone, it
would partake of the timidity of capital, and whenever danger threat
ened, seek safety under a neutral or hostile flag.

Still further, we cannot build up a truly American merchant marine
in a foreign country, for the reason that the countries in which we build
will have every advantage over us in competing for the carrying trade
which is to sustain such a marine. First, in the profits of the business
of building and fitting out the vessels. Second, in the command of
cheap capital. Third, in combining the building, owning, and manging
interests, which can only be done in the country where the shipping is
built. And fourth, in the prestige such countries would obtain by furn
ishing the vessels which Americans would own, and also those which
were to compete for the business with American-owned vessels. Fur
thermore, it is not probable that American capital would be sent to
Europe to build ships with which to compete on equal terms for busi
ness with the ships of those who build for them, unless these foreign-
built vessels were allowed to participate in our coasting trade a change
in our policy which would not only entirely destroy every branch of
mechanical industry in the United States dependent upon ship-building,
but would ruin the present owners of coasting vessels. It would be ad
mitting to the enjoyment of American business foreigners who pay no
taxes to the American government, and who, by virtue of that exemp
tion, would be enabled to drive American tax-payers out of employment.

The policy of admitting foreign-built ships to American register, on
payment of a duty, has also been urged. The committee cannot recom
mend such legislation, for whatever duty might be so imposed, would
operate only to the advantage of the foreign ship-owner, with whom the
American purchaser and owner of such foreign-built ships would have
to compete. If we were to admit foreign-built ships to American regis-

XIV NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

tor at all, it would be with the view of enabling our ship-owners to
supply themselves with vessels at a rate as low as that paid by foreign
competitors. An American ship-owner must in such case be able to
purchase as cheap as the foreigner, or he must obtain better ships ;
otherwise he is deprived of that equality of ability to compete, which
is an essential quality of the success desired by those who engage in
the carrying trade of the world. The statement is in itself a sufficient
answer to the proposition.

But there are other objections more weighty than those referred to,
that should prevent the adoption of either policy. They would deprive
us of the mechanical skill requisite to build our navy in time of war, or
oblige us to maintain it at great expense connected with the govern
ment works in time of peace, and would also compel the maintenance
of a large naval force entirely useless as a peace establishment, but
necessary to preserve and defend the national honor and interests in case
they were menaced. It would be humiliating, indeed, to every American
to see Great Britain employed and paid by us to build shipping to replace
that which she so effectively aided to destroy during the rebellion. If we
adopt a policy that will admit of such results, that nation could well
afford to pay our most extravagant demands upon her for damages in-
fl^cted by the cruisers which from her ports made war upon our com
merce during the rebellion.

Every consideration, whether of interest or of national pride, impels
us to build upon our own soil the ships which are to bear the flag of our
country to all quarters of the globe.

This result can only be accomplished by adopting a policy as liberal
and enlightened as that of the nations with which we are to compete for
the carrying trade of the world, which nations are now in possession of
the field.

Those nations admit all the material entering into the construction of
vessels free of duty ; they also allow the withdrawal from bond of all
stores used on the voyage of a ship sailing to a foreign port, the same
as though such stores were exported ; and they pay liberally to steamers
for carrying the mails, and thus establish lines to all parts of the world.

SUBSIDIES TO STEAMSHIPS.

The subsidies paid by Great Britain and France to establish their
steamship lines, and for the promotion of their general shipping interests,
are returned to them many fold by the nations that pursue a more narrow
and short-sighted policy. It is the United States that supports the foreign
steamships which run to and from her ports, by the mail, passenger, and
freight money which she pays to them, rather than to establish lines of
her own. Worse still, while we carefully scrutinize every appropriation
for our own navy, we pay annually more to support this most efficient
arm of the navy of Great Britain than is asked for the support of our
own.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. XV

The testimony taken by the committee is nearly unanimous that by
offering to our citizens the same encouragement and protection as is
afforded by other commercial nations to their citizens, our shipping can be
built and lines of ocean steamers established as fast as the requirements
of business demand, and that there would be a present demand for ships
if they could be cheaply supplied.

That although the cost of iron and some other materials would be
higher by the amount paid for freight, and the wages of labor are also
higher with us than in Europe, yet we should have an advantage in the
cost of timber, a la,rge amount of which is used, even in the construction
of iron vessels ; and that the higher rates paid for American labor
would be more than counterbalanced by its greater efficiency and skill.
This leads us to the difficult question, as to the methods in which gov
ernment shall endeavor to extend its aid to our decaying navigation
interests. Your committee, after the most careful deliberation, impressed
with the great importance of restoring our commercial marine, not
only as a means of increasing the national wealth in time of peace, but
also as one of the most efficient agencies for national defence in time
of war, respectfully recommend the following measures as calculated to
promote the desired object :

First. The remission of the duties imposed upon the raw material
entering into the construction of vessels and steamers, limiting the
amount to the minimum of duties per ton collected on the material
required for certain classes of vessels ; and where American iron is used
in the construction of iron vessels, an amount per ton equivalent to the
duties on a like amount of imported raw materials, limiting the amount
to be paid.

Second. That all stores to be used by vessels sailing to foreign ports
may be taken in bond free of duty j and

Third. Further to encourage investment in shipping, and to extend
the aid to ships already built, and which have been sailed during and
since the rebellion at great disadvantage, allowing to all sail vessels
and to all steamers running to the British North American Provinces,
one dollar and fifty cents per ton ; on steamers to European ports, four
dollars per ton ; and on all other steamers running to foreign ports,
three dollars per ton.

In view of the fact that the tax upon tonnage cannot be removed
without relieving the vessels of all foreign nations of the same, while no
such exemption is extended to American vessels in foreign ports, and in
view of the further fact that the shipping interest of the country is to
receive some relief by the passage of the proposed measures, the com
mittee recommend only the removal of all tonnage, harbor, pilotage,
and other like taxes imposed upon shipping by State and municipal
authority, (most of which taxes have been declared by the Supreme Court
unconstitutional,) and the readjustment of the present tax upon tonnage,
so that it will fall more equitably upon the different classes of vessels

XVI NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

affected thereby. The amount which will be received from this source
is estimated by the committee to be more than three million dollars per
annum, and will to that extent contribute to the relief which is proposed
to be granted in aid of the shipping interest of the United States. For
the purpose of carrying out the foregoing recommendations, your com
mittee report herewith two bills for consideration.

In reporting the bills referred to, your committee are hopeful that in
case of their adoption the shipping interests of the country may derive
very considerable relief. That they will fully meet the expectations oi
the large class of our citizens connected with this interest they do not
expect. Nor have they full confidence that the result will be the speedy
restoration of our lost commerce.

Time will be required to organize the capital and labor necessary to
embark extensively in the business of constructing iron sail and steam
ships ; and still greater inducements must be offered to insure the estab
lishment of lines of American ocean steamers which will relieve us from
our present humiliating and disgraceful dependency upon foreigners.

It is but a few days since that our government was reminded by the
managers of the English lines of steamers, the Inman and Cunard, of
the disgraceful fact, that not a single merchant steamer bearing the
American flag now crossed the Atlantic, and that we were entirely de
pendent upon them for the transportation of our mails, which they carry
under temporary arrangements, to be terminated at their pleasure.
While our government has with lavish liberality, in subsidies of lands
and money, aided in extending railways through the West, and have
appropriated large sums for .the improvement of interior water commu
nications, our ocean navigation has been left without either aid or pro
tection. The prosperity of the country in time of peace, as well as its
security in time of war, is largely dependent upon an efficient merchant
marine, and it is worthy of the consideration of Congress whether by
granting such aid as will secure the building up of a large part of this
marine, in swift ocean steamers, readily convertible into cruisers in time
of war, we are not providing a most economical and efficient means of
naval defense. It was stated by Admiral Porter, before this committee,
that with a few such ships converted into war vessels at the breaking
out of the rebellion, such a blockade of the southern coast could have
been established as would have prevented the rebels from sending out
a pound of cotton or obtaining supplies or munitions of war, and the
rebellion would have been strangled almost at its birth. Who can com
pute the loss in lives and in money consequent upon the want of a few
such ships?

It is evident that our future wars with any of the great powers must
be upon the ocean, and with an enemy that must cross the ocean to attack
us, and whose vulnerable point to assail is the population and wealth
which he has scattered on every sea.

Great Britain has, as we have seen, adopted the policy of subsidizing

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. XVII

her lines of ocean steamers, and the result is that she has doubled the
efficiency of her navy, and at the same time added immensely to her
national wealth. These subsidized ships are subject at all times to the
demands of the government. Our government has no such source to
draw from, and must consequently depend entirely upon a navy sup
ported in peace, to be available in war.

It would even be a matter of economy if our government should
build vessels adapted to the uses of commerce in time of peace, and
readily convertible into fighting ships in time of war, giving the free
use of such ships in time of peace to merchants who would take care ot
and use them until required for the national defense. Under such cir
cumstances the government would be relieved of the cost of taking care
of the ships when not required for the public service, and the national
wealth would be increased by their use for mercantile purposes. As
the government can have the control of such vessels when needed, by
paying only a small percentage of their cost, is it not clearly a matter
of economy and sound public policy to legislate with a view to such re
sults?

The policy here suggested, in regard to extending government aid
to establish lines of steamers, should be entered upon only after such
careful and thorough consideration of the whole subject as will lead to
the adoption of a comprehensive system that will be permanent in its
character and certain to secure the desired results.

Your committee have only had time to consider the general question
relating to navigation interests, and leave this particular branch of the
subject to be reported upon after considering fully the various bills re
lating thereto referred to them by the House.

OUR RIVER AND RAILWAY NAVIGATION.

The vast navigable rivers and extensive lines of railway of our coun
try are so intimately connected with the subjects of ocean steam navi
gation that your committee cannot refrain from alluding to them in con
cluding this report.

The continental position and geographical features of this republic,
lying in the direct route between Europe and Asia, washed on either
shore by the two great oceans of the world, and interlaced with a vast
net-work of interior navigable waters, affords in itself the grandest of
all possible incentives toward determining the granting of such legiti
mate aid as may be accorded in the effort to revive our shipping inter
ests, as well as to achieve that supreme maritime leadership to which
we may reasonably aspire.

Oar natural advantages are still further aided by the artificial means
which scientific and material enterprise has afforded through the devel
opment of the railroad system, especially of those great lines which
connect the Atlantic and the Pacific, and which, with their branches,

XVIII NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

are to intersect the whole territory between those oceans. They arc
like so many mighty rivers, furnishing capacity for unlimited transporta
tion.

The mail route from London to Eastern Asia lies across the American
continent, and passengers and valuable freights such as the trade oi
China and Japan provides will pass over the same lines. Yokohama,
the principal port in Japan, and Shanghai and Hong Kong, in China,
are all nearer in time and distance to London via New York and San
Francisco than via the newly opened route of the Suez Canal.

The following comparative distances between London and New York
and some of the principal ports of Eastern Asia illustrate the advan
tages of our position :

London to Yokohama (Japan) via Suez Canal 11,509

London to Yokohama (Japan) via New York and San Francisco 10,000
New York to Yokohama (Japan) via Pacific railroad and San

Francisco 7,520

San Francisco to Yokohama (Japan) per steamer. 4,520

London to Shanghai via Suez Canal 10,469

New York to Shanghai via Pacific railroad and San Francisco. . 8,555

San Francisco to Shanghai per steamer 5,555

Chicago to Yokohama 6,900

St. Louis about same distance as Chicago.

Nothing in the future is more certain than that the foreign importa
tions of the West are to be made directly to her chief commercial
cities, and distributed therefrom as they now are from the ports
of the seaboard. The railways which are to supply them in part
are but in their infancy, and by means of improvements yet to be
introduced may ere long be able to compete successfully with steam
transportation by water. Through such improvements, the routes across
our continent, already the most direct, may become the cheapest routes
from London to China and Japan. Between the western termini of these
routes and the lauds that are washed by the Pacific and Indian Oceans,
nature has provided free of cost a great highway, which we have only
to occupy with vehicles of transportation. No mountain barriers are to
be scaled or leveled to reach them.

Those Asiatic countries are teeming with a busy, industrious popula
tion, skilled in the mechanic arts, and adepts in the science of agricul
ture. Abounding in wealth, with extensive internal, and little external
commerce, their trade has been the prize for which all commercial
nations have for centuries contended. The trade of the more important
of these countries, India, China, and Japan, Great Britain now draws to
herself, and distributes again from her stores to the rest of the world.

The silver products of the mines of America make nearly the circuit
of the world to reach, via Great Britain, the countries of the East,
while the products of those countries come back to America by the same
circuitous route.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. XIX

These far Eastern countries are at our very doors ; their relations with
us more friendly than with any other nation j their trade is at our com
mand, if wo will but stretch forth our hand and take it.

The advantages to result from the revival of our commerce and navi
gation, and especially from our obtaining possession of the Pacific trade,
are confined to no one section of the country. With the Sandwich
Islands in our possession, and by the adoption of a wise and liberal
commercial policy, we can control the trade of Eastern Asia and the
commerce of the Pacific, and pour their wealth directly into the valley
of the Mississippi, which is to be the center of population in the future
of our country. Chicago, St. Louis, and other cities of the West are,
as we have said, to become ports of entry, and distributors of the pro
ducts of Asia as well as of Europe. Thus, the great West has the same
interest in reviving and maintaining the ocean commerce of our country
under the American flag that the Atlantic States have in opening up
internal lines of commerce, whether by the building of great lines of
railway, or by the improvement of lake or river navigation.

Shall we, after having expended millions in opening this opportunity
of controling the commerce of the world by uniting the two great oceans
that wash the opposite shores of the continent after astonishing the
world by our energy and wisdom in carrying through such a gigantic
commercial enterprise while in an armed struggle for national exis
tence surprise it still more by our supineness and folly in neglecting
to avail ourselves of the greater advantages which nature has opened to
us without cost ?

JOHN LYNCH.

JAS. BUFFINGTOST.

CADWALADER C. WASHBURK

GILES W. HOTCHKISS.

DAN L J. MORRELL.

HERVEY C. CALKIK

ERASTUS WELLS.

Mr. LYNCH, from the Select Committee on the Causes of the Reduction
of American Tonnage, reported the following bill :

A BILL to revive the navigation and commercial interests of the United States.

Whereas the mercantile marine of the country was nearly destroyed
during the late rebellion in consequence of the inability of the govern
ment to protect it j and now, while bearing its share of taxation, has no
such protection from foreign competition as is afforded to other great
national interests and industries, and is therefore steadily declining ;
and whereas the restoration of our commercial marine, constituting as
it does, one of the most efficient means of defense in time of war, is of

XX NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

great national importance and essential to the maintenance of our posi
tion as a first-class power : Therefore,

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives^ the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That upon all imported lumber,
timber, hemp, Manila, and composition metal, and upon iron not ad
vanced beyond plates, rod bars and bolts, which may be used and
wrought up into the construction of steaia or sail vessels built in the
United States, whether for the hull, rigging or equipment, or machinery
of such vessels, there shall bo allowed and paid by the Secretary of the
Treasury, under such regulations as he may prescribe, a drawback
equal to the duties which may have been paid on such material:
Provided, That the amount of such drawback shall not exceed on
wooden vessels, eight dollars per ton j on iron vessels, twelve dollars
per ton ; on vessels known as composite, that is, vessels composed of
iron frames and wooden planking and sheathing, ten dollars per ton ; on
wooden steamers, ten dollars per ton ; on composite steamers, composed
of iron frames and wooden planking, twelve dollars per ton ; on iron
steamers, fifteen dollars per ton : And provided further, That where
American material is used in the construction of iron or composite ves
sels or steamers, there shall be allowed and paid, as aforesaid, an amount
equivalent to the duties imposed on similar articles of foreign manufac
ture when imported, the full allowance on American and foreign mate
rials not to exceed the amounts per ton, on vessels of each class re
spectively, hereinbefore specified.

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That all ship stores and coal, to be
used and consumed by any vessel on its voyage from any port of the
United States to any foreign port, may, in such quantity and under such
regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe, be taken in
whole packages in bond, and disposed of for such purposes, free of im
port and internal duty and tax.

SEC. 3. And be it further enacted. That the owner of any American
registered sail or steam vessel which shall be engaged for more than six
mouths in the year in the carrying trade between American and foreign
ports, or between the ports of foreign countries, shall, at the end of each
fiscal year in which such vessel has been so engaged, be paid by the
collector of the port where such vessel is registered, upon exhibiting
satisfactory evidence, in form to be prescribed by the Secretary of the
Treasury, that such vessel has been so engaged, upon every sail vessel,
one dollar and fifty cents for each registered ton; and upon every
steamer running to and from the ports of the North American Province,
one dollar and fifty cents for each registered ton; and upon every
steamer running to and from any European port, four dollars for each
registered ton ; and upon every steamer running to and from all other
foreign ports, three dollars for each registered ton.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. XXI

Mr. LYNCH, from the Select Committee on the Causes of the Eecluction
of American Tonnage, reported the following bill :

A BILL imposing tonnage duties, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of tlie United
States of America in Congress assembled, That in lieu of all duties on
tonnage now imposed by law, a duty of thirty cents per ton is hereby
imposed on all ships, vessels, or steamers entered in the United States ;
but the receipts of vessels paying such tax shall not be subject to the
tax provided in section one hundred and three of an act approved June
thirty, eighteen hundred and sixty -four, nor by any act amendatory
thereof: Provided, That no ship, vessel, or steamer having a license to
trade between different district of the United States, or to carry on the
bank, whale, or other fisheries, and no vessel or steamer to or from any
port or place in Mexico, or from any port or place south of Mexico, down
to and including Aspinwall and Panama, or from any port or place in
the British Provinces of North America, or the West India Islands, and
employed regularly in these trades and no others, shall be required to
pay the tonnage tax contemplated by this act more than once in each
fiscal year.

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That no harbor dues, pilotage fees,
or other taxes on imports levied, or pretended to be levied, on the ton
nage, merchandise, trade, imports, or cargoes of any vessel, by virtue
of the authority of any State or municipal government, except wharfage,
pierage, and dockage, shall be collected ; and the collection of, or at
tempt to collect the same, or any portion thereof, shall be a penal offense,
to be punished as hereafter provided.

SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That any person who, by virtue of
any authority or pretended authority derived under any State or mu
nicipal government, shall collect any such illegal tax, fees, or dues, or
shall attempt to collect the same, shall, upon the conviction of each
offense, be fined in a sum not exceeding one hundred dollars for each
offense, the amount of which fine shall be paid into the Treasury of the
United States to the credit of the judiciary fund, and he shall further be
liable to pay a sum not exceeding double the amount of the illegal taxes,
fees, or dues thus collected, or attempted to be collected, one-half to be
paid to the informer, and the other to be placed to the credit of the ap
propriation for light-houses.

SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That any captain or master of a ves
sel, or any other person being the duly authorized agent of any vessel,
line of vessels, or transportation company, who shall pay, with or with
out protest, any such illegal taxes, fees, or dues as are prohibited by
this act, may recover the sum from the person collecting the same by
action in appropriate form in the district court of the United States of
the district where the collection was made, and the courts of the United
States shall have full jurisdiction in all cases arising under this act.
m NI

NAVIGATION INTEEESTS.

TESTIMONY TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE.

NEW YORK, October 14, 1869.

The committee met in a room in the custom-house.

Present: The chairman, Messrs. Buffiuton, Morrell, Wells, Calkin,
and Holman.

The chairman stated the objects for which the committee was ap
pointed, and said that he had been notified that committees had been
appointed by the Ship-owners and Ship-builders Associations, of New
York, to present the views of those associations, and that the com
mittee would now be pleased to hear from the New York associations.

The New York Ship-owners Association was represented by Messrs.
Gustavus A. Brett, Edward Hincken, Ambrose Snow, James W. Elwell,
William Nelson, jr., and Allstou Wilson.

Mr. HINCKEN, as one of the representatives of the New York Ship
owners Association, stated that there were one hundred and eighty
members on the rolls of that association, and that almost every man
owning a ship in the city of New York was represented by the associa
tion. The matter before the committee had been discussed by that
association, and it believed that there was but one salvation for the
shipping trade, and that that consisted in Congress permitting the pur
chase of ships where they could be bought cheapest. He thought that,
with one or two exceptions, that was the unanimous opinion of the ship
owners of New York. The ship-builders of Maine would present their
own views of the case. The ship-owners saw no other means of compet
ing with foreign nations for the carrying trade unless they could buy
their ships in the same market. The cost of sailing-ships, after they
came under the American flag, would be greater than their cost would
be to foreign ship-owners ; but it was believed that the ship-owners of
America had sufficient energy, enterprise, and ability to overcome that
difference, just as the ship-builders of Maine thought that they could
overcome the difference in the cost of labor, &c., if the materials that
entered into the building of their ships were free of duty. The sh ip-own-
ers of New York were IbrVuying their tools where they could buy them
cheapest, because a ship was but a tool, and it was the only tool that
was prohibited from being imported. As to the amount of duty that
was to be paid on imported ships, that would be a question for Con
gress to decide. They claimed as carriers that they ought to have the
right, if the carrying trade of the country was of any advantage, to
buy their tools wherever they could buy them cheapest. England had
bought her ships here when she could not build them so cheaply her
self; but England was now building iron ships, and France and Ger
many and Belgium were buying their ships in England. Before the
French had entered into this commerce there were sixteen regular
packets running from New York, which sailed as regularly as the day of
sailing came round, whether they were full or not full. But what
was the case now I The house which he (Mr. Hincken) represented was

2 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

the sole survivor of four similar houses, and it was reduced to two
ships. The trade of France had gone into foreign steamers. And why?
Because American houses could not buy and sail foreign-built vessels.
Certainly, they might go to England and buy steamers and run them
under the English flag ; but he asked that those vessels should be al
lowed to run under the American flag, if there was any national im
portance attached to the fact that the carrying trade of the country
should be done under the American flag.

The CHAIRMAN. Cannot ships be built in the United States as
cheaply as in Europe, provided the materials used in the construction
are obtained free of duty I

Mr. HINCKEN. I only know by what our ship-builders say that, if
they had the materials duty free, they would compete with the cheaper
labor on the other side ; but they could not compete with the greater
cost of the materials. I am told that England allows drawbacks on
everything that enters into the construction of ships, and I know that
she does upon ship stores. If I take a cask of sugar out of the custom
house in this city, it will cost five or six dollars for custom-house fees
besides the duty, whereas in England such stores are admitted free of
duty and of fees; so that this operates very much against American nav
igation interests. There is no provision for so provisioning ships under
our revenue laws.

Mr. AMBROSE SNOW, also representing the New York Ship-owners ? As
sociation, said that, as to the matter of cost of building ships, that
could be very well explained by the gentlemen who would come before
the committee as builders, but that he and the gentlemen with him, rep
resenting the Ship-owners Association, confined themselves simply to
the difficulties that they met in the prosecution of their business. They
were prepared to answer any questions that might be put to them in
that connection.

The CHAIRMAN said that he had asked the last question because he
supposed that the gentlemen who were members of the Ship owners 7
Association knew the relative cost of building vessels on both sides of
the Atlantic.

Mr. SNOW remarked that they were all more or less familiar with it,
but that they were disposed to confine themselves to the difficulties
which they had to contend with as ship-owners, and to the condition of
the ship-owning interest. It was very apparent that the foreigner was
taking away that trade, and they had casl; about to see where the trouble
lay. They could see that there was no way for them to compete with
the foreigner, unless they were able to buy ships as cheaply as foreigners
bought them, and they had settled down on the proposition that a free
navigation law, similar to the law passed in England some twenty years
ago, was what would relieve the ship-owners of the United States. It
seemed rather paradoxical that the ship-owner who was interested in
protection should at the same time be in favor of free trade. The ship
owners of the United States had now the whole coasting trade, and yet
they asked for free trade in their ships. It might seem natural for them
to oppose free trade, but they did not ; they found that every nation in
the world was encouraging free trade in ships ; they found that all
nations had faeen forced, from one cause or another, to recognize that
their interests lay in that sort of free trade. The ship-owners of New
York had had a great deal of discussion on the subject, and they had
come to the conclusion that a free navigation law, similar to the law
passed in England some twenty years ago, would relieve the shipping
interest more than any other thing. If American ship-builders could

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 3

compete with foreign ship-builders upon the allowance of a drawback,
then the free navigation law which the ship-owners advocated would not
hurt the ship-builders. The question was not so much one of building
wooden ships in Maine as it was a question of occupying the ocean
routes, which he compared to railroad routes. The route of the Penin
sular and Oriental Steamship Company, which started from South
ampton, touching at Marseilles, and which went from Marseilles to Alex-
auclria, then across the Isthmus of Suez, then down the Ked Sea and to
Hong Kong, and from Hong Kong across to San Francisco, and from
San Francisco to Panama, and then back to Southampton, making a
complete circuit of the world, might be considered as a railroad track
round the world. That company was putting on just as many steamers
as could be employed in the trade, and was thus absorbing the trade.
As American ship-owners could not build ships to compete with such
companies, they held that free trade in ships should be made the law, so
that they could buy ships where they could buy them cheapest. An
other line of ships, starting from Southampton and touching at Bordeaux
and the Canary Islands, going thence to Valparaiso, was taking posses
sion of those avenues of trade. This was almost like laying a railroad
track across a continent. Once a railroad track was laid to San Fran
cisco, there was not any great encouragement toward laying another
railroad track near it. The New York ship-owners were simply asking
for a law to enable them to occupy, as it were, railroad tracks across the
Atlantic Ocean, and they had settled down to the belief that the only
relief which they should ask from Congress was the passage of a free
navigation law. He remembered very well the passage of a similar law
in England some twenty years ago. He recollected very well the dis
cussion on that law. The ship-owning interest had opposed it very much.
They had said that England, of all other nations, should keep the ship
ping trade to herself. She had her colonies then the same as -she had
now, and could build cheap ships. She had a very large colonial trade,
and the English government opened the whole of that trade to competi
tion. And yet, during the twenty years since then, the English shipping
trade had increased enormously, so that that navigation law proved to
be one of the most beneficial measures of legislation. If Great Britain
were to do with this country what this country was doing with her, and
refuse to Americans a participation in her colonial trade, American ship
owners would be obliged to put a large portion of the ships they now
own under the British flag, in order to get employment for them. The
conclusion that American ship-owners had come to was, that uncondi
tional free trade in ships was what they must have.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think it better that we should, if possible,
build our ships in this country ?

Mr. SNOW. We have thought of that a good deal, and there are many
gentlemen, particularly ship-builders, who entertain that opinion.

Mr. MORRELL. Will it not in the end be likely to produce the same
result as it produced in England, namely, build up an interest which
will eventually cheapen the cost of ships ? The proposition seems to me,
so far, rather beneficial to English ship-builders and English interests
than in favor of American interests and American ship-builders.

Mr. SNOW. If American ships could be built cheaper than English
ships, we admit that that would be a. help. We also think that a bonded
warehouse system, such as they have in England, would be of much
advantage to us. Prior to the war, and prior to having any internal
revenue tax upon our goods, we did not feel the want of a bonded ware
house system ; but now we do. If a ship is taking among her stores a

4 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

barrel of whisky, for instance, instead of buying it here out of bond,
at cost price and free of duty, she has to go to England and buy it
there ; because there she can get it free of duty and here she cannot.
In England, all ships going abroad take their stores out of bond free of
duty, which lessens very much the cost of the outfit of the ship. Here
there is no such provision, and we need it very much. We have thought
that such a system might be inaugurated here with a great deal of profit.
The trade of ship-chandlers in this city has been almost ruined by the
difference between the two countries. It would take four hundred sail
ing ships of one thousand tons each to do the work which the European
lines of steamers to this port now do ; and those steamers buy nothing
here except their fresh stores. They buy in their own ports our pro
ducts which go from here abroad, because they get them cheaper than
they can get them here. It will be seen that the laws governing our
commerce in this respect require modification. They require first-class
talent to be brought to their examination, and they require complete
modification. It is the defect in our laws that is putting us behind other
nations in the carrying trade. A few years ago American ships always
got the preference in fine goods and fabrics going to the East; but now
American ships get no fine goods for trade; they get nothing but the
coarsest articles. In England, ship-building has been so much improved
that England is now a first-class nation in the carrying trade. Hereto
fore, in the cotton ports, our ships always got one-sixteenth of a penny
per pound more than English ships did ; but now we do not get any
such preference.

Mr. MORRELL. That is to be attributed to the introduction of steam,
is it not ?

Mr. SNOW. No, sir; it is to be attributed to the improvement that the
English have made in the building of their ships. From being a first-
class carrying nation we have become a second or third-class carrying
nation.

The CHAIRMAN remarked to Mr. Snow that he supposed that in the
matter of ship stores the disadvantage was one more to the general trade
than to ship-owners especially.

Mr. WELLS inquired as to the relative cost of iron ships and wooden
ships.

Mr. BRETT, one of the committee of the New York Ship-owners 7 Asso
ciation, remarked that he found that question answered in the New York
Times of this morning, in a letter from a correspondent, who was sent
to Europe for the purpose of inquiring into the ship-building business.
He (Mr. Brett) read a portion of the letter, and asked that it be incor
porated in the proceedings of the committee.

As the author of this letter was not before the committee, it was not
deemed proper to introduce an anonymous paper into the report.

Mr. HINCKEN replied that it affected ship-owners also, and that if
the disbursement bills of foreign ships at this port were examined it
would be seen that their disbursements for ship stores were confined to
articles of positive necessity. Ship-owners would buy wherever they
found stores the cheapest.

The CHAIRMAN. The point is, whether an American master provision
ing his ship in a foreign port is placed upon the same footing as the
masters of vessels belonging to that nation?

Mr. HINCKEN replied that he was. American ship-masters bought
their ship stores abroad on the same terms as foreign ship-masters. In
regard to the building of iron ships in this country, he remarked that it
would not do to suppose that they could be built here at first as good

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 5

and as cheap as they were now built upon the Clyde. The first building
of them here would necessarily be an experiment, and very few ship
owners were willing to try that experiment.

Mr. MORBELL. Do you not consider it an advantage that we should
acquire the skill and facility to build iron ships here?

Mr. HINCKEN. Certainly.

Mr. MORRELL. Would it not be better for us to so legislate as to make
that possible, rather than to drive our ship-owners abroad to obtain
ships f

Mr. HINCKEN. I believe it would be much better if we could so legis
late that ships could be built here ; but it would take four or five years
to acquire that facility in building iron ships as cheap and as good as
they are now built on the Clyde, and that period of four or five years
might be very fatal to the interests of commerce in this country.

Mr. BRETT read a letter which he had received some time since from a
very intelligent ship-master, and which had been recently published in
the Journal of Commerce, of New York.

The letter is as follows :

SAN FRANCISCO, September 10, 1869.

DEAR SIR : As an old friend, I take the liberty of writing you a few lines in regard
to a matter in which I know you take a deep interest that is, our &quot; shipping.&quot;
I see that the Ship-owners Society of New York, of which you are a prominent member,
have made a movement, which I hope will lead to the repeal of the navigation laws ;
laws so ancient that the far-famed &quot; oldest inhabitant &quot; docs not remember when they
were made. That our shipping interest has declined no one will deny. The cause,
most ascribe to the war ; but I do not think this a correct assumption. The war I
consider an accessary after the fact only. The main cause for the decline of our ship
ping interest I ascribe to the wording of our reciprocity treaties and the existence of
our navigation laws. Many years ago Congress passed an act admitting into our ports,
on the same terms as American vessels, the vessels of all foreign nations that would
extend to us the same privilege in their ports. By the wording of these treaties foreign
nations are allowed to bring into our ports, on reciprocal terms with an American ves
sel, all vessels sailing under their flag. Now the American is not allowed by his gov
ernment to hoist the United States flag on any but an American-built ship, and at the
present day all foreign nations allow their subjects to nationalize vessels without
regard to where they are built, whether at home or in a foreign country ; and those ves
sels can then enter a United States port on the same terms as an American-built vessel.
If when these treaties were made our diplomats had understood the matter in hand,
they would have considered that as the American flag could only be hoisted (legally)
on an American bottom, so must reciprocity exact the same of the foreigner, and only
those foreign vessel* be admitted to reciprocity that were bnilt in the country of the
flag under which they sailed.

As the case now stands the Hamburger can go to England or Scotland, buy a steamer,
put her under the North German flag, and run her betAveeii any foreign port and any
port in the United States with all the privileges of and in effect as an American vessel.
This with the consent of our own government. At the same time the American is not
allowed by his laws to purchase this steamer and hoist on her the American flag And
even gives the Hamburger further encouragement by giving him the European mails
to carry from our country. Here we see our government, by its laws and acts, encour
aging foreigners, to the detriment of its own citizens. I suppose no one will dispute at
this time that iron steamers are much better than those built of wood, for ocean navi
gation, as regards strength, speed, capacity, and economy. The high cost of iron
steamers and vessels in the United States precludes our building them, and if not al
lowed by our government to purchase them abroad, we must go without them and see-
all foreign-carrying trade pass out of our hands. Ship-owners can, and have the right
to, demand of our government that they be placed by our laws on the same equality as
the foreigner, or else that the reciprocity laws be repealed, and no vessel of any nation
or flag be allowed to come into our ports on terms of reciprocity, unless it be those
built in the country of the flag under which they sail. Almost all the iron steamers or
sailing vessels are built in Great Britain ; they can be built much cheaper there than
in any other country. A first-class iron ship, to class A 1 for twenty years, with an
East India outfit, which includes two suits of sails, three bower chains and anchors,
and in fact everything belonging to the ship, except provisions and cabin stores, can
be built for 14 10s. per ton re#ti*er, and guaranteed to carry one and a half tons weight
per register ton ; also to attain rt speed of twelve knots. The insurance on such a ship

6 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

oirt to Calcutta and back is two and a half per cent. I know you are fully aware of
the advantage of iron in the construction of ships, and I merely mention the above a-s
facts that have coine under my own observation. There is another matter I would
wish to call to your notice. Last summer Mr. Seward made an arrangement with
Great Britain whereby vessels under that flag could enter at the custom-house in the
United States under their English register and not bo remeasured, American ships to
enter the customs in England under their American register. This is another example
of the smartness of our diplomats. Now, in England American ships almost invariably
measure less than they do (honestly) at home. For instance, the Norway, that I now
command, measures in England 1,983 tons ; United States register says 2,107 tons, a
difference of 124 tons. By this American register now dock dues, pilotage, steam hire,
&c., are paid, and our government, in its great desire to reciprocate with foreign na
tions, obliges me to pay the above dues on 124 tons more than I ought or would,
prorided the above arrangement had not been made. The Ne Plus Ultra, that I com
manded before this ship, was 1,534 tons American and 1,450 English ; and, if necessary,
I could give you many other instances of the same kind. I complained to the English
officials, but they told me to go to my own government ; it was it that made the
arrangement. To that I could make no reply. I was really in hopes that when we got
a new Secretary of State it would be one who knew how to make a bargain, and who
would get value equal to what he gave. Of Hamilton Fish I have not much hope.
All our laws relating to seamen abroad want revising as they now stand. Consuls can
do as they please, and ship-masters are obliged to submit.

Excuse&quot; this, if uninteresting, for the good of the cause.
With many regards, I remain vours, truly,

J. T. WOODBERRY.

G. A. B., Esq.

The CHAIRMAN. It has been a question with some whether we really
sail our vessels as cheaply as foreign vessels are sailed, on account of
our higher-priced provisions and higher wages to officers and men. I
want to get at the views of you, gentlemen, as to whether we do not
really stand on the same footing with foreign vessels in that regard, as
we have the privilege of buying at foreign ports, and as foreign vessels
are subject to the same disadvantages as American vessels in buying at
American ports; in other words, whether that thing does not equalize
itself, and whether we do not really provision our vessels as cheaply as
foreigners provision theirs; and also, whether we do not man them
nearly as cheaply as they do, we having the privilege of manning our
vessels with foreign crews to a certain extent the same as they have.

Mr. SNOW. When our vessels are in the same trade as foreign vessels,
of course we have the same facilities in those respects. If a foreign ves
sel was in our port bound from here to an English port, she would have
no advantage which our vessels would not have; but if we are fitting
out a ship to go from here to the East Indies, we cannot take out of
bond, duty free, the ship stores that we want for that voyage, but we
have to pay internal revenue tax upon them ; whereas an English ship
going to the East Indies would provision herself duty free.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose, for instance, that an American line of steam
ers or of sailing vessels were running between Liverpool and New York,
with an English line running alongside of it, would not both biry their
stores in England at the same rates ?

Mr. SNOW. Certainly.

Mr. CHAIRMAN. And both would buy on this side at the same rates ?

Mr. SNOW. Certainly.

The CHAIRMAN. The vessels of both lines are assumed to be in port
and out of provisions the same number of times. Are they not, there
fore, really equal in respect to the purchase of ship stores, except in
their first outfit ?

Mr. SNOW. I presume so.

The CHAIRMAN. Then the cost of provisions is, in the long run, no
greater to an American vessel than to an English vessel ?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 7

Mr. SNOW. That is so when they are trading between here and Eng
land, but it is not so when they are trading between here and Bio Ja
neiro, or Buenos Ayres, or Havana. The vessels that get their stores
here do not get them free of duty, whereas the English vessels going to
those ports get their stores free of duty. I grant you that when trading
directly to England, American vessels would be on the same footing
precisely as English vessels.

The CHAIRMAN. But the foreign and American vessels that pursue
the same trade stand on precisely the same footing?

Mr. SNOW. Precisely ; if English ships were running from here to
Havana, they would be on the same footing precisely as American ships
in the same trade. As to ship-building, capital is being diverted from
that branch of industry to something else. Take an eastern ship-build
ing town where the people have been in the habit of investing their
capital in ships. They find now that that business has become uiire-
munerative, and little by little, as their ships are sold off, their capital
is diverted into something else, and the. town ceases ultimately to be a
ship-owning town. There are towns in Maine that have ceased to be
ship-owning towns in consequence of the depression in commerce.
When you do not protect the ship-owner, the ship-builder has no market,
and the matter of first importance is to make a market. If you want
to protect the ship-builders, there must be somebody for them to sell to.
Now, if all the capital is driven out of that business and diverted into
other channels, most of the people engaged in ship-building will in ten
years have gone out of the business ; the father will die and the sons
will not be brought up in it. If it is a matter of importance that our
commerce shall be retained, something must be done for that purpose
sooner than it can be done by the means of granting drawbacks to the
builders.

The CHAIRMAN. If you buy your ships as cheap, can you sail them
in competition with foreign ship-owners I

Mr. SNOW. I think we can ; there is no doubt of it ; but if we want
to run a line of steamers between here and England, in competition with
the English, we must have vessels fully equal to theirs in every respect.
They recently built two steamers in Boston which cost fourteen hundred
thousand dollars. One of them went one voyage, and the other never
has been at sea. One of the owners talked with me the other day about
buying those ships at six hundred thousand dollars. He said to me that
if I would take a half interest in them, he would take the other half,
and I could keep the management of them and run them in the Liver
pool trade. Now that seemed to be a very good opening, the ships
being cheaper than English ships ; but I venture to say that you cannot
run those ships by the side of the existing lines of steamships, because
you would have to contend with all the adverse influences that would
be brought to bear by the first-class iron ships in that trade. That is
the position we are brought to. There is no use in looking at it in any
other way.

The CHAIRMAN. Could not that be on account of the want of adap
tation of those ships to that particular business ?

Mr. SNOW. They are very fine wooden ships ; but those foreign ships
occupy the ground. You cannot, for instance, put another line of rail
road alongside of the Pacific railroad after the present line has got the
start. Any other company going in would have to meet with so many
disadvantages, as would be ruinous to them.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean that a regularly established line has
advantages ?

8 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. SNOW. Yes, it has all the advantages. But what I wish to im
press upon the mind of the committee is, that we are letting foreign
ship-owners take possession of all those routes, and that when once they
have possession, we cannot, even though we may get vessels as cheap
or cheaper than theirs, cut inside of them with any prospect of success.

The CHAIRMAN. Does that apply to the general freighting business
as well as to established lines of steamers I

Mr. SNOW. Not so much ; but a general revolution in business has
been going on, and we are being run out of the business. We are sail
ing wooden ships, and cannot participate in the business of running
iron ships.

Mr. MORRELL. Are these Boston ships unfit to enter into competi
tion with foreign vessels f

Mr. SNOW. We build the finest wooden vessels. When the Cunard
folks withdrew their line to Boston, the Boston people felt a great deal
of pride in having a line of their own, and they built those two ships,
hoping to get a subsidy from the government, and intending to build
other ships, and to have a successful line.

Mr. WELLS. Are not the English steamers that are running here
mostly subsidized by the English government ?

Mr. SNOW. No, sir; there are a few lines subsidized by the govern
ment. Speaking of subsidies, our ship-owners, as a rule,- would oppose
with all their influence any subsidy, because it would be building up
the interests of a few to the prejudice of a great many. In England
they have subsidized steamers, and the result has been, perhaps, up to
this time, profitable ; but subsidies would not be favored by the ship-
owning interest in this country.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to give it as your opinion, that in
the general freighting business, if an American ship-owner could procure
his ships as cheaply as the foreign ship-owners procure theirs, he could
run them in competition with foreigners, except in regard to those
established lines ?

Mr. SNOW. I would not individually go so far as to say what we could
do in that way; but after all the discussion that we have had on the sub
ject, we have come to the conclusion that if there is anything that will
help us, this one thing is what will help us, namely, giving us the benefit
of free trade in ships. I do not believe that ship-owners generally
claim to be sure that that would relieve them entirely. It is possible
that the foreigner, having still other advantages, may do better than we
can do, but we have faith to suppose that we should compete success
fully with foreigners in that trade. We want a law giving us the privi
lege of purchasing where we can purchase cheapest. There is no other
nation in the world that does not purchase ships wherever she can pur
chase them to the best advantage.

Mr. WELLS. Do you believe that a drawback of the small duty of
twenty per cent, or ten per cent, on materials entering into ship-building
would remedy the evil ?

Mr. SNOW. I think it would help.

Mr. BRETT expressed the belief that if American ship-owners could
procure their vessels as cheaply as foreigners do they could compete
successfully with any foreign line. Although it cost more to sail Ameri
can vessels, still, the superiority of the American ship-masters was
more than an equivalent for that. He mentioned the case of an Austrian
vessel which recently arrived at this port, taking one hundred and
twenty-nine days to come from Bordeaux. She was manned by Austrians,
Avho received only $8 a month, her captain receiving only $40 a month;

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 9

whereas American crews received from $25 to $30 a month, and an
American captain from $125 to $150 a month. But with all that differ
ence in the cost of running, he believed that the American vessels could
compete with foreign vessels, on account of the greater activity and
intelligence of the Yankee officers and seamen.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask you if that same superiority is not mani
fested by American mechanics and workmen ?

Mr. BRETT replied that it was. He said that mechanics in this country
now demanded five dollars a day for their labor, whereas in England
they obtained only five shillings sterling a day; and he thought that,
having to pay five dollars a day for skilled workmen in the building of
ships, American ship-builders could not successfully compete with Eng
lish ship-builders. That was the reason why the Ship-owners Associa
tion asked the privilege of buying vessels where they could buy them
cheapest, and of having such vessels, when purchased, navigated under
the American flag.

The CHAIRMAN. What I want to get at is whether, although American
labor costs more than foreign labor, its greater efficiency does not over
come the difference in the rate of wages.

Mr. BRETT. Our labor is no better, so far as mechanical skill and
work are concerned, than it is in England.

The CHAIRMAN. But do not our workmen accomplish more in the same
time.

Mr. BRETT. No ; English laborers do more work. They work a greater
number of hours, and do much more labor in a day than the mechanics
in our yards do, because our workmen are so independent that unless the
boss allows them all the privileges which they demand, they immediately
knock off work and go to some other yard ; and the demand for skilled
labor in this country is so great that we cannot successfully compete
with England.

Mr. MORRELL. Is that the case in the ship-building business ?

Mr. BRETT. It is.

Mr. MORRELL. Then I would infer from that that the ship-building
business is not so very much depressed.

Mr. BRETT. So far as this city is concerned, our ship-workmen de
mand the same rate of &quot;wages that they did during the war.

Mr. HAYDEN, of Bath, Maine, representing the ship-building interest
of Maine, addressed the committee in reference to the question of ob
taining ship stores free of duty, and as to whether that privilege was
reciprocal between other nations and ours. So far as the direct trade
between this country and England was concerned, he admitted that the
advantages were reciprocal, but showed that in regard to the trade from
New Orleans, Savannah, Norfolk, and other southern ports, the advan
tages were not reciprocal. American vessels going to those ports had to
pay duty upon all their stores, whereas British vessels going to British
ports had their stores free of duty, and came directly into competition
with American vessels for the freights from those ports. The advantage,
therefore, was evidently with the foreign vessels, and against American
vessels, So it was with the trade to Cuba, and the West Indies, South
America, and all over the world, except in the direct line from this country
to England.

Mr. BRETT read to the committee a resolution which he had submitted
last evening to the Ship-owners Association, and which it had been
thought prudent to lay over for the present. The resolution is as fol
lows:

Resolved, That the committee of this assoociation appointed to confer with the con
gressional Committee on Commerce and Navigation be instructed to express the viewB

10 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

of this association as desiring for American citizens the right of purchasing vessel prop
erty in any part of the world where they may find it most advantageous to do so, which
vessel or vessels, when so purchased, shall be entitled to all the privileges of United
States registry.

Mr. MORRELL. Can you tell how much more per ton it costs to build
an iron ship here than it costs to build one in England ?

Mr. SNOW. Iron ships are now built in England, classed A No. 1, for
from 12 10s. to 14 a ton. Steamers will cost about 20 a ton.

Mr. WELLS. What do they cost in this country ?

Mr. SNOW. There have been very few iron ships built here, and I do
not know what they cost. The ship-builders will be able to answer that
question.

Mr. WELLS. -What does it cost to build wooden ships here 1

Mr. SNOW. Wooden ships, classed A No. 1 for about nine years, are
costing now about $80 in currency per ton.

Mr. BRETT. These questions are answered in the coinmraiication from
the Journal of Commerce, to which I have already directed the atten-
of the committee.

Mr. SNOW remarked, in speaking of iron ships, that an American ship
captain had mentioned to him the other day the case of the iron ship
Richard Cobden. which had been built about thirty years ago, and which
had been registered in England some time since for ten years longer,
making her classification run for forty years. He mentioned in that
connection that the life of a wooden ship is usually considered as ten
years, although by extensive repairs they are sometimes made to last
twenty years.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever got any proposals from American iron
ship-builders, so as to know what iron ships could be built here for ?

Mr. SNOW. No, sir ; I am not prepared to say what they can be built for

&quot;here. There is only one yard in this country that builds iron ships that

I know of; that is the yard of Harlan & Hollings worth, in Wilmington,

Delaware. I understand that they would contract to build iron ships

on English specifications at the same price as they are built in England.

Mr. BRETT. That has been rumored here for some time, but I under
stand it has never been carried out. I understand that they did build
one iron ship, the Costa Rica, for the Panama Railroad Company.

Mr. MORRELL. How does the ship compare with foreign-built iron
ships ?

A MEMBER OP THE SHIP-OWNERS ASSOCIATION. She went down to
Aspinwall, and was wrecked within three months after her arrival.

The CHAIRMAN understood that there was one American-built iron sail
ing ship in this port now.

Mr. SNOW had heard of it, but did not knowthe particulars. But if
it were a fact that American builders can build iron ships as cheaply as
the English can, that was no argument against free trade in ships, be
cause that fact would be all the more in their favor. If American build
ers can build as cheaply as English builders can, we should not go abroad
to get ships, only in such measure as our own builders cannot supply
them fast enough.

The committee from the Ship-owners Association thereupon, having
submitted their views, withdrew from the committee room.

Mr. JOHN HAYDEN, of Bath, representing the Ship-builders Association
of Maine, remarked that he had now very little interest in ship-building,
as, owing to the effect of the present laws upon that trade, he had grad
ually got out of it, so that the position which he took upon the subject he
took upon national considerations, not on personal considerations. If the

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 11

disabilities that were now imposed upon American shipping, and which
prevented the building of ships in this country as cheap as they could
be built in other countries, were removed, the ship-building trade would
be revived in a very short time, and ships would be built in this country
as cheaply as in any other country ; instead of Americans going abroad
to buy ships the people of other countries would be coming here to buy
them, as they did before the war. He regarded the remedy proposed
by the New York Ship-owners Association as one which would be dis
astrous to the ship-building interest. He argued that if the govern
ment should take the present burden off American ship-builders, and
still should allow them no time to fill the void existing in the American
shipping trade, but would give the ship-owners time to fill up that void
with the refuse ships of Europe, American ship-yards would be rendered
inactive for all time to come. But if a little time were allowed (two or
three years would be sufficient in his estimation to give American ship
builders all the start they wanted) they could fill this void that had
been created, and things would go on as smoothly as before. Why did
Great Britain own such a large amount of shipping as she now owned ?
It was because, during the late contest in this country, American ships
had been sold to England. He himself had gone over to England and
sold two of his ships. England had thus filled up her trade, while
Americans had been depleting theirs , besides that, the extra cost of
ship-building in this country was now so great as almost, not quite,
to annihilate American ship-building. The British kept on building,
and now they had four or five times the tonnage engaged in the foreign
carrying trade that Americans had. The remedy for the evil was to
remove those disabilities. He suggested that a certain amount per ton,
the exact figures to be obtained by estimates, should be allowed as a
drawback upon every vessel built in this country, as an equivalent for
the duty paid on the copper, iron, cordage, sail-cloth, &c., used in her
construction. He thought that with these allowances American ship
builders could compete with foreign nations. He put this on high
national grounds. It was of the utmost importance that the country
should be in a position, in regard to her mercantile marine, to deter
other nations from going to war with her. If she put herself in that
position she would insure peace, and thereby prevent the cost of war.
It was incumbent on this country to have a large mercantile marine,
and to have American sailors to man her ships, and to have skilled
mechanics of every kind on hand ; and all this could not be secured if
the ship-building interest was allowed to decay. He considered that if
the other course were to be adopted, namely, the course proposed by
the New York Ship-owners Association, the mechanics skilled in ship
building would either leave that business and turn to some other branch
of industry, or would leave the country and go where they could profit
ably pursue their business, and that, consequently, in the time of emer
gency, we would not have skilled mechanics to extemporize a defensive
or offensive fleet. He held that it was of vast importance that this
country should retain the carrying trade and the profits arising there
from.

Mr. WELLS. What do you propose ?

Mr. HAYDEN. I propose the allowance of drawbacks on the amount
of materials used in ship-building. I think that nothing else would be
requisite. Let us have this and we can build ships as cheaply as other
nations can. The ship-owners of New York, who have one particular
view of the question, would be in a very short time satisfied, because
things would return to the condition they were in ten years ago.

12 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

would have no more cause of complaint than they had then. It is not
necessary that we should always have a navy on hand, but it is neces
sary that we should always have skilled mechanics to construct a navy.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired of Mr. Hayden as to the extent to which Great
! Britain had been engaged in the purchase of American vessels before
the war.

Mr. HAYDEN said that he was not able to state that definitely, but he
had been in ports of Great Britain and of the Continent, and had seen a
great many ships, which he knew to be American-built ships, under the
Sags of foreign nations. Still he would not state in what proportion
other nations were purchasers of American ships.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired to how late a date citizens of other nations had
been purchasers of American-built ships.

Mr. HAYDEN replied that the last one he had himself sold in England
was sold in 18G4.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether ships had been built in the United
States for foreign capitalists upon contracts.

Mr. HAYDEN replied that he did not think they were, except in some
few instances. The rule generally was to send them abroad with freight,
or in ballast.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether c^&amp;gt; to 1860 wooden ships had been built
as cheaply in the United States as in England or on the Continent.

Mr. HAYDEN. Undoubtedly ; and they could be sold so as to compete
with foreign-built vessels.

Mr. HOLMAN. Labor was higher in the United States ?

Mfr. HAYDEN. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. But materials were cheaper ?

Mr. HAYDEN. I do not know that; but persoos who have seen our
mechanics at work in this country, and have seen mechanics at work in
other countries, cannot help appreciating the vast difference there is be
tween them. On this point Mr. Hayden proceeded to give some illus
trations.

Mr. WELLS. Is the skill of American laborers so much superior to
that of English laborers I

Mr. HAYDEN. I will not say as to England. The illustration I have
given had reference to France.

Mr. HOLMAN. Your theory is that American labor, considering its
quality, is actually cheaper than foreign labor ?

Mr. HAYDEN. Exactly so.

Mr. HOLMAN. And you think that if drawbacks were allowed on mate
rials entering into the construction of ships, ships could be built as
cheaply in this country as abroad?

Mr. HAYDEN. I have no doubt of it.

Mr. HOLMAN. Supposing that policy were adopted, how many years
would be requisite to construct any considerable number of ships so as
to materially increase our mercantile marine?

Mr. HAYDEN. So far as wooden ships are concerned, a good deal might
be done in one year ; but I can t say as to iron ships. Iron ships have
been laid and constructed in this country in Boston and in Wilming
ton and I cannot entertain a doubt that, if due encouragement were
given, the building of iron ships here would succeed as well as in any
other nation.

Mr. HOLMAN. Suppose that the policy were adopted of allowing Amer
ican registrations to foreign-built vessels, either without the payment of
any duty, or with the payment of a small duty, imposed upon the ton
nage; and suppose at the same time that a drawback were allowed upon

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 13

the materials entering into the construction of ships in this country,
what would be the effect of that policy on the shipping interest of the
country?

Mr. HAYDEN. The immediate eifect would be that the ships already
built by other nations would flow in here at first and fill the void so as
to deprive our mechanics of the opportunity to do so.

Mr. HOLMAN. Suppose that such vessels as were purchased abroad
were excluded from the coastwise trade, and that American-built vessels
had the exclusive coastwise trade, how would that policy affect both the
commerce of the country and the ship-building interest ?

Mr. HAYDEN. In reference to the coastwise trade, I do not think that
we derive any advantage now from the discrimination in our favor. What
American who is concerned in shipping at all, and who wishes to invest
money in it, would invest his money in coasting vessels rather than in
foreign trading vessels ? What little of the foreign trade we have is
better to us than the coasting trade, so that I do not see any objection
at all to removing altogether the restrictions on the coastwise trade.

Mr. MORRELL. Is the foreign trade better than the coasting trade?

Mr. HAYDEN. There is more money made out of it.

Mr. MORRELL. The coasting trade is entirely in our own hands?

Mr. HAYDEN. Yes ; but that is a trade which requires but little capi
tal, and the competition is already complete, so that there is no room
for foreigners to get into that trade.

Mr. HOLMAN. But by persevering in that policy some encouragement
and protection would be furnished to ship-builders.

Mr. HAYDEN. Let the whole matter remain as it is for a few yjears,
(in my judgment three years would be sufficient,) and let American
ship-builders be allowed drawbacks on the materials, and then I shall
be perfectly willing, as one interested in shipping and as a citizen of the
United States, to repeal all navigation laws, and to make them just as
the British navigation laws now are. But if we admitted free trade in
ships at once, the effect would be to crowd in all the refuse vessels of
foreign nations, so that it would take some time before we could have
anything to do. It would be a blow to ship-building worse than any
thing that we have yet received.

Mr. HOLMAN. Can those inferior vessels compete with the foreign
lines already established ?

Mr. HAYDEN. Of course we would want equally good vessels to con&amp;gt;
pete with them. The British have the whole run now.

Mr. HOLMAN. As to the ordinary carrying trade, would not the pref
erence be given to, and a lower rate of insurance required on, the supe
rior vessel? As a commercial adventure, would there be any advan
tage in purchasing those inferior foreign-built vessels ?

Mr. HAYDEN. No ; but a great many would be brought in for general
business. In reference to the letter published iu the Journal of Com
merce, to which the attention of the committee hos been called to-day,
it was written by a gentleman of San Francisco, and it is not necessary,
I presume, to say anything about it, because the testimony amounts to
nothing. He says that iron ships can be built at 14 10$. a tonj but I
am very incredulous on that point, as I think it costs very much more.
Any letter written in that way is a very loose kind of evidence.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you know how long it is since any European nation
has imposed restrictions on the granting of registers to foreign-built
vessels entering into their commercial marine?

Mr. HAYDEN. I do not recollect, myself, except by what has been al-

14 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ready stated here as to Great Britain, which removed such restrictions
about twenty years ago.

Mr. HOLMAN. Has any nation, within the last twenty years, adhered
to that policy f

Mr. HAYDEN. I do not know ; T cannot testify on that point.

Mr. HOLMAN. You spoke of the importance of protecting the ship
building interest, as a national measure, on account of the necessity ol
being prepared for emergencies in case of war. How far has the expe
rience of this country, say from the beginning of the war of 1812 up to
this time, demonstrated the facilities of improvising an effective navy
for war purposes out of the commercial navy of the country ?

Mr. HAYDEN. I suppose I know no more on that point than any other
person ; but I suppose it will be conceded by every one that we were in
a good condition at the beginning of the late war. At the beginning of
the war of 1812 we were not in so good a condition, because the embargo
had almost annihilated our shipping interest.

Mr. HOLMAN. In a national point of view your argument would be in
reference to the facilities for building ships for war purposes.

Mr. HAYDEN. Exactly ; and to the advantages which the country
would have from the carrying trade.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would not that result follow as well from American
citizens being the owners of foreign-built vessels?

Mr. HAYDEN. Yes, sir; undoubtedly.

Mr. HOLMAN. So that the other is the real advantage for encouraging
that particular industry?

Mr. HAYDEN. Yes, sir. It will be recollected that in the war of 1812
the frigate which took the principal part in the action &quot;on Lake Erie
was built in eighteen days from the time that her keel was laid. If we
had not had skilled mechanics, such a thing could not have been done.

Mr. P. M. WETMORE, of New York City, made some remarks to the
committee in reference to a proposition which had been made by him
during the late civil war, to send out privateers against British com
merce, and said that if that had been done British commerce would have
been swept from the seas to a greater extent even than the American
commerce had been. He also advocated the subsidizing of American
lines of steamships, giving some facts in reference to former subsidies
to the Collins line, and to the two lines owned by Mr. Law and Mr.
Aspinwall. He declared his belief that whenever the United States
government would restore the system of giving a reasonable subsidy to
mail steamers on the ocean, it would be a happy day for the commerce
of the country. Americans to-day could not send a letter to any nation
in Europe without hiring a foreign steamer to carry it. He did not
think that creditable to the intelligence, the enterprise, or the public
spirit of the country. He gave an illustration of the injury to the
American trade with China, caused by the necessity of our sending,
some years since, American letters destined to China through the Eng
lish mails.

Mr. WELLS inquired whether there was not an American line subsid
ized to Kio Janeiro, and one to Hong-Kong.

Mr. WETMORE replied that that was so, but that it was a very small
affair, and that when the commerce of the nation is spoken of it is not
South American commerce, but the Atlantic commerce that is meant.

Mr. WELLS inquired whether those subsidies did not operate benefi
cially to the trade between this country and South America.

Mr. WETMORE replied that they did, and that he should not like to
live to see the day when they would be withdrawn ; but that was only

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 15

one point in the common system of commerce. He believed that a mail
line on the ocean could not be supported by the mere carrying of mails
and passengers, but that there must be subsidies, and that the United
States government could well afford to give subsidies.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether there had not been many successful
American lines prior to I860 that were not subsidized.

Mr. WETMORE replied that if there had been he was not acquainted
with them. The Collins line had had a subsidy of $385,000, Mr. Law s
line a subsidy of $290,000, and Mr. Aspinwall s line a subsidy of
$199,000.

Mr. HOLMAN. These lines were in the direct trade with Europe 1 ?

Mr. WETMORE. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Had we any subsidized line to South America prior to
I860?

Mr. WETMORE. No, sir ; none to South America, nor was there any
subsidy to any line on the Pacific Ocean. I think that the granting of
a subsidy to the Pacific Mail Steamship Company was a beneficial pub
lic measure. L think that that company has committed the same fault
that Mr. Collins committed, in making its ships too costly ; in other
words, I think that there has been a want of economy in the manage
ment of the concern.

Mr. N. G. HIOHBORN, president of the Maine Ship-owners Association,
next addressed the committee. He said that the ship-owners of Maine
simply asked the committee to recommend such measures of relief as
would unfetter that interest, and bring back the mercantile marine of
the country to its former position. Up to 1860 the Maine ship-builders
constructed sailing ships for England cheaper than the English could
build them, but under the disabilities which the ship-building interest
was now laboring under, that trade had languished. The representatives
of that trade asked this committee to recommend to Congress the passage
of such laws as would facilitate their efforts in building up commerce,
and such as are granted to the same interests in other commercial nations.
A ship now costs sixty or seventy dollars a ton built in this country,
whereas in the Provinces it only costs forty-five or fifty dollars a ton,
and the two ships when afloat were brought into competition with each
other. He spoke of the importance of having a merchant marine that
could, in case of emergency, be used for the defense of the sea-coast, and
remarked that during the late civil war a single British gunboat could
have destroyed all the towns upon the Penobscot Bay and along the
coast of Maine, whereas if the government had authorized it to be done,
the people of Maiae could have created a floating defense in three weeks
that would have defied attack from abroad. He spoke of the commander
of the Kearsarge having been educated in the mercantile marine in Bos
ton, and said that though an army might be extemporized in three or
four months, sailors could not be extemporized in that way. He asked
that the ship-building trade be unfettered, and that it have the oppor
tunity to use iron and coal and wood and all other materials as cheaply
as it can procure them, and there would then be no fear of foreign com
petition, and there would be, in a time of national peril, a fleet and sail
ors ready to defend the country. If the mercantile marine were increased,
the ships of the navy, which were now maintained at great cost, could
be brought home, and the commerce of the country would be better pro
tected through the evidence of the strength and power and civilization
of the country, manifested by the fleets of the American mercantile
marine. He understood that there were to-day in the port of New York
some sixty barks, forty-three of them being foreign vessels, and only

16 NAVIGATION INTEBESTS.

seventeen American vessels. Those vessels were principally engaged in
carrying western grain to European markets ; and he showed how it was
to the interest of the western producer to have his grain sent to the mar
ket in American bottoms rather than in foreign bottoms. Valuable as
was the guano of the Chincha Islands, the carrying of that guano was
of more value, so that if Peru continued to own those islands, and if
Americans owned all the shipping engaged in the transportation of the
guano, they would get more value out of it than Peru would. The East
India trade was now being carried on almost entirely by foreigners. He
had been informed recently by an intelligent American master that in
his voyage to and from Yokohama he had only spoken two American
vessels. It was of vast importance that this nation should have as much
of that business as it could possibly have. As to the inquiry whether
Americans could compete with foreigners in the sailing of vessels, he
thought that they could. American masters and seamen w r ere superior
to foreigners. He related an instance of the master of a small vessel
of six hundred or seven hundred tons which was lying some time since
at Boston, there being lying on the other side of the wharf at the same
time a British iron ship Avhich was understood as a fourteen-knot ship
and of about one thousand five hundred tons. They were both bound
for Melbourne. The merchants of Boston were invited to put their
cargoes into the iron ship, because she would be at Melbourne before the
wooden ship. But the young American master (who had come to him
a barefooted boy some fifteen or eighteen years before) said that he
w r ould do the best he could to get there before the other, and the result
was that- he delivered his cargo seventeen days before the iron ship
arrived, so that the Boston merchants who shipped by his vessel had
saved more than the cost of the freight in having their merchandise
arrive first at Melbourne. The same principle of American superiority
held true in the line of ship-building. As to the question of labor, labor
was now in excess in Europe, and the ship-builders there did not use
machinery to the same extent as the ship-builders here did. He did not
like to be over- sanguine, but he believed that if the ship-builders of
Portland could not learn to build an iron ship in two years they would
luive forgotten their skill. They only wanted two or three years, and
they would then take care of the ship-building interest.

Mr. WELLS inquired how Mr. Hichboru proposed to remedy the evil.
Was it by drawbacks?

Mr. HICHBOHN. Yes, sir; we want a drawback on the articles entering
into the construction of ships. He did not want to antagonize the inter-
ests.of Pennsylvania or any other interest; but simply asked that if it
took one thousand dollars to pay the duty on iron entering into the
construction of ships, that duty should be refunded whether the iron
was procured from abroad or from Pennsylvania. He spoke of the
English insurance companies combining against the American shipping
interest, by requiring a premium of from eight to ten per cent, upon
American wooden vessels to Calcutta, and requiring only two and a half
per cent, upon English iron vessels. Whereas if he were to decide which
style of vessel was the most competent to take a cargo to Calcutta, he
would say that the wooden vessel was at least as competent as the other.
He did not believe that the time had come for the end of wooden ships,
or for the disappearance of sailing ships. Ships of wood and ships of
iron would both be continued, propelled by steam and propelled by
sails. The ship-building interest of Maine called upon Congress simply
to unfetter it in the matter of ship-building, and it would then meet ail
the demands upon it.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 17

Mr. HOLM AN inquired what the present condition of ship-building in
Maine was?

Mr. HIGHBORN replied that it was a great deal depressed, now, owing
to the fact that the late war had troubled the exchange of the world, and
that a very large amount of shipping had been transferred, together with
the fact that more iron vessels were being built now.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether any iron vessels had yet been built in
the Provinces ?

Mr. HIGHBORN replied that very few, if any, had been.

The CHAIRMAN inquired whether the yards where the government iron
clad vessels had been built were prepared to build mercantile iron vessels,
and whether the same kind of work and machinery would answer for
both classes f

Mr. HIGHBORN replied that at all events the same kind of workmen
would answer, and that the difference between the two classes was
about the same as the difference between the building of steamships
and of sailing-ships. There was a very fine yard in Wilmington, Dela
ware, for the building of iron vessels, and such vessels could easily be
built in Maine, if they could have the iron in Maine as cheap as they
had it on the Clyde. American mechanics would simply need the time
to learn how to rivet, and they would get out of four days labor as
much as they would get out of six days on the Clyde. He would say to
his New York friends that both the ship-owning and ship-building interests
were aiming at the same subject, but in a different direction. They both
wanted cheap ships, and the ship-builders of this country would supply
them if Congress would only unburden the ship-building interest.

Mr. HOLMAN. If you are allowed drawbacks on the materials entering
into the construction of ships, what is gained in a national point of
view between the building, of ships here and the purchase of ships
abroad ? Is there anything else gained than the value of the labor
which goes into the construction of the ship ?

Mr. HIGHBORN. Yes, sir. First we have our ship-yards kept intact
in case of the emergency of war with a foreign country, and that I think
a very essential point. Secondly, we have our sailors trained and formed ;
but if we get our ships abroad, we will get our sailors there too, and
they will be men on whom we would have no claim, and who would
have no love for this country in case of danger. Perhaps a great many
of the masters also would be from Europe, and they would be men who
would have no love for our flag and no disposition to spread our civili
zation and sentiments.

Mr. HOLMAN. Up to 1860 had the ship-building interest of Maine
steadily increased from the time it commenced &quot;?

Mr. HIGHBORN. Yes, sir ; very steadily . You will understand me to
admit that it had its intermittent spells.

Mr. HOLMAN. Was it greater in 1859 and I860 than it had been pre
viously ?

Mr. HIGHBORN. I do not think that it was. Our great ship-building
years were 1852, 1853, 1854. They were wanting ships on the other side,
and they discovered that we could build them very cheaply, and we did
build for ourselves and for the world.

Mr. HOLMAN. Between 1848 and 1860 was any large number of vessels
built in Maine on contracts with foreign capitalists &quot;I

Mr. HIGHBORN. Not extensively so. Our people constructed ships
and sent them abroad, some in ballast and some w r ith freight, and
there they were sold. There were, however, some built on contract;

2NI

18 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

but yet we did not get acquainted with each other enough to go into
that business extensively.

Mr. HOLMAN. What is the present condition of the ship-building
interest in Maine f

Mr. HIGHBORN. At this time I should think that about three-fifths
of our ordinary capital is at work. The inquiry may be made, how we
can do so much work as that under the circumstances ? The answer is
that those towns of ours which have been used for ship-building have
that business as a specialty and have nothing else that they can do.
The people who have followed it understand it and understand nothing
else; and they are now building more than they can afford to do, simply
because the workmen must have something to do, and they must have
some employment themselves. I built a ship this year, and I cannot get
85 per cent, of what it cost. The ships now being built in Maine will
not sell for more than 85 or 90 per cent, of their cost.

The CHAIRMAN. What are the rates that are paid now to mechanics
in ship-building?

Mr. HIGHBORN. From 82 to 82 50 a day for skilled mechanics and
ship-carpenters. I have not paid over 82 50, and I have had a great
many at 82.

Mr. CALKIN. What were the wages before the war?

Mr. HIGHBORN. I am quite certain that in 1854 1 have paid 83 50.

The CHAIRMAN. Is not the decrease in wages in consequence of the
depression in business, and is not labor as low in that branch of business
as it was before the war ?

Mr. HIGHBORN. Yes, sir ; we have two applicants for labor where we
can only employ one.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you know anything about the price of labor of machin
ists, as to how it rates now in comparison with what it did before the
war f

Mr. HIGHBORN. I think that a good machinist to-day gets from 83 50
to $4 a day. I fell in this morning with a friend of mine who wanted
some stone-cutters to send to Maine, and the man with whom he was
talking told him that if he could not give more than 84 a day he need not
seek any here, because theywere getting $4 50 a day here, and yet our
very best mechanics in ship-yards can only get $2 50 a day.

The CHAIRMAN. Then I understand you that in regard to labor you
can build ships as cheaply now in currency as you could before the war
in gold ?

Mr. HIGHBORN. Certainly we can. In 1S54 I have paid 83 50 in gold
to the same men that I am now paying 82 50 a day in currency; but
that was in an emergency.

The CHAIRMAN. How did the average rate of wages then compare
with the present rate of wages?

Mr.- HIGHBORN. My judgment would be that it would not vary twenty-
five cents to-day from the average for ten years before the war.

Mr. CALKIN remarked that in New York good machinists could be had
for 82 a day, on account of the depression in business.

Mr. BUFFINTON remarked that in his city (Fall River, Massachusetts)
good machinists received -83 50 a day, and that there was plenty of work
for them.

Mr. CALKIN said that Mr. Roach was hiring them in this city at 82 a
day.

Mr. BUFFINTON remarked that house-carpenters in Fall River received
thirty-five cents an hour, and that common dirt-diggers in the street
got 82 50 a day.

NAVIGATION - INTERESTS. 19

Mr. WELLS inquired from Mr. Hichborn what amount per ton should
be allowed for duty in the shape of drawbacks.

Mr. HIGHBORN replied that the estimate was about $8 per ton upon
wooden vessels.

Mr. WELLS inquired what it would be on iron vessels.

Mr. HIGHBORN replied that it would be something more perhaps $10
or $12 a ton.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that for the hull alone ?

Mr. HIGHBORN. No, sir; it is for the hull and spars and rigging.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you think that a bounty equal to $10 or $12 a ton
on iron vessels, and $8 a ton on wooden vessels, would put you on an
equality with foreign ship-builders ?

Mr. HIGHBORN. Yes, sir ; I am clearly of the opinion that $8 a ton
would do it on wooden vessels, but I am not so clear as to iron vessels.

The CHAIRMAN. If that is the case, why is there so much difference
between the cost of building in the Provinces and in Maine.

Mr. HIGHBORN. The ships in the Provinces are not so well constructed
as ours are, though they will get the same rate as we do through English
houses. They make ships entirely of spruce, which is a light and cheap
quality of timber. If we built ours of spruce we could build them at $8
or $10 a ton less; but we use oak and hard pine and hackmatack. I
had a vessel of five hundred tons at Boston, and on the other side of her
was a British vessel built entirely of spruce inside and outside. My
vessel was discharging sugars at perhaps $15 or $20 expense of cooper
age on her cargo, whereas the other vessel was also discharging sugar
at $200 or $300 expense of cooperage, and you could have scraped up
cart-loads of sugar. I think my vessel had twice the strengtli of the
other. She cost $20 or $30 more per ton.

In conclusion Mr. Hichboru extended an invitation to the committee
to visit Portland in the pursuance of its investigation.

Mr. WETMORE addressed the committee in defense of wooden vessels
as against iron vessels. He. believed that if a careful calculation were
made it would be found that from two to three iron-built steamers were
wrecked off Newfoundland for the one wooden steamer that was wrecked
there. He spoke of Admiral Farragut having put the bow of the wooden
frigate Hartford dead upon the iron ram in Mobile Harbor ; and about
the Star of the West, also a wooden vessel, placing herself alongside of
Fort &amp;gt;umter and bringing back her flag in safety. He believed that
the public interest of the country required that its commerce should be
extended wherever it could be done without infringing upon any of the
great principles of the Constitution.

The committee adjourned till to-morrow, October 15.

NEW YORK, October 15, 18G9.

The committee met at 10 o clock a. m. Present, the chairman, and
Messrs. Morrell, Holinan, Calkin, Buffinton, and Wells.

Mr. A. C. STIMERS addressed the committee. He said that he was in
terested in seeing ships built and run under the American flag, which
was not done now to any extent. If there were the same laws on the
subject of shipping in this country as there were in other countries the
result would be the same the growth of American shipping and com
merce. He understood the law of England to be, that all materials
entering into the construction of a ship were free of duty, and that all
stores subsequently put into her were also free of duty. With such a
law in this country ships could be built and run in competition with any
nation. Americans were superior in the arts of ship-building and navi-

20 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

gation to the French, Germans, and Spaniards, and were certainly equal
to the English. Labor cost more here, but it was also worth more, in
consequence of the superior intelligence of American mechanics; so that
if the duty were taken oft materials a ship would not cost any more here
than in England. The tax should come off iron used in the construction
of iron ships.

Mr. MORRELL remarked that there was not much tax now on manufac
tured iron, except the mercantile tax.

Mr. STIMERS replied that that was one of the taxes which he wished to
see taken off. Ships could be built here now cheaper than was generally
supposed. He had noticed that it had been stated yesterday before the
committee that iron steamers could not, for the present, be built here as
well as they were abroad. He did not agree to that. During the late
war iron steamers had been built for the government under his general
superintendence, and Mr. Eowland, now present, had built as good iron
ships as ever had been built.

Mr. MORRELL inquired whether it would not be desirable to use Ameri
can materials in the construction of ships when they could be got as cheap
as foreign materials.

Mr. STIMERS replied that American iron was much better than Eng
lish iron. Shippers and shipping merchants always paid a higher price
for American iron than for English iron.

Mr. MORRELL inquired whether it would not be better to allow a draw
back on iron equivalent to the duty, so as to allow the ship-builder to
use American iron.

Mr. STIMERS replied that it would, and that ship-builders would
always prefer American iron on account of its superiority. If it were
made free it would come to that. At first English iron might be
imported, -but builders would soon come round to American iron.
He had been government inspector of the iron-clads, which had been
constructed under his supervision, in various parts of the country.
The machinery for government irou-clads and for iron mercantile vessels
was just the same. The armature of the iron-clads would be heavier,
but the construction of the hulls would be the same. Vessels with iron
hulls had been built for the government at Portland, Boston, New
York, Jersey City, Greenpoint, Chester, Wilmington, Baltimore, Pitts-
burg, Cincinnati, and St. Louis. He had been abroad, and had seen
nothing there to surpass the American iron work. The iron here was
better than is made in Europe, and, therefore, the ships were better.
These iron-clads had been to sea, and had pounded on sand-banks, and
not a hole had been made in one of them. Americans had not to learn
how to build iron ships. They knew to-day how to do it. Give them a
chance and they would build fleets of them. As to the low insurance
on English iron ships, the insurance would be equally low on iron ships
built here. The latest works on naval architecture were obtained and
studied in this country, so that American ship-builders knew all that
English ship-builders were doing, and would not produce work inferior
to the English work.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand you as saying that the difference is
simply the difference in duties on materials, and that in all other respects
we can compete with foreign ship-builders ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir ; decidedly.

The CHAIRMAN. How would you overcome the difference in the cost
of labor?

Mr. STIMERS. The labor here is worth more. You can get more out
of an American mechanic than you can out of an English mechanic.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 21

The CHAIRMAN. Is there more machinery used here ?

Mr. STIMERS. No, sir. We use similar machinery. In a great many
cases we have more ingenious arrangements for saving labor; but more
attention has been paid to that in England recently than used to be.
In 1854, when I was in England, their ships were, as a rule, interior to
ours in New York ; but now, I think, they are rather superior, because
we have had so much discouragement, and have been running down.

The CHAIRMAN. Do the builders of wooden ships adapt themselves
readily to the building of iron ships ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. The change is very simple. My opinion is,
that when iron ships come to be made here, it will be found that the
builders are those who have been building wooden ships. It requires
only a different arrangement of materials, which is very easily learned.
In tact, the art of ship-building is simple if you understand naval archi
tecture, and that the wooden ship-builders understand. I have seen
men acting as common laborers, carrying, iron about, and have seen
them in six months afterwards driving rivets, which is the most partic
ular thing. If you have the head man right the labor part is easily
learned, as is proved by the building of alP these iron ships all over the
country. Of course the knowledge how to direct all to be done requires
a labor of years ; but, after the plans and specifications are completed,
the other parts of the work are easy.

Mr. MORRELL. I suppose you would apprehend no difficulty in sup
plying the demand for all the iron ships needed if you were sure of the
demand after the ships were built ?

Mr. STIMERS. I would apprehend no difficulty at all.

Mr. MORRELL. That was proved by the ability to supply the demand
during the war?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. That is the best proof di* it. Mr. Fox, the
Assistant Secretary of the Navy, complained to me that the South was
building ships faster than we were. I said, &quot;Yes ; but when the ships
meet, what becomes of the southern ships? We not only build a
number of ships, but we build good ships. 7

Mr. MORRELL. What you want is to be secured possession of the
American market for ships ?

Mr. STIMERS. We want to be on a par with Englishmen. That is
all.

Mr. MORRELL. You would prefer to be able to use American mate
rials ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir; they are better. American iron will always
command a better price than English iron. It is worth more.

Mr. HOLMAN. The vessels built by the government during the war
would be too costly for commercial purposes?

Mr. STIMERS. Their cost was not on account of their being govern
ment vessels, but on account of the disturbed condition of labor and
iinances. They were made after the rules of building iron vessels.

Mr. HOLMAN. But a capitalist could not think of expending anything
near the amount of money for a ship for commercial business that the
government did for its vessels.

Mr. STIMERS. No ; but he would have equally good vessels. The
difference is that labor now is cheaper, and materials are cheaper, and
the finances are in a better state. The machinery for building iron
ships is simple.

Mr. HOLMAN. Your experience only goes to the question of the prac
ticability of building such vessels in this country.

Mr. STIMERS. I know the cost of all the vessels that we were build-

22 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ing then. I saw how they were being built. I saw how the process
was carried on, and how it was carried on abroad, The processes are
quite similar, except that an American workman will always get off
more work.

Mr. HOLMAN. I understand you to say that, with relief from the pay
ment of taxes, internal and external, on the materials entering into the
construction of ships, they could be built in this country, of wood or of
iron, so as to compete with foreign builders?

Mr. STIMEES. Yes, sir ; but then I also want the inducement of letting
all stores be put on board ship free of duty. That would be an addi
tional inducement to build ships, because it would afford profits.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is that the practice of all commercial nations ?

Mr. STIMERS. It is the practice of England. A passenger on board
a Cunard steamer gets his bottle of champagne for three shillings ;
whereas on an American ship he has to pay three or four dollars for it.

Mr. HOLMAN. Does that policy of furnishing goods from bonded
warehouses extend any further than Great Britain?

Mr. STIMEES. I do not know. I notice, however, that other conti
nental nations are adopting the liberal policy of England in reference
to ships. Ships that are built in England are imported into France,
Germany, and other countries, and enter into navigation under their
laws.

Mr. HOLMAN. That is the policy of all the commercial continental
powers.

Mr. STIMERS. I understand that it is.

Mr. HOLMAN. There is no government except ours that prohibits the
sailing under its register and flag of vessels built in foreign countries.

Mr. STIMERS. I do not know of any. .

Mr. HOLMAN. Suppose that ship-builders were allowed a drawback
of duties, internal and external, on all materials entering into the con
struction of ships, what would be the gain to the country between that
policy and the policy of letting our merchants buy their ships abroad ?

Mr. STIMERS. I think our ships would pay better profit than English
ships would. My opinion is that the American ship will earn money
where the English ship will be simply paying expenses. There are
technical reasons why I think that is so. The vessel that is constructed
here is owned here, and our people make the profit resulting from run
ning her.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would not that result follow if the ship were built
abroad and owned here ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, except that if we build our own vessels we will
make more money than by buying foreign vessels. Ours are more profit
able vessels to run. We have always led all other nations in the
construction of ships, both naval and mercantile. The French vessels
used to be superior to the English, but the French had not the aptitude
lor going to sea that the English had, and they were consequently
driven from the sea by the English.

Mr. MOREELL. Is there not another and a higher reason for building
our own ships and that is that we may be able to supply our navy in
time of need J ?

Mr. STIMEES. Yes, that is a further consideration which should be
kept in view by statesmen. During the war we derived great advan
tage from the tact that our people were able to construct ships.

Mr. HOLMAN. Vessels purchased abroad by Americans would be
likely to be manned by American citizens.

Mr. STIMEES. If you buy a ship abroad you would be very apt to put

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 23

people aboard of her there. Ships now are owned here, as nearly as
they can be owned, running under the American flag, that are com
manded and manned by Englishmen.

Mr. HOLMAN. Sailors are admitted to vessels without regard to na
tionality.

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. I think it has been always so. I never heard
of any restrictions on that account either as to officers or crews.

The Cn AIRMAN. I believe that a certain proportion of the crew has
to be American.

Mr. STIMERS. -Perhaps so. I do not know about that.

Mr. HOLMAN. Then your view of the matter is, that the advantage to
be gained by the United States from relieving ship-builders of the duty
on materials is that resulting to labor from the construction of the
vessel here, and that of keeping up our ship-yards with a view to any
national exigency that may occur, and also the fact that you think our
ships are better than foreign-built ships.

Mr. STIMERS. Yes. These are the advantages that I had in my mind.

Mr. HOLMAN. Taking the present condition of our commerce into con
sideration, would the advantages to labor resulting from the construction
of vessels here countervalue the advantages of allowing our merchants
to buy their ships abroad and have them registered here, thus stimulat
ing our commerce immediately In other words, which would employ
the largest number of persons ?

Mr. STIMERS. I suppose that the building of ships here would. I
should like to see the whole thing left free to see the duties taken off
materials entering into the construction of ships, and then to let our
merchants go and buy ships abroad if they chose. I think that very
few would buy their ships abroad.

Mr. HOLXAN. And American commerce and ship-building would be
promoted to a large extent?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. In the first year, no doubt, there would be
quite a number of ships bought abroad ; but merchants would soon find
out that they could do better here. The comparison would be in favor of
our ships. And after the first year, I think there would be few ships
purchased abroad by our ship-owners.

Mr. HOLMAN. Then you think that the true end would be obtained by
allowing foreign-built vessels purchased by American citizens to obtain
American registers, and, at the same time, by removing all duties from
the materials entering into the construction of ships here.

Mr. STIMEES. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. You think that both these plans would improve our
commerce if

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Without any injury to the ship-builder ?

Mr. STIMEES. Yes, sir. I do not think he would suffer at all. I am
interested in it myself, because I am a ship engineer.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would you make any distinction between vessels built
abroad and those built at home as to their right to engage in the coast
wise trade $

Mr. STIMERS. I would throw the coastwise trade open to all ships
under the American flag, wherever they were built.

Mr. HICIIBORN, of Maine, remarked that it seemed to have been the
sentiment of those who had appeared before the committee yesterday
that, even with a remission of duties, iron ships could not be constructed
here at once to compete with those built on the Clyde or the Tyne, but

24 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

that it would require two or three years for the American iron ship
builders to get ready.

Mr. STIMERS replied that Americans could proceed at once in the con
struction of iron ships. There were several establishments ready now
to go right ahead and build iron ships, and large numbers of such ships
could be supplied in the first year. He thought that they could be pro
duced here quicker than they could be procured abroad.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you think that if you had a demand for iron ships
at this time you would be able to build them of American materials as
quickly as you could by importing the materials ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. We have rolling mills that are prepared to
roll such iron if they only get the order.

Mr. MORRELL. You found no trouble during the war in supplying the
demand after a few months ?

Mr. STIMERS. No, sir. The mills sprung up to meet the demand. I
superintended the construction of our first iron vessel, the little Monitor,
and we got the iron from Baltimore for the armature. It was supposed
at that time that it could not be obtained anywhere else ; but just as
soon as more vessels were wanted the whole country was ready to sup
ply the article.

Mr. MORRELL. If the duty on iron were remitted and there were no
provision made for the use of American iron on our ships, do you sup
pose that those American mills could live ? Do you not suppose that
all the American vessels would be built of foreign materials ?

Mr. STIMERS. It is impossible to say how cheaply the American mills
could produce the article. My opinion is that they would soon come to
the point of producing it as cheaply as it could be imported.

Mr. HOLMAN. Were all those monitors and iron vessels built of
American iron ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. All of their iron was rolled here. There
never was a pound of English iron imported for the purpose.

Mr. MORRELL. You experienced no trouble in getting anything you
wanted of American manufacture when you were able to give the order?

Mr. STIMERS. No, sir ; not at all. This country can produce anything
required for ships. There was competition throughout for the supplying
of these things.

Mr. WELLS. What material used in the construction of a ship is not
produced in this country ?

Mr. STIMERS. I believe we import Manila hemp ; but that is a very
small matter, particularly in steamships. Most of the ships built here
after will be, I think, iron steamers. That is the tendency.

Mr. WELLS. Then the drawback would be principally 011 iron and on
the stores that go into the ship after its construction?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Were any new navy yards established during the war?

Mr. STIMERS. No, sir. All those vessels -were built in private yards.
There were naval stations established, but not what we understand as
navy yards. Those at Cincinnati and St. Louis and other points were
just improvised ship-yards. Mr. Rowland, who built the first monitor
for us, had already a ship-yard.

Mr. WELLS. The iron vessels at St. Louis were built on the open levee?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. All that was needed to secure the prompt construction
of vessels for the government was to have the skilled workmen i

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. The only difficulty about skilled workmen
was the needs of the army. Many of them were drafted into the army,

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 25

and employers had to took aromid and make them out of common labor
ers, which they soon did. At present we could not have any such diffi
culty.

Mr. HOLMAN. Any man skilled in iron- work can readily be trained in
that kind of work f

Mr. STIMERS. Certainly, sir. The head man, of course, wants to
understand naval architecture. We have men enough in the country to
build hundreds of iron ships very soon.

The CIIAIRMAN. Were not a majority of the iron-clad government
vessels built at private yards ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir; all having iron hulls were. We did not
attempt iron hulls at the navy yards. Mr. Fox asked me how long it
would take to build them at the navy yards. I told him that it would
probably take a couple of years ; and that, therefore, we must build them
at private yards. A few iron-plated vessels, with wooden hulls, were
built in the navy yards: but the iron vessels proper were built in private
yards. I went into a ship-yard on the river Clyde. It had been a
meadow eighteen months before, and yet they had already launched
fourteen ships from it;- so that you see it does not take long to establish
an iron ship-building yard.

Mr. HOLMAN. In case of emergency, would there be any difficulty in
constructing any number of vessels that might be required, with a rea
sonable degree of promptness I

Mr. STIMERS. No, sir. I really think we could get the vessels more
promptly than by going abroad for them.

Mr. CALKIN. Are there not concerns in Wilmington, New York, and
Boston, that would be prepared at once to build iron steamers ?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. At Wilmington, Delaware, Chester, Pennsyl
vania, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston, they can go right to work
at once, as soon as they get contracts ; you would see the riveters at
work in a week.

Mr. MORRELL. The difficulty is the want of demand, rather than of
means to supply it ?

Mr. STIMERS. The want of demand is the entire difficulty. That is
why I want to see ship-building encouraged here by the withdrawal of
duties.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you not think that the talent of this country in the
way of building iron ships is equal to that of Europe?

Mr. STIMERS. Yes, sir. We build better ships than they build abroad 5
ships that earn more money. I refer to iron ships, as well as wooden
ones.

Mr. T. F. ROWLAND next addressed the committee. He said that he
was the proprietor of the Continental ship-yard at Greenpoint, Brook
lyn. That yard was established in 1859 about two years before the
war broke out. Previous to the war he had only built some three or
four iron vessels there coasters running between New Orleans and Mo
bile, and one or two for the Sound trade. After the breaking out of the
war Captain Ericsson took a contract to build what was afterward
called the Monitor, and as he (Mr. Rowland) was the only man in the
business in New York, Captain Ericsson applied to him to do the work.
That vessel was built in just one hundred and one days from the day
she was started. She happened to be successful, and &quot; the government
wanted some more of the same kind, and Captain Ericsson got a con
tract to build six, somewhat larger. There were only twelve months
allowed to build the whole six. Captain Ericsson sent for him, and he
told Captain Ericsson that he would undertake three of them. He sub-

26 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

sequently became sick, and his foreman called to see him, and proposed
that if lie should get ten per cent, of the profits he would stay; otherwise
he would strike. He (Mr. Eowland) told him to strike and to clear out;
and he cleared out the whole tribe of workmen who had been with him
two or three years. After clearing out the whole party of experts, he
went to work and laid the keels of the Passaic, Moutauk, and Catskill.
]Sot a man struck a blow upon them who had ever struck a blow on an
iron ship before. He built those vessels with house-builders, molders,
and all kinds of mechanics. There were no ship-carpenters among them.
Mr. Badger, a house-carpenter in New York, helped him a good deal.
Mr. Badger s business had given out, and he had a good number of Ger
man mechanics good fellows with whom the work was done and the
vessels got out. The other three, which were built in Wilmington, Del
aware, came out after his. After that the government had given orders
for two large monitors, the Dictator and Puritan, and he (Mr. Rowland)
took the Puritan. He thought he would send to England for some work
men, and he got eleven of them from the Tyne, agreeing to pay them
two dollars a day. These men staid but three weeks with him. They were
not worth their two dollars a, day, and they cleared out. He was better
without them than with them. He built the Puritan and launched her,
and he believed that there never was a piece of iron work done to excel
the Avork on her. He did not know the cause of the present decline in
the shipping interests. During the last year, at least once a week, he
had made propositions to build iron sailing vessels at not exceeding
ten per cent, in currency over their cost on the other side; but
people did not want ships. Mr. Low had sent for him, and he had made
drawings and a contract to build a ship for the China trade, but just
then the recent troubles in Wall street occurred, and consequently the
ship had not been built. He had offered to build her as cheap as she
could be got in England. He had seen by the paper to-day that Mr.
Low had stated before the committee yesterday that they did not know
how to build iron ships in this country. He himself, however, had built
a good many. The Americans were a peculiar people, but the English
were still more peculiar. The English never learned anything with
out immediately running to some printing office and publishing it all.
The Yankee never did that ; but he knew enough to read up and keep
posted. The Yankee thus had the benefit of his own experience and of
the Englishman s too, and had sense enough to pick out the good and
to throw away the bad. The iron planing machine, which had long been
in use here, had only recently been adopted by the English ; and that
was one reasoli why they were doing better work. But yet the English
could not build a ship much cheaper than Americans could. Iron sailing
ships cost about 10 sterling per ton, and steamers from 22 to 24.

It was in England as here. One could get a vessel for almost any
price. The idea of using English iron was all moonshine. Ships could
not be built in this country of English iron, but the American iron
would have to be rolled to order, for by the time that iron could be
procured from England rolled to order, the Yankee would want his ship
launched. During the war the Passaic had come into Isew York want
ing some repairs done. He had gone into Mr. Wells s store with an order
for about thirty plates of iron, saying that it was life and death to have
them ; that the vessel was in the dock, and that they must be got. Mr.
Wells hadn t them in the store, but said he would have them rolled.
This was about eight o clock in the morning, and the same evening a
cart drove into his yard with one load of that iron, which had been rolled
in Jersey City, sheared and delivered at Greeiipomt, and the rest of it

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 27

came the next day. If it had been necessary to send to England for a
lot of iron, he would have had to wait a long while to get it, and price
was no object in such a case as that. All that he had ever seen of Eng
lish iron was perhaps thirty or forty per cent, poorer than American
iron in regard to its ductility and strength.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think that those English ships that are
built so cheaply are built of iron that is vastly inferior to American
iron, and that it is an unfair competition for American builders to be
brought into contact with them ?

Mr. ROWLAND. The kind of iron that I have seen from England is
mighty poor stuff.

The CHAIRMAN. Do not the insurance companies in Europe discrimi
nate against a poor quality of iron in ships ?

Mr. ROWLAND. No, sir. According to Lloyds regulations a certain
weight of iron per ton measurement must be put into a ship. That iron
must have a strength of twenty thousand pounds to the square inch,
and there is no difference made. If we put in to .our ships iron of one
hundred thousand pounds to the square inch, we would have to put in
the same weight of iron as if it was only twenty thousand pounds to
the square inch. Until that regulation of Lloyds is changed, I do not
see how we can enter into competition with the English. I will make a
contract to build an iron ship at less than they can produce it in Eng
land, if regard is had to the strength of the iron, not to its weight.

The CHAIRMAN. You would use a lighter quality of iron and get
the same strength ?

Mr. ROWLAND. Yes, sir. I would use not more than five-eighths the
weight of iron and get greater strength. I do not propose to build a
ship out of English iron. I would rather leave the business. I could
not do it.

The CHAIRMAN. Your experience in iron ship-building was during
the war, when you were obliged to have everything at once, without
any regard to its cost. The only question is whether you could afford
to pursue that mode of doing business in regard -to mercantile ships ?
, Mr. ROWLAND. You could not build ships of any magnitude without
ordering the iron rolled at the mill and cut to shape. You cannot
afford to have it rolled except on pattern, because if you had afterwards
to cut it into shape you could not stand the waste.

The CHAIRMAN. Would not the iron be all of a certain shape, and
if the business were pursued would not the result be to come down to
those certain shapes and certain sizes, and to have them imported and
kept on hand ?

Mr. KOWLAND. ISTo, sir, I think not.

The CHAIRMAN. If you were building several thousand-ton ships,
would you not necessarily build them on the same model, so as to have the
patterns and sizes of plates alike ; in other words, would you not follow
the mode of building them all pretty much in the same way 1

Mr. ROWLAND. I have been an engineer for about twenty- two years.
It is about that length of time since I first started in the building of
locomotive and marine engines. Our marine engines that go to sea,
and that all look alike to the eye of a layman, do nevertheless differ
from each other. I do not recollect making two engines that were pre
cisely alike. We are always making alterations and what we call im
provements, though they are only sometimes improvements. I never
built two engines precisely alike. I built three ships for the govern
ment, all apparently alike; but if you came to measure them, you would
find them entirely different.

28 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand you that the plates are necessarily
cut to shape ?

Mr. ROWLAND. They are cut to shape. We generally allow a half
inch for the edges and use the shears.

Mr. MOREELL. You order the plates to be cut to pattern ?

Mr. ROWLAND. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORRELL. And the rolling mills cut the plates to pattern ?

Mr. ROWLAND. Yes; and a half inch is allowed for irregularity in
the shearing. That makes a waste of a quarter of one per cent.,
whereas if you order plates promiscuously, there will be a waste of five
per cent, and the labor of cutting, and no ship-builder could stand any
thing like that.

The CHAIRMAN. What, in your opinion, is the remedy for the pres
ent depressed condition of the ship -building interest ?

Mr. ROWLAND. That is a pretty hard question to answer.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be requisite in order to revive the ship
building interest ?

Mr. ROWLAND. Taking the duty on iron might help us some. It
would make those Pennsylvania people come down in their prices, and
then, instead of building ships at the same prices or at greater prices
than they are built in England, I think we could build them ten per
cent, cheaper. It looks to me like a lack of enterprise among our mer
chants. When an Englishman makes three or four per cent, on the
capital invested, he is quite well satisfied; but our people do not look at
it in that light.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you not know that Americans are negotiating
to buy ships in England, and are sailing them under foreign flags, in
consequence of their inability to procure vessels here at cheaper rates $

Mr. ROWLAND. No, sir ; I do not know that.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Do I understand you to say that you are prepared
to-day to build an iron ship as cheaply as it can be built in Europe?

Mr. ROWLAND. I said I would do it at a diiference of not exceeding
ten per cent, over the cost in England. On a large specification I would
build a ship for less money. I do not want anything but the contract.

Mr. BUFFINTON. You would build a ship as good, in your opinion,
as it could be obtained abroad for the same money ?

Mr. ROWLAND. Yes, sir.

Mr. WELLS. But under Lloyd s regulations it would cost you ten per
cent, more S

Mr. ROWLAND. Yes, sir.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Then if that statement is correct, it is not the duty
on the iron and on the materials that go into ships that causes the
depression in the trade?

Mr. ROWLAND. I think not, myself; but I want the duty taken off
iron, so as that we can build ships under Lloyds 7 rule and build them as
they are built in England.

Mr. MORRELL. Would you not consider it rather a disaster than an
advantage if by legislation you compelled the iron masters of this coun
try, in order to compete with English manufacturers, to reduce the
standard of their quality of iron 1

Mr. ROWLAND. 1 do not want it reduced any more than it is now.
Our American iron is poor enough now, to say nothing of the English
iron. The trouble is that we do not always get the Pennsylvania iron
when we think we do. At the present time there are four thousand tons
of scrap iron in port here, which will be rolled and sold for American
plate iron.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 29

Mr. MORRELL. If you want plates rolled to specification, you must
have American bloom iron, and can afford to pay more for it ; but if
you compel American iron masters to sell their iron as cheaply as for
eign iron is sold, you will break down the business I

Mr. ROWLAND. I do not know. I have got an idea that iron masters
like to make a great deal of money.

Mr. MORRELL. There is probably some money made in the business ;
but there are rolling mills that are standing idle now for want of orders.
The best mill in the United States to-day, and the one most able to make
those- plates, is comparatively idle, has not made money, and has not
declared a dividend. I refer to Abbott s, at Baltimore. We want to save
this work to our own country. We do not want extreme profits, but
simply to be able to earn interest on the capital invested.

Mr. ROWLAND. It seems to me that if we were to go abroad to buy
our vessels, and if English vessels were allowed to come here on the
same basis as American vessels, American capitalists would cease to be
interested in commerce on the seas, and would put their money in rail
roads, so that we would lose our coasting trade also. If that kind of
policy is pursued it seems to me that we might as well give up our ship
yards altogether. The ship-yards and ship mechanics of the country
must be taken care of. History says that the time has been when the
English would not sell us vessels. &quot;That may be again. We had better
be ready to do our work at home. Without knowing much of the policy
of the government, it seems to me that if the government should give
up all its navy yards and should have its ships outside, it would be bet
ter for the government in case of an emergency. The navy yards were
not worth the room they took during the war. They never built an iron
clad during the war. The government had to take for that purpose to
poor fellows like myself. As to the cost of machinery here, that can be
constructed by the horse-power for the same money as is paid in England.
Mr. Delamater and Mr. Eoach, of the Morgan Iron Works, would take a
contract to-day to do it.

Mr. HOLMAN. Then you are inclined to attribute the decline in our
ship-owning and ship-building commerce to the fact that American capi
talists are not satisfied with the small rate of interest that English capi
talists are satisfied with ?

Mr. ROWLAND. Yes, sir. There is to-day, in our port, an iron ship
that was built in Wilmington, Delaware, and she lies here without any
business. I do not know why it is. She has been here three or four
weeks, and there is no business to be found that would pay her. She is
a ship of eight hundred tons, as splendid a vessel as ever entered the
port of New York. There is apparently no business for her. She lies
at the dock paying wharfage, waiting for freight, I suppose.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think that there are certain combinations
of great shipping lines to divert freight into the channels in which these
foreign vessels are chiefly employed

Mr. ROWLAND. No ; I guess that merchants go where they can get
things cheapest. These Englishmen carry for less money than we do.
They are satisfied with less profit upon their investments.

Mr. WELLS. Is it your opinion that the allowing of drawbacks- on the
materials used in shii)-building would facilitate and encourage the build
ing of ships here?

Mr. ROWLAND. It would make a ship cost fourteen or fifteen dollars a
ton less, and that would help us some ; there is no doubt of it.

Mr. CALKIN. You spoke of building ships of a lighter class of iron,

30 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

using a better quality, of course not giving so great a weight. Please
to state that again.

Mr. EOWLAND. An inch square bar of English iron is supposed to
hang up 20,000 pounds without breaking. I suppose that would be the
test of a bar of English iron. A bar of American iron of the same size
would be considered rather poor if it did not hold up 40,000 pounds.

Mr. MORRELL. The average is 00,000 pounds ?

Mr. EOWLAND. Yes, sir. The Abbott Company iron will carry 40,000
pounds sure. Under Lloyds rules we are bound to put quite as much
of that 40,000 pounds iron into a ship as an Englishman puts in of the
20,000 pounds iron. The one costs about two and a half cents a pound
in gold, and we pay from four and a half to five cents a pound in cur
rency, so that really our iron does not cost a great deal more than theirs,
if you take it by the real value. But if you take it by the thickness,
they can beat us to death. But where we do beat them is in our labor.
They pay a great deal less for labor than we do ; but we do more in one
day than they do, and what we lose in iron we gain in labor.

Mr. HOLM AN. Do you pretend to say that the English capitalist is
satisfied with less profit and a less rate of interest as well on the build
ing as on the earnings of ships ?

Mr. EOWLAND. I think so.

Mr. HOLMAN. And you attribute the decline in ship-building and in
American commerce largely to that fact?

Mr. EOWLAND. I think that the American people got pretty well
discouraged during the war by having their vessels taken away, and
they went into other speculations in which there is a great deal more
gain with less risk.

Mr. HOLMAN. Speaking of Lloyds regulation in regard to the weight
of iron in ships, that has only reference to the insurance?

Mr. EOWLAND. That is all 5 but the insurance of a ship is the life of
her. If we cannot insure our ships there is no use in building them.

Mr. HOLMAN. To what extent does that rule act ?

Mr. EOWLAND. It acts the world over. An American ship to-day
would not pass Lloyds muster. To-day there are American vessels in
China lying up for want of trade, while there is freight waiting for Eng
lish vessels built under Lloyds rule.

Mr. HOLMAN. English vessels as well as American vessels are insured
here in the same way?

Mr. EOWLAND. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORRELL. Would it not be an advantage to American commerce
if our merchants could establish something like Lloyds regulations here?

Mr. EOWLAND. Yes, sir; and if we could make Englishmen come
under it at this end of the route, it would hurt them some ; there is no
doubt of it.

Mr. MORRELL. Is it not time that we, as a nation, should establish
our own registration of ships J ?

Mr. EOWLAND. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. How long has this evil been felt?

Mr. EOWLAND. It is about twelve years since Lloyd s rule was origi
nally established. Four years ago, after the Eoyal Charter and other
vessels were lost, they went to work and got up a new set of rules
requiring more iron than before, and the inspection since then has been
more rigid than it was before.

Mr. HOLMAN. Has this question ever been a subject of diplomacy
between this government and the English government?

Mr. EOWLAND. Not that I am aware of. I do not know than any

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 31

effort was ever made by the United States to relieve American ship
owners from the effect of the English rule in reference to insurance.
This rule has existed ever since iron vessels have been in vogue.

Mr. L. A. SMITH, of the Continental Iron-works, New York, next ad
dressed the committee. He said that there appeared to be a discrepancy
between the ship-owners and ship-builders. The ship-owner wanted his
ship free; but if absolute free trade in ships were established, he believed
that the ship-builder could not keep his business going. There should
be absolute and unconditional free trade for all or for none. If the
manufacturing interests of the country were to be protected, the. ship
building interest should be protected. As to allowing iron ships built
in England to be brought in here duty free, and to run under an Aimg-i-
can registration, it would simply amount not only to allowing English
iron to come in duty free, but also to allowing English labor to come in
duty free. He had been at some little pains within the last day or two
to ascertain the cost of a thousand-ton iron sailing-ship, built in New
York, to comply with Lloyds 7 specification, and fitted out ready for sea,
excepting stores. It would cost $121,000. The same vessel would be
built in England at 16 per ton, which, allowing currency and ex
change to be at $1 40, would make it cost in our currency very nearly
8116,060. That would be a little over 4,000 less than the American-
built ship, and that showed about the extent of the relief that American
ship-builders wanted. The duty on iron averaged about thirty-live per
cent. The duty on the iron in such a ship would be about 8-1,000 ; so
that if that duty were taken off, it would give the American builder an
advantage of between 816,000 and 817,000.

Mr. MORRELL. You mean pound for pound of iron, making the Ameri
can ship of the same weight as the English ?

Mr. SMITH. Exactly. As to the question of steam, they are paying in
England from 45 to 50 per horse-power. At that rate American
engines could be built at good profit, though not English engines, per
haps.

Mr. MORRELL. Does that include the boiler, &c. f

Mr. SMITH. Yes ; it includes the engine complete, ready to propel the
ship. The Pacific Mail Steamship Company is running its ships with a
consumption of about forty tons ot coal a day, and making between
eleven and thirteen knots. They are about three-thousand-ton ships.
The Clyde-built steamers, I believe, are using from fifty to seventy tons
of coal per twenty-four hours, and are making about the same rate of
speed.

The CHAIRMAN. The Pacific Mail Company s ships are American-
built?

Mr. SMITH. Yes ; they are American-built, and with American engines ;
they are built of wood; they are not as good ships as the Clyde or T\ in
built vessels ; that is, they are not such shapely ships, but their engines
appear to be superior.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand you to say that American engines
can be built as cheaply here as in England 1 ?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The difference, then, is only in the hull of the vessel 2

Mr. SMITH. The difference would not be even in the hull if we could
put in American iron according to its real merits. They build ships in
England of steel or semi-steel; it is not a very good material it is ratlu-r
treacherous ; but where they have built those ships and shown a tensile
strength of sixty or seventy pounds to the square inch, a reduction has
been allowed in their scantling; if that same reduction could be allowed

32 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

to Ainerican-bnilt ships, that would sustain from one-third to one-half
more tensile strength than the English iron, then the enhanced cost of
the American iron would be made up practically to the builder and the
owner of the ship. If we had an American insurer as reliable all over
the world as Lloyds, then we should have no difficulty in the matter.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Has there been any recent improvements in steam-
engines?

3Ir. SMITH. Yes, sir; a good many.

Mr. BUFFINTON. I suppose you know the machinery and engines of
the Old Colony, the Newport, the Providence and the Bristol steam
boats I

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Do you know that the Providence and the Bristol
consume in a trip from ten to fifteen tons less coal than the other two
boats, while they are much larger boats ?

Mr. SMITH. I do not know that ; I have no information on the sub
ject,

Mr. BUFFINTON. If it is so, it is not the result of the model of the
boats ?

Mr. SMITH. No, sir ; the Old Colony and the New Bedford are as good
models of boats as the Bristol and the Providence; if that is the fact, it
arises from the construction of the motive power, either in the engines
or in the furnace.

Mr. WILLIAMS, of the firm of Williams & Guion, ship-owners, next
addressed the committee. He said that the great difficulty in the way
of our navigation was, he supposed, pretty apparent. The English had
got the tools to work with and we had not; and the English were run
ning away with our business. The English had started with iron steamers
years ago, had followed it up, and had arrived at a great degree of per
fection. The Americans had not done so ; they were just making a com
mencement, he might say. There were very few iron vessels built here ;
he believed that there was only one square-rigged iron sailing vessel
built here, and that one was built recently. Iron vessels, both of steam
and of sail power, were generally approved by shippers. They were
much the superior class of vessels ; underwriters would insure them at
much less rates, and of course that was operating against wooden ves
sels and against the American shipping interest. That was the whole
thing, and the question, he supposed, was how to overcome that diffi
culty.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you had vessels built in England ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you made any comparison as to the cost of
building on each side ? Have you got any proposals from parties here
to build iron ships ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I cannot say that we have had proposals. W T e have
had specifications made out, and some approximation to the cost.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you regard the difference in the cost between
American and English built ships as being the main difficulty in the
way?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not know what the difference is ; but, of course,
that is a very important point. But we have not been prepared here to
build iron ships ; we have had no works here to enter on that large busi
ness of building iron steamers of two thousand tons and upward. We
have not had experience in it to do it to a large extent on an economi
cal basis. Daring the war a great many iron vessels were built here;

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 33

but I do not think that they would meet the economical wants of our
commercial interests.

The CHAIRMAN. How many English ships have you running in your
line?

Mr. WILLIAMS. We have six running now.

The CHAIRMAN. What is about the cost per ton of that class of ves
sels in England ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. They are not all the same price. They cost perhaps,
on the average, about 22 or 23 per ton. They are three thousand
ton ships, some a little less and some a little more. They are iron pro
pellers running from two thousand eight hundred to three thousand five
hundred tons. That price includes all the outfit of the ship ready for
sea.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know whether the English have any advan
tage over ourselves in the sailing of their vessels outside of the govern
ment subsidy ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think they have. I think that generally they man
their ships more economically. I do not know that there is any princi
ple which shows that that should be so, except simply that we have not
had the experience. We have a great many American sailing ships,
but not steamers, engaged in the foreign trade. Sailing between Liver
pool and New York, the trade that we are engaged in, the foreign ves
sel would have no advantage over the American in regard to fuel,
although you get fuel in England cheaper than you get it here. But
when vessels are sailing from both ports their facilities for get ting cheap
fuel are the same. I think that the officers and crews of English ships
generally sail at less rates. I think it is certainly so at present, and
has been so up to this time.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you officer and man your vessels principally with
Englishmen 1 ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mainly so. We have a great many Americans.

The CHAIRMAN. About the same proportion of Americans, I suppose,
as there would be of Englishmen in an American ship !

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. But the character of the vessel and crew is English?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; necessarily so.

Mr. CALKIN. There is also an advantage in being able to buy your
liquors and stores in bond on the other side ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. There is a very great advantage in that; but that ad
vantage we would have with an American vessel as well as with an
English vessel.

Mr. WELLS. The English government gives you the same advantage
in that respect under the American flag as under the English flag?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Precisely. There is no distinction at all. We go in
there with American ships, and we take our stores out of bond duty
free.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand, then, that your vessels are substan
tially English vessels?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; we have nothing but American captains.

The CHAIRMAN. Would not the effect of building our vessels in Great
Britain be, in the ordinary course of business, to have them substan
tial^ English vessels, manned, officered, and fitted out would it not
substantially transfer the business, except as to the ownership, to Great
Britain?

Mr. WILLIAMS. O, no; that would not be so. If we put them under
the American flag of course we should be subject to United States laws,

3NI

31 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

and could not have a foreign crew. We might, perhaps, have English
engineers; but as to officers, captains, and mates, they should be Ameri
cans. I think that this thing is all in a nut-shell. What \ve are seeing
now was as apparent to me fifteen years ago as it is to-day. I saw that we
were going to lose our commerce simply from the effect of the advan
tage which Great Britain had over us in the building of iron steamers,
They had seen the advantage of those steamers before we did, and had
facilities for building them, and pressed the business ahead.

The CHAIRMAN. l)id that advantage become manifest before the com
mencement of the war ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. It was man ifest to me fifteen years ago.

The CHAIRMAN. When did it develop itself?

Mr. WILLIAMS. It had commenced to develop itself in 1858. I went
to England expressly for that purpose, seeing that we could not get
American iron vessels here, and could not get foreign iron vessels regis
tered under the American flag. The war only hurried on the develop
ment.

Mr. WELLS. From your experience, what remedy of legislation would
you recommend?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I am, myself, a free-trade man. I go for free ships.
That policy would certainly have saved our commerce to a very great
degree, if it had been adopted fifteen years ago.

Mr. WELLS. That policy was adopted in Germany and France as well
as in England f

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.

Mr. WELLS. As I understand, they buy their ships wherever they
can get them cheapest, and run them under their own flag 1

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. Most of the vessels in the French and
Bremen lines have been built in England.

Mr. WELLS. Are all the lines of steamers between this port and the
ports of Great Britain subsidized lines ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir j the only subsidized lines are the mail lines.
The Cunarders run two boats a week. One of them is subsidized and
the other not. The Inmans run one boat weekly here, which is subsi
dized, and one fortnightly, by way of Halifax, which is subsidized ; but a
large part of the tonnage is not subsidized.

Mr. HOLMAN. What restrictions are imposed upon a foreigner in Eng
land as to obtaining a registry on a vessel which he purchased there ?
Can he hold the title himself and obtain the registration ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I apprehend not. / , :

Mr. HOLMAN. The title of the vessel must be in a British citizen ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir ; I think so.

Mr. HOLMAN. The fact of a foreigner being an owner constitutes no
impediment to obtaining the registration?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I really cannot answer as to that. As regards our
own case, we are only part owners. W^e are shareholders in an incor
porated company.

The CHAIRMAN. Have not these lines been established under sub
sidies ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir ; the largest amount of tonnage between here
and Liverpool has never been subsidized. One boat each week of the
Cunard line and one of the Inman line are subsidized ; but the Iiiman
line ran for a dozen years without being subsidized. It is only recently,
within a year or two, that they got that contract. The Cunard freight
line, and the National line, and our line, have never been subsidized.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 35

Mr. WELLS. Are not the French and German steamers that run to
this port subsidized ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir ; they have mail contracts ; they all get more
or less compensation from their own governments, and some of them
from our government,. for the mails that they carry; and they get some
from the British government for the letters that they carry to England,
Vessels stopping at Southampton and Plymouth get a certain portion oi
the mail money.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is there any commercial nation except ours that inquires
into the fact of where a vessel is constructed, for determining the ques
tion as to granting registration ?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir ; I presume that they all do. In England
transfers are made without impediment; but in France there is a duty
of, I think, ten per cent, imposed on foreign-built ships.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is there a duty imposed by most other nations?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I am not advised as to that.

Mr. NELSON, a member of the Ship-owners 7 Association of New York,
next addressed the committee. He thought that the question before
the committee was one which concerned the whole country, not one
particular portion of it. All were directly interested in this matter of
ship-building. Ship-owners were clogged and dragged down by what
he considered an obsolete and a fossil law a law which compelled them
to buy their vessels in this country alone. It was a law copied, he
thought, from the enactments of the time of Cromwell, and yet the
American government was still sticking to that old law. Our commer
cial rival, Great Britain, had known the effect of that law and had twice
altered it, the last time in 1854. In that year the American tonnage
was 5,100,000 tons, equal to that of Great Britain ; but now what was
it ? It had declined within the last ten years fifty per cent., whereas
the tonnage of England had increased to about 7,500,000 tons. The
whole tonnage of the world, outside that of Great Britain, was some
thing like 9,800,000 tons. Deducting from that all the river tonnage
and lake tonnage, fishing boats and canal-boats, and reducing it down
to ocean tonnage, it would be found that the tonnage of Great Britain
at this day was equal to that of the rest of the world. The business of
entering and clearing from British ports had so increased that statistics
showed that they carried last year from sixty to seventy per cent, of the
whole business, while all other countries carried only about thirty -three
per cent. They were all seeking about to find where the trouble lay,
and it was a ray of light to see the appointment of this committee.
They had nearly given up every hope, but they now trusted that this
committee would make such a report and would so sift the thing down
as to find a solution of the trouble.

There were three important things necessary to increase American
tonnage: first, the vessels; second, marine insurance; third, negotia
bility, based both on the vessel and on marine insurance. They first
wanted to get the vessels, but American capital was now invested in
lands, houses, bonds, and all other interests that give a better return
than shipping gives. He would leave it to any ship-owner in New York
and vicinity to say whether or not the owning of tonnage for the last
three years had not been a grievous thing to his pocket. The knowl
edge tliat a man was keeping race-horses would probably not help his
character as a business man, but really the character of owning ships
was about equal to that. After the Crimean war he had been in London
and he found the docks there full of transports, vessels that were owned
by doctors, clergymen, ladies, bishops, apothecaries, tin-smiths, and all

36 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

classes of tlie community. Every one owned a little piece, and many ol
them made large fortunes during the war; but since the war had closed
they were very glad to get rid of their vessels. He had seen some very
fine boats there for sale, and thought it would be a good thing if they
could be bought and owned here ; but the collector at New York informed
him that they could not be owned and registered here. He had asked
the collector whether he could not own them and put them under some
body else s name. The collector said: &quot;Mr. Nelson, if you can swear
that no person except a citizen of the United States owns them, or is
directly or indirectly interested in their profits, you can take them. 3
He (Mr. Nelson) had, therefore, to drop that idea, and he presumed that
there were others at the same time willing to do the same thing. But
the Germans saw the chance, bought two or three of those boats, fitted
them up as passenger boats and sent them to this country as a nucleus
for new lines, and they had now grown into extensive steamship lines.
Gentlemen had said that the English people were contented with less
profit than Americans would be. He did not admit that that was so ;
they were not contented with small profits. Some years ago the Anchor
line to Glasgow consisted of one solitary ship, and now that same line
had thirty steamers, all built out of the profits of their business. To this
day the Chinaman was operating under the same navigation law that he
was operating under thirty centuries ago, and the Americans were just
following that example, wanting to shut out everything. He did not
think that that was a proper mode to pursue. If nature had placed iron
and coal and a superabundant population in one portion of the world,
enabling iron vessels to be built cheaper than elsewhere, Americans
should take advantage of that and buy their vessels where they could
get them cheapest. Mr. Rowland had said that he could build an iron
vessel within ten per cent, as cheap as it can be built in Great Britain,
and yet for two years he had been trying to get an order and could not
get one. That gentleman thought that American capitalists wanted
more return for their money than the Englishmen did, and that, there
fore, they would not invest in ships ; but surely the business of New
York was open to the capitalists of the whole world on the other side of
the water. However, they had the business so nicely digested and so
nicely arranged that capitalists were always ready to come forward and
advance money upon any steamship line. But what was the case here?
There was no security to be had on wooden vessels. Wooden vessels
had had their day. In Maine, to be sure, there had been considerable
money made in the building of wooden vessels ; but they had lost a great
many such vessels. The loss from 1854 to 1858 had been one thousand
two hundred, and the loss for the last five years was about one thousand
eight hundred. Many gentlemen on the committee were probably not
familiar with the ship-owning interests. It was absolutely ridiculous
for a man to spend his time now in going around among capitalists and
soliciting them to invest money in ships. An old ship-owner had said to
him a day or two ago, that a man who would invest money in ships here
was deemed a lunatic. And why ! Because there was no security in
lending money on a vessel. Americans could not build up their tonnage
unless they could buy their ships where they could buy them cheapest.
He supposed that there must be more or less shipping consisting of sail
ing-vessels; but the great desideratum now was speed, and therefore
the great bulk of the commerce would be done in steamships. If the
Englishman, the Frenchman, or the German could come to New York
and do business between New York and New Orleans cheaper than he
could do it, let them do so, and let the people of the country receive the

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 37

advantage of it. Six years ago there were between thirty and forty
large ships being built in New York alone. Now there was but one. Two
years ago, for the space of four months, there was not a single American
ship or vessel going from New York to Liverpool, whereas there used to
be six or eight great lines of ships in that trade. American sailors were
all going into other avocations, and, in a short time, there would be very
few American sailors left. He should like to see this committee take up
this question of supplying American ships with sailors; because, in case
of foreign war, sailors would be wanted. He should like to see every
ship obliged to carry a certain number of apprentices. He should also
like to see all the local pilot laws of the country repealed, and one gen
eral statute passed to cover all the points.
The following letter was received from Mr. Allston Wilson :

NEW YORK, October 15, 18G9.
Hon. John Lynch, Chahinan of Committee, $c. :

DEAR SIR : As a member of the committee of tlie Ship-owners Association, and having
been prevented from attending the conference held yesterday, I desire to call your
attention to a collateral branch of the subject which does not appear to have been dis
cussed before you by my colleagues. While fully agreeing with those gentlemen in
their statements that the only salvation for the shipping interest under our flag is to
admit to free registry all vessels upon their becoming the property of American citi
zens, I would add that free ships require free sailors, and therefore suggest the removal
of all restrictions as to the nationality of officers and men serving iu our mercantile
marine. It is an admitted fact that our navigation laws are behind the times, and
that we require a new code that will not suffer in comparison with that of Great Brit
ain, which passed in 1854 an act known as the merchants shipping act. many of the
provisions of which might be adopted to advantage in this country, to assure the better
protection of seamen, and to secure an organized system of shipping and discharging
by proper officers, with forms of certificates of capacity and conduct. The mercantile
community being alive to the alarming decrease of their tonnage, it becomes those of
is who have the ear of your committee to present our opinions for suitable legislation.
Very truly, yours.

ALLSTON WILSON.

Mr. WILLIAM H. WEBB next came before the committee. He said
that he was not prepared to make any statements, but would answer any
questions that might be asked. He did not see the ship-owners of New
York represented before the committee. He did see some members of
the Ship-owners Association, but in his opinion they did not represent
the ship-owners of New York. He had heard the sentiment expressed
&quot;by some ship-owners that they would be very glad if the meeting of the
committee could be postponed for a little time, until they could get
together and put their views in some shape to lay before the committee.

The CHAIRMAN intimated that the committee would be very glad if the
ship-owners would do so.

Mr. WEBB repeated that the principal ship-owners of New Yerk were
certainly not represented by the Ship-owners Association. Those who
were most largely engaged in the business were not connected with that
association.

Mr. WELLS. I understand you to be a ship-builder as well as a ship
owner?

Mr. WEBB. Yes, sir ; I have been long engaged in the building of
ships, and I have been heretofore very largely interested in sailing ships ;
and 1 suppose that to-day I have as large an interest in steamships as
any other man in the country.

Mr. WELLS. What remedy would you recommend for the present
depressed condition of commerce and ship-building !

Mr. WEBB. My general views are that if Congress would pass a law
freeing all materials that enter into ship-building from the payment of

38 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

duties, we could then begin to build ships and could compete with any for
eign ship-builders. It has been said that that would open the door to a
great many frauds upon the government. To avoid that, I would suggest
that the materials when purchased and when used in the ship should be
ascertained by the government in such manner as might be deemed
best for its own security, and that then the drawback should be made
upon the materials that were absolutely used in the ship. I think that
that would enable the government to adopt this plan without being
defrauded.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that you are not now
engaged in the construction of vessels, but that you are merely a ship
owner&quot;?

Mr. WEBB. I have a ship-building establishment, and keep it open,
but unfortunately we do not do much business there. I am. sorry to say
that in that yard, where we built a great many ships, the grass is now
growing.

The CHAIRMAN. As a constructor of vessels, do you give it as your
opinion that you can build ships in competition with the ship-builders of
Great Britain if you are allowed a draw-back to the amount of the duties
on the materials entering into the construction of vessels ?

Mr. WEBB. I do, under the protection that the ship-building interest
has in the prohibition of foreign bottoms being owned and registered
in this country. We built ships in this country, from here to Maine, so
cheaply and so well that we absolutely obliged foreign ship-owners to
come to this country and buy our ships, and I think I may say, without
fear of contradiction, that there is no other production known in this
country, or perhaps in any other, where that thing has been accom
plished. The English came here to buy ships, the Germans, the French,
and the Italians came here to buy ships. And why? Simply because
they could buy better ships and cheaper than they could at home. And
yet the wages of our operatives then were nearly double the wages of
the same class of operatives abroad ; but we managed our business so
as to be able to do that. Put us on the same footing as we were then,
and we would be able to compete again with the rest of the world
in ship-building. It is true that the cost of operating ships is much
greater in this country than on the other side, but I trust that that will
eventually find its proper level. Wages were always higher here. At
present we have to pay firemen on board our steamers more than twice
as much as they are paid in Europe.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there any greater difference now than there was
before the war ?

Mr. WEBB. Yes, sir; there is a greater difference. The difference against
us is from forty to fifty per cent, greater than it was then, and it has been
as high as from sixty to seventy. But notwithstanding the difference of
wages, if we could get the materials of our ships at about the same as
they have them on the other side, we could compete with them success
fully ; at any rate, I should be willing to go in and invest my money in
ships and make the trial ; but as it is now it is entirely hopeless. I have
a place where I built more than one hundred ships within the last thirty
years, and, as I said, the grass is growing there now. I have attempted
to build a ship recently, and I have lost money by it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that if the draw-backs were allowed
to the amount of the duties paid, the ship-building business of the
United States would revive immediately 1 ?

Mr. WEBB. Yes, sir ; immediately*

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 39

The CHAIRMAN. And that a vessel could be built as cheaply here as
in England ?

Mr. WEBB. Not quite so cheap, but the difference would not be so
great as that we could not compete with them. We might not have so
good a return for our money, but the return would be such as would in
duce our people to go in and build ships, and I think that in a compara
tively small number of years we would regain the position that we have
lost. We have always had much to contend with in this country against
foreign ship-building. One considerable item was that a ship-owner was
always taxed more or less on his shipping interest as personal property,
whereas in Great Britain there was no personal tax on shipping. A
ship-owner in Great Britain does not pay any personal tax on his ship
ping interest ; he pays income tax, but that is all. We have always had
much of that to contend with, and yet we competed with them success
fully. That was due to the fact that we built better ships and on better
models. The same talent exists in the country now j and I do not hesi
tate to say that if we had the same help from our government that the
foreign steamship owners and builders have from theirs, we would be
able to compete successfully with them in building and running steam
ships. I ain entirely satisfied that we can surpass them in the model of
our ships.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be the effect on the ship-building and
general navigation interests of the country of amending the navigation
laws, and allowing the purchase of foreign ships, while at the same time
allowing a draw-back of duties on the materials entering into ship-build
ing in this country ? What would be the effect of having the two meas
ures go into operation at the same time ?

Mr. WEBB. That is a question which I have not deliberated enough
upon to be able to give a satisfactory answer.

The CHAIRMAN. Would the vessels probably be contracted for here,
or would they be contracted for in England ?

Mr. WEBB. I think, without giving the thing due reflection, that the
operation of that would be that the ship-owners of this country would
buy ships that are already built to such an extent as they could, and
that beyond that they would be obliged to contract for new ships. 1
think it would take all the ship-building business from this country, and
for such a length of time that it would die out. I think that all the
ship-yards of the country would die out under that system.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that if drawbacks on materials were
allowed for three years, and that then the navigation laws were amended
so as to admit foreign vessels to register, the American ship-builders
would be in a condition to compete with foreign ship-builders $

Mr. WEBB. It would take a much longer time than two or three years.
Time soon runs away. It would take a much longer time than that.
The navigation laws might have been abrogated any time between 1850
and I860 without injury to the American ship-builders. Then we had
enough of the field to ourselves to have enabled us to have continued
to compete with foreign ship-builders. Our labor was at a moderate
rate, and everything was going on successfully. All kinds of materials
for building ships could be obtained then at much less rates than they
can be now. The business was extensive, and the supply was very great.
Now the supply is limited and irregular.

Mr. WELLS. I understood you to say that American-built ships were
superior to foreign-built ships ?

Mr. WEBB. Yes, sir.

Mr. WELLS. Do you not believe that American merchants would

40 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

give the preference to American-built ships sufficiently to overcome the
difference that you speak of?

Mr. WEBB. Yes, sir ; an American ship-owner will give more money
for a first-class American-built ship than he will for any other ship. He
would be induced to do that because the underwriters of this country
would certainly give the preference to American-built ships.

The CHAIRMAN. I suppose that they have been gaining on us in that
regard in Great Britain while our business has been depressed ?

Mr. WEBB. Certainly ; not only in one direction, but in all the ramifi
cations of the shipping interest they have been gaining ground upon us
until they have got the field pretty nearly to themselves, and if the thing
runs on as at present for one or two years longer, not only the ship-yards
of this country will be all closed, but the skilled operatives will have gone
away or left the business, and we will have no men to build our ships.
For the last ship that I built, last year, I found more difficulty in getting
skilled operatives to work upon her than upon any vessel I ever built.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you believe that if the Alabama, and the other
confederate privateers, had not been permitted to prey upon American
commerce we would have been able to have held our supremacy, not
withstanding the war j ?

Mr. WEBB. No, sir ; I do not think we would. These vessels, of
course, aided very much in injuring our commerce ; but the high price of
labor and of materials has been perhaps the principal drawback. I do not
expect that labor will ever come to the level that it was at many years
ago 5 but it will fall sufficiently, I think, to enable us to build ships if
we can buy our materials cheap.

Mr. NELSON, speaking for the Ship-owners Association, asserted that
it represented three-fourths of the tonnage visiting the port of New York,
and that that fact could be proved if Mr. Webb denied it. He presumed
that Mr. Webb was not putting a stigma upon that association.

Mr. WEBB said he had no desire of that kind. He had given what
was his impression, and he still thought that the older ship-owners of
New York, who had had the most experience in the business, were not
represented by the Ship-owners Association.

Mr. WESTERVELT next addressed the committee. He expressed his
belief that very much of the trouble was owing to the fact that the Amer
ican standard of mechanical labor was very greatly reduced, and that
we were paying very much more for the amount of labor performed than
we used to do in former years. He thought that the ship-builders had
neglected their own interests. Twenty years ago it had been the custom
for each ship-builder to educate a certain number of boys to the business,
and to make them familiar with the mysteries of ship-building ; but he
believed that there had been no apprentices taken for many years past.
The result was that the mechanics employed by ship-builders now knew
very little about their business, and that ships cost a great deal more to
build than they used to cost. Probably the bosses themselves had not
kept up with the times, and he did not think that they had. He thought,
however, that the days of wooden ships were ended. He believed that
iron ships possessed all the qualities that wooden ships did, and possessed
besides many qualities that wooden ships did not. In almost all respects
iron ships were superior to wooden ones, and it was no longer worth while
to talk about their respective merits. There had been very little expe
rience in the building of iron ships in New York. He understood that in
other parts of the country iron ships could be built almost as cheaply as
they could be abroad. He thought that we might be able ultimately
to compete with foreign ship-builders, but not for some years j because

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 41

the foreigners had got men educated to the business, and Americans
were not so well skilled in the art of iron ship-building as the English
were, and that, for the best of all reasons, because very few iron ships
had been built here in comparison with the immense number of iron
ships built in England. There were very few establishments in the
country in which iron ships could be built. He believed that it cost
more to build ships in New York than in any other place in the world.
There had been a time when New York built ships which were equal
and superior to the ships of any part of the world ; but now they were
turning out ships in England which, in his opinion, were equal to any
thing that New York had ever done in that way.

The CHAIRMAN. If you obtained the materials free of duty, could you
construct ships in competition with the English I

Mr. WESTERVELT. I cannot speak of iron vessels, because I am not
conversant with them, and to build wooden ships I think would be labor
lost.

The CHAIRMAN. How much higher are the wages that are now paid
to ship-carpenters than they were before the war ?

Mr. WESTERVELT. Before the war we paid $2 25 per day ; we are now
paying $4. At that time a first-class ship cost $55 a ton to build j to
day it costs $110 a ton.

Mr. WELLS. What proportion of the expense of building wooden ships
is in the labor ?

Mr. WESTERVELT. I can hardly state that, for I have built no ships
for several years. I have got the cost of ships recently built in Boston,
and I am told that they cost about $110 a ton. I have not built ships
for several years.

Mr. MORRELL. Would the cost per ton for a ship of eight hundred
tons be the same as for a ship of sixteen hundred tons!

Mr. WESTERVELT. The cost per ton would be rather greater in the
small ship than in the large one. As a ship increases in size the rate
per ton would be less. I am speaking about ships of fifteen hundred
tons costing about that much per ton.

Mr. WILLIAM H. WEBB was again called before the committee.

Mr. CALKIN. As Mr. Webb has had experience in running steamers
to Europe, I desire to ask him whether, if Congress should pass a law
relieving the shipping interest so that iron steamers could be built as
cheap in this country as abroad, and if Congress should subsidize them
to a small amount, could a line of steamers then compete with the
present European lines and pay a fair dividend to the owners ?

Mr. WEBB. I have had some experience in running steamships in
different directions in the past year to Europe. Judging from that
experience, I should say that if Congress should pass a law relieving the
construction of steamships from the onerous duties now paid, and should
also grant a liberal subsidy I cannot say a small subsidy, but a liberal
subsidy, no more than European governments have heretofore granted
to their ship-owners we could run steamships and compete successfully
with any of the foreign lines. ,

Mr. CALKIN. In reference to immigration, do you know whether the)
immigrant coming to this country usually prefers to come in an Ameri-j
can ship and under the American tlag rather than in a foreign ship f j

Mr. WEBB. Heretofore they gave a decided preference to American}
ships ; but from the fact that American ships have almost died out,
that preference, as a matter of course, has also died out. I have sent
two ships last year, and the preference was given to them simply because
they were American ships. I do not mean to say by that that the pref-

42 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

erence has been given to them over any foreign, ships, but I mean over
foreign ships of the same class. And I know from my recent traveling
in Europe that a sympathy exists there, especially among emigrants, in
favor of American ships, and a desire that American ships should be
put into the business again.

Mr. FRANCIS COBB, of Kockland, Maine, largely interested in ship
building, next appeared before the committee and was inquired of in
reference to the wages paid to ship-carpenters. He said that ship-car
penters in Maine were now being paid from $2 50 to $3 a day.

The CHAIRMAN. How do their wages now correspond with what they
were before the war *?

Mr. COBB. There has not been that advance with that class of labor
that there has been with other classes, for* the very reason that there
has been less ship-building than there was formerly. We used to get
men at perhaps half a dollar a day less before the war. There was one
statement made here to-day in reference to the cost of ships, which I de
sire to correct. It has been stated that first-class ships cost, in New
York, at the rate of 8110 per ton. I can say that first-class ships are
built in Maine (nine-year ships of the very first class of oak and pine)
at $55 per ton. They can be fitted out ready for sea, with all their fit
tings, at from $70 to $75 per ton.

The CHAIRMAN. What did the same class of ships cost before the
war?

Mr. COBB. The cost of such ships before the war was about $40 per
ton, without spars. Similar ships are now being built at from $50 to
$55 per ton. I saw a contract recently for a large ship at $55 per ton.
That is about thirty or forty per cent, more than they were before the
war. That is the price that ship-builders are selling them at, and I sup
pose they would not build them without making some profit on them.

Mr. E. P. BUCK, of New York, next addressed the committee. He said
he rose principally to corroborate what Mr. Cobb had just said relating
to the present cost of ships. He had just sent to sea a new ship which
had cost, coppered, $73 per ton, and he should launch another of one
thousand four hundred tons within a week, which would cost $75 a ton
without copper. She is more of a white-oak ship, and cost a little more
money on that account. She is rigged with wire rigging, which is a
little cheaper than hemp rigging, although I am inclined to think it is
not quite so good. As to the remedy for the present evil, it has puzzled
my head for the last fifteen years. I do not know where the remedy is.
Most certainly we cannot throw open our whole coastwise trade to for
eign ships unless we have free trade in everything, and that we cannot
afford to have under the present circumstances. I think that if the
matter is sifted down it will be found that most of the men who want
free trade in ships are men who are directly or indirectly interested in
ships built in the provinces, and who would like to get those ships regis
tered here so as to put them into the coasting trade. The very moment
that foreign ships are admitted to registration here those ships will do
all our coasting trade instead of the ships that are built in Maine. It-
will produce what Mr. Webb has described, a dearth of mechanics, and
we will have no ship-builders in time of war. It will also make our
sailors extinct, because they will not go to sea in foreign ships. I have
known American captains, during the war, who were so loyal that they
would rather stay at home than go to sea in foreign ships that were of
fered them. I think that if we had a reduction of the duties on all
the materials going into the construction of ships, whether the ma
terials be American or foreign, and if we could also be freed from the

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 43

taxation on ships, as is the case, I understand, in other countries, we
could then afford to build our ships in this country and to compete with
any other nation. I do not believe that there is any more ingenuity in
Glasgow or any other ship-building place than there is in this country ;
nor do I believe that there is any more energy among the foreigners
than among Americans. I think that if we are put upon the same foot
ing we will be able to compete on the ocean with the rest of the world.
We have a greater ocean front than . iny other nation, and it would be a
terrible disgrace if we allowed ourselves to be driven from the ocean.
It has been wisely said that the nation which controls the ocean controls
the world; and since we have the Pacific and the Atlantic, we are des
tined to do that. That is what we will do if we have sufficient en
couragement from the government, or rather if the government with
draws its restrictions upon us. The tariff renders the cost of materials
so great that we cannot build ships. I do not think that the ship-own
ers of New York are represented extensively in the Ship-owners Associa
tion. I am free to say that I believe that if you could call together the
men who have been twenty or forty years in the ship-owning business in
this city, you would not find the majority of them ready to throw the
business open to foreigners and to have oar ships purchased abroad. I
saw that it was stated here yesterday that British vessels are insured at
two and a half per cent., while the rates on our ships are from eight to
nine per cent. I have made inquiry this morning at the office of the
Atlantic Insurance Company, and I was informed that insurance is just
as cheap on an American vessel as on a foreign vessel.

The CHAIRMAN. The statement was that the low rate of insurance is
only charged upon iron ships abroad, and the high rate of insurance
upon wooden ships.

Mr. BUCK. They may insure on what they like abroad, but we want
our insurance done at home. They may insure iron ships cheaper there ;
but I do not believe that they insure cargoes any cheaper in an iron ship
than they do in a ship built by Mr. Webb. Just think how the balance
of trade is against us. If we bought our ships abroad, paying gold for
them at thirty per cent, premium, we would be impoverished so speedily
that we would never be able to get back to specie payments.

The committee adjourned till to-morrow, IGth October.

NEW YOUK, October 16, 1869.

The committee met.

Present, the Chairman and Messrs. Wells, Holman, and Calkins.

Mr. A. A. Low appeared before the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee would like to hear from you in regard
to the general policy of building our ships at home or buying them
abroad, as we understand that you are a ship-owner and importer. What
should be the policy of the government to protect and foster our ship
ping interest and to bring it back to the standard position it held before
the war?

Mr. Low. Individually, I have always been in favor of protecting
Amesican interests. I have been inclined to sustain our own architects,
builders, and mechanics, and to rear our own sailors and advance the
interests of commerce generally in that direction. Most of our laws are
formed with a view to protecting our various industries; but the laws
which protect our general industry bear oppressively upon this par
ticular interest, so that the laws which are designed for the protection
of American industry are really a burden upon our shipping industry.

The CHAIRMAN. We would like you to give the committee your views

44 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

as to the causes which have operated to produce the present depressed
condition of affairs in our shipping interests.

Mr. Low. In the first instance we have a depreciated currency. 1
think that militates against the building of ships. We have very high
prices of labor, and high prices of all the materials that enter into the
construction of ships. These prices are increased by the laws which
are designed to protect other branches of industry, and of course they
all tend to increase the cost of the ships in the first instance, and the
cost of the sailing of the ship after she is built. I think that the Ameri
can shipping interest suffered before the war came on. The California
trade had caused the building of a vast number of ships, especially of
the class known as clipper ships. Then the steam lines began to multi
ply and to take the valuable traffic on the Atlantic. That forced sail
ing ships upon distant courses, and the freight was very low for several
years before the war so low as to be wholly unremunerative. When
the war came on, the privateers burned our vessels and added to the
cost of sailing by increasing the rates of insurance upon our ships. Our
ships were destroyed, and there is no motive to replace them at the
increased cost. Nor do I see how we can recommence building ships
unless the ship-building interest is relieved from the taxes put upon all
the materials that enter into the construction of vessels. My own belief
is that the policy of England, in subsidizing lines of steamers to the
various ports of the world, has given her a prestige which is almost
insuperable. Her mechanics have been trained in the construction of
iron ships and of all the machinery requisite for the purpose, and it
would seem to me that it would take our mechanics a long time to get
into a condition to compete with England. We have just now but one
important steam line, and that is the Pacific Mail Steamship line, and it
seems to me that all the subsidies which our government has ever given
to all the steam Xnes that we have ever had would not be equal to the
amount of loss inflicted upon that single remaining line by the Pacific
railway. We gave fifty or sixty million dollars, and lands extending for
miles on either side, to that railroad an internal line of communication
to the Pacific, which has cut off all the support that hitherto belonged
to the Pacific Mail Steamship line so that during the little time that
that Pacific railroad line has been opened that single line of steamers must
have suffered an injury of from six to eight million dollars. The capital
of the Pacific Mail Steamship line is twenty million dollars. Two years
ago its stock was worth from one hundred and forty to one hundred and
fifty ; now it is down to fifty-six. It has fallen within a year from one
hundred and twenty-five down to fifty-six, which would represent about
fourteen million dollars. I do not know why the Pacific Mail Steam
ship line would not be as good property to-day as it was before if Con
gress had not given fifty or sixty million dollars, and immense quantities
of land, to that line of railroad, and so built it up at the expense of the
only single line of steamers remaining to this country. There does not
seem to be a law upon our statute books which does not inflict an injury
upon our commercial interests. Then, again, the policy of England in
reference to subsidies has been different from our own. The English
have engrossed the traffic from almost every country. They have man
ufactures in abundance to supply the distant markets. They have their
distant colonies to incite them to effort. Occupying an insular position
i as they do, there is not a man in England that does not appreciate the
importance of commerce j so that all the English laws are for the benefit
of commerce. Our country is so large, and the opportunities for the
employment of capital are so diverse, that our legislators do not give

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 45

that attention to commerce which the statesmen of England do. I think
the English statesmen have been wiser than ourselves in subsidizing
largely^ in the first instance, all their ocean lines, until they have trained
their mechanics perfectly in the creation of steamships. There is a very
interesting article in the Times this morning which shows what the
English are doing in that line. It is easier to explain the causes of our
decline than it is to suggest a remedy. If there is any way of relieving
the ship-building interest from the duties imposed upon it for the pro
tection of other American industries, that would certainly be a step in
the right direction. If a subsidy could be given to ocean steamers that
would be an offset to the extra cost of building our steamers, that would
be another mode of meeting the difficulty. My own impression has
been that large subsidies should be given as an inducement, and that
those subsidies, while they would cost the government something in the
beginning, would cost the government nothing in the end, because the
materials used in the construction of ships would pay back in taxes to
the government whatever is paid in subsidies. At present we build no
steamers we can build none. We cannot build steamers, I suppose,
because iron has taken the place of wood. We abound in wood but not
in cheap iron. The screw steamers have taken the place of the side-
wheelers, and wooden vessels cannot bear the action of the ocean upon
the screw ; so that we are inevitably driven upon iron in the construc
tion of our ocean steamers, and we have not the cheap iron to compete
with the cheap iron of England and with the skilled labor of England.
I see that Mr. Webb and others express great confidence in the ability
of our mechanics to compete with English laborers. I must say that I
have not that same confidence in the superiority of our workmen. They
work a shorter time than the English workmen do, and demoralization
seems to have extended into the department of labor to a greater degree
perhaps than to almost any other. Our labor generally is very much
demoralized, and any one who undertakes to build a house or anything
else will soon find it out. I have no doubt that we can command as
skillful workmen as any in the world, but that we can command better
workmen than are in England I do not believe. Certainly the ships
that they send here are superior to any that have ever been made
hitherto. They are excellent in model and in workmanship. Any one
who has made a passage across the Atlantic in one of their ocean steam
ers will be satisfied of their stability and excellence as well as of their
great speed. It seems to me that the English have attained to the
utmost excellence in that line, and that although our mechanics may be
of the best order, we should be weak and foolish to think that we can
excel the English in any of those respects. We should be put to our
mettle to hold our own with them until we have had a good many years
to study the art and to practice it.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you give us any information as to the amount
of subsidies paid by our government and by the English government?

Mr. Low. I cannot give you the particulars of the different subsidies
paid by Great Britain or by this country. I only know that the English
have adhered to the policy of sustaining their ocean lines of steamers
by sufficient subsidies. They have never shrunk from the necessity of
paying whatever was needed to continue a line to distant countries. For
instance, if a line of steamers were formed to Australia and were unsuc
cessful, and if it were found that a larger subsidy was necessary to continue
it, they would liberally give what was sufficient for the purpose. In a
word, the English have always, in peace and in war, manifested a deter
mination to hold the supremacy on the ocean ; and the supremacy which.

46 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

they acquired by arms in war they have in peace acquired by subsidies.
They have, deliberately and intentionally, driven the Americans from the
ocean by paying subsidies which they knew our Congress would not pay.
I believe it has been the deliberate purpose on the part of En gland to
maintain her supremacy on the ocean by paying larger subsidies than
any other nation as long as subsidies were necessary to preserve their
control. 1 believe that when the Collins line was running, the subsidy
to the Cunard line was renewed for the express purpose of enabling it
to run off the Collins line. It was renewed several years before the
expiration of the subsidy already granted, so that the Cunard line might
enter upon contracts for new ships ; and a committee of the English
Parliament similar to this committee was employed to make the most
minute investigation into the matter. It was after the most careful
inquiry by that committee that the contract with Cunard was renewed,
for the express purpose of enabling that line to run the American steam
ers from the ocean ; and they have driven us from the ocean by that
policy just as effectually as they ever did drive an enemy from the ocean
by their guns.

Mr. WELLS. From your experience of the mode of conducting steam
ship lines, do you not think that the English run their lines at much
less expense than the Americans, and that if Collins had run his line at
the same expense as Cunard it could have been sustained?

Mr. Low. The English protect their ships, but we burden ours. We
burden every supply that goes on board our ships. Every pound of tea
and every pound of sugar is burdened with heavy tariff charges. The
English exempt the stores that are put on board their ships from such
charges. In every way they increase their shipping interests, and in
every way we depress ours. In the time of the war the shipping inter
est was the only interest that suffered. The privateers burnt our ships
or subjected them to heavy rates of insurance j and so far as foreign in
surance companies were concerned, they turned their faces against in
suring our ships.

The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion are ship-owners generally in favor of
amending the navigation laws, so as to allow the purchase of ships abroad
and nationalieing them here*?

Mr. Low. I dare say that those who are not fully American in their
feeling would be in favor of bringing foreign-built ships here, and of
putting them under the American flag ; but I, individually, would pre
fer to see our mechanics encouraged as hitherto, to build those vessels.
I think that we should be relieved from the burdens which now stand
in the way of ship-building, so that we shall not only have ships to sail,
but men to build them. Still, it would be better to go abroad and buy
our ships and put them under the American flag rather than to be ruled
out off the sea altogether, as we now are. The shipping interest has
been so unprofitable in this part of the country that capital has been
diverted from that branch of commerce to more inviting fields.

The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion, if the American ship-builders and
ship-owners were put upon the same footing and offered the same en
couragement as the ship-builders and ship-owners of Great Britain,
would we be able to compete with them ?

Mr. Low. If it were possible to put them on the same footing, of
course there is an aptitude among our people in the pursuit both of
building and sailing vessels that would soon manifest itself, unques
tionably.

Mr. WELLS. In other words, you think that if drawbacks were
allowed on the materials entering into ship-building in this country,

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 47

and if the disabilities in reference to buying ships abroad and putting
them under the American flag were removed, our commerce would re
vive f

Mr. Low. I have said that there are many things in the way of the
restoration of our commerce, and one of the first difficulties is the con
dition of the currency. That aggravates everything.

Mr. WELLS. That cannot be remedied for the time being. But as to
the more immediate relief, what do you think would be its result ?

Mr. Low. Our mechanics say that if the materials that enter into the
construction of ships were relieved from taxes they could go to work,
and I have no doubt that that is so. I have no doubt that we have iron
equal to any other for the construction of ships, and that we have the
skill to construct them. We have not the experience 5 but I have no
doubt that that will come.

Mr. WELLS. And we have national pride, too.

Mr. Low. We have the pride.

Mr. WELLS. That, together with the subsidies, you think would prob
ably be the only policy to relieve us for the time ?

Mr. Low. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You speak of the currency being an impediment.
Where we compete with England upon gold prices, would the condition
of our currency make any real difference?

Mr. Low. Inasmuch as the traffic is carried on in gold prices, we
would be on a par with them - 3 we should have the same remuneration
as they have.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, really, what effect does the currency have on
the question ?

Mr. Low. It is the parent of a great deal of demoralization. Every
thing is high rents, and labor, and materials. We have exaggerated
prices for everything.

The CHAIRMAN. Above the difference between gold and currency ?

Mr. Low. Apparently. Labor is certainly out of proportion to the
difference between gold and currency. Where we used to pay eleven
dollars a month to sailors, we now pay twenty-five dollars. That exhibits
more than the difference between gold and currency. I speak of the
sailors in the China trade, where the rates are lower than in the Euro
pean trade. We used to pay eleven dollars where we now pay twenty-
five dollars. Commerce now is threatened in another way. The trade
that we have hitherto done in ships to China shall be lost to us through
this Pacific railroad, after awhile. The teas that now come by ships
may come from San Francisco over the road ; and I presume they will
do so before long. Then, again, we are threatened through the Suez
Canal, and through the competition of steamers with sailing vessels. I
understand that the English are already making inquiries here in rela
tion to the cost of transportation of teas by steam from China ; so that
the commerce which we have carried on with the East is threatened
the whole way by the land route across the continent, and by the steam
route through the Suez Canal. I do not, myself, believe in the trans
portation of teas by so expensive a route. At present there is no profit
in the importation of teas, and there has not been for two years past.
And inasmuch as there is no profit with the inconsiderable cost of
bringing them by sailing vessels, there would be no warrant for the
higher cost in bringing them by steam vessels, as steamers cannot trans
port freights so cheaply as sailing vessels can.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you/tthen, to be in favor of an attempt

48 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

to restore our shipping by building it at home rather than by buying it
abroad ?

Mr. Low. Certainly, sir; my feeling is to have our ship-yards revived.
The skill acquired there would make us independent of foreign labor.
That has always been my feeling. I always had a desire to see our own
ship-yards restored to their usefulness, and to see men trained up in this
country so to make us independent of foreign skill and labor in that
regard. I suppose that it is the natural feeling of every one who has an
interest in American commerce to see American industry thrive in that
direction. Still, I think it would be better to resort to England for
steamers, rather than be ruled out entirely from the benefits of a very
profitable pursuit.

The CHAIRMAN. What effect do you think it would have on our com
mercial interests if we were to amend our navigation laws and go
abroad to buy our vessels ?

Mr. Low. It seems to me that at present the English can build much
more cheaply than ourselves, and that that policy would put off the time
when we should be independent of other nations. It would be pursuing
a course in reference to that particular industry of ship-building at vari
ance with that which is adopted in reference to all other American inter
ests. In regard to all other internal pursuits, we adhere to the policy of
protection ; but in reference to ship-building, we adhere at present to
one of oppression. We protect all other industries at the expense of
commerce.

The CHAIRMAN. Would the effect of purchasing our ships abroad be
to make them foreign in their character to a considerable extent?

Mr. Low. They would be foreign ships ; and I think they could build
them at present so much more cheaply than we can that there would be
little hope of reviving that industry among ourselves.

The CHAIRMAN. What I mean is, whether there would not be inter
ests of ownership on the other side which would make those ships to a
great extent foreign whether it would not necessitate a change of laws
as to officering and manning our ships, and whether our ships would not
be finally pretty much under the control of foreign interests?

Mr. Low. If Americans should buy ships abroad and put them under
the American flag,, we have men enough to command and man them, and
I do not know whether there would be any tendency to employ others
instead of Americans.

The CHAIRMAN. Why I ask that question is, that was submitted by
the Ship-owners Association of New York, in favor not only of foreign
ships, but of foreign officers and crews.

Mr. Low. I think that that is the sentiment of an alien, not of an
American. I cannot imagine that any American should wish to see for
eign ships where we hitherto had American ships, and to see foreign
commanders and sailors in place of Americans. Our sailors have been
always very largely foreigners, but our ship-masters and mates have been
generally Americans. There are enough of them awaiting employment
now, and every patriotic sentiment would urge their employment.

The CHAIRMAN. I suppose that that was a question of economy, as it
is in the purchase of ships?

Mr. Low. We have many men now idle who would be glad of employ
ment at a very moderate compensation. In former times we had no dis
position to employ foreigners in preference to Americans, when the laws
allowed it. We always had good commanders, and when wood was em
ployed in the manufacture of our ships, we had the sea. It was only
when the new condition came into force, steam instead of sailing ships,

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 49

and iron instead of wood, that we lost it, and then, I think, through the
policy of England in subsidizing steam lines, which took all the valuable
traffic and all the passengers. The English maintain their steamers by
ample subsidies ; our government does not. And, as I said before, the
propeller has taken the place of the side-wheeler, and the wooden ship
cannot bear the propeller ; therefore England now engrosses almost the
whole building of steamers.

The CHAIRMAN. You say that wooden ships cannot bear the propeller.
Is that on account of the strain ?

Mr. Low. The action of the propeller, I am told, is such that no wooden
vessel can stand it on the ocean. They do very well along the coast and
in still waters ; but I was told that on the Atlantic a wooden vessel can
not stand the action of the propeller. I think that Mr. White will tell
you the same thing. Therefore our steamers are driven from the ocean.
1 do not think myself that wooden fabrics would stand the strain.

Mr. CALKIN. I do not understand you to be in favjor of abrogating
the present navigation laws ?

Mr. Low. I have beeu always in favor of American interests.

Mr. CALKIN. You are one of our leading merchants, and I should
like that expression from you.

The CHAIRMAN. He has already given it while you were out.

Mr. Low read some proof-sheets of an article contributed by him to
Putnam s Magazine for December, which article is hereto annexed, as
follows :

SOVEREIGNTY OF THE SEAS.

An idea extensively prevails that the contest for supremacy on the ocean was virtu
ally closed with the victories of Trafalgar and the Nile. After the destruction of
the French fleets in the Mediterranean, it was indeed evident enough that no single
nation, nor all the maritime powers in the world combined, could successfully cope with
Great Britain on the sea. Throughout the waters of the globe the British ensign waved
triumphantly, the undisputed and unquestioned symbol of sovereignty. Down to the
time when the wars of Napoleon ceased the naval arm was used more as an auxiliary
to contending armies battling for dominion on the land than as a means of controlling
the commerce of the world. As an agent for crippling the strength of an adversary the
navy has always been employed ; while the lust for gain has stimulated an active cru
sade against private property in aid of a more direct national aim. Even now, when
commerce is so much extended, and the interests of all countries and all peoples are so
blended as to be inseparable, every effort to abolish privateering fails, and, when na
tions resort to war, merchant-ships, doubtless, will continue to be the prey of the
national cruiser and privateer alike.

The purpose of this article, however, is not to consider the &quot;usages of war,&quot; nor the
abuses to which war gives rise. Friend and foe have taught the United States a lesson
in this regard that will not soon be forgotten. It is our aim, rather, to show in this
paper that supremacy on the ocean in the interests of commerce was not so directly
sought, nor so effectually gained, by the vast and costly armaments of Great Britain in
the wars that preceded the present century, as it has been by the more peaceful and
inexpensive method steadfastly pursued by that country during the last thirty years.
Or, without undertaking to show, what it might be difficult to prove, that the contest
on the ocean has not always been waged by Great Britain to advance the interests of
her foreign commerce ; or, admitting this to have been the ultimate aim, and open com
munication with her distant colonies a nine qua nan, demanding the utmost exertion
of her naval power, it is still of paramount importance to mark the policy that has gov
erned her statesmen since the cessation of the continental wars. Whether for coast de
fense, or as a means of hostile attack, or to keep pace with the growing navies of other
maritime powers, England steadily adds to the number of her ships of war, never fal
tering in her purpose of holding, at any cost, the dominion of the sea. Let any who
doubt this visit her dock-yards and her channel fleets, and behold the majestic irou-clads.
formidable for their size, their armor, and their armament, as well as for their great
propelling power. The superiority of England in this class of vessels for purposes of
attack and defense it is not popular with us to admit. We are vain enough to assume
that against armored ships of the greatest magnitude and the most powerful batteries,
our slowly-moving monitors ; with two and four heavy guns, are a safe reliance. Be it ao !

4 N I

50 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Monitors have answered the purpose for which they were created ; and it is not in the
direction of her naval armaments that the policy of England demands onr present at
tention or imitation. Were it otherwise, our naval officers are abroad they are intel
ligent and observing and we can safely leave to the verdict of their judgment such
problems as only experts can solve.

From 1815 to 1835 peace reigned throughout the world, affording an opportunity to
all the nations bordering on the sea to enter into a friendly competition for the carry ing
trade of the nations. In the ensuing struggle the United States acquired a prestige
that was unexcelled ; and such was the skill of our mechanics, the abundance of our
material for the construction of ships, and the aptitude of our sons for the life of a
sailor, that our republic gained the command of the trade to and from Europe, and was
a, bold and successful competitor with Great Britain for the traffic between her own col
onies and the mother-country, as well as for that from China and other portions of the
East. A little later on, our clippers, outsailing the old-fashioned vessels, became mod
els for merchantmen ; and, notwithstanding the proverbial obstinacy of the English and
Scotch, they were alert enough to accept and adopt them.

But what a change since then has taken place, commencing in 1837 and 1838, but not
patent to the common eye till ten or fifteen years later on. England s maritime suprem
acy is so manifest now as to reflect our national humiliation ! How this is to come to
pass it is not difficult to explain ; but the explanation is mortifying and painful.

Many things have combined and worked together to produce the revolution. In the
chain of events resulting in the rapid decline of our commerce may be cited the fol
lowing, viz :

1st. A substitution of steamships for sailing-vessels ; this commenced about 1837- 38.

2d. The use of iron instead of wood in the construction of ships and steamers.

3d. The reaction from high rates of freight, because of the vast increase of tonnage
which the trade of California brought into being, the expulsion of sailing-vessels from
short ocean routes, and the consequent overcrowding of distant ports.

4th. The war of the rebellion, which raised up an insidious foe, and for five years
rendered the building and sailing of American ships a worse than profitless pursuit, and
which finally imposed a burden of taxes on all the material that enters into the con
struction of vessels, and so enhanced the price of labor and of seamen s wages as to make
competition with our great rival most unequal.

When it is borne in mind that the shipping interest was the only important interest
at the North that suffered by the war, and that other great interests have been benefited
rather than injured by the enactment of import and internal revenue laws, it seems
strange that Congress has done little or nothing to mitigate the burden on our external
commerce ; failing utterly to relieve it from th operation of laws that bear unjustly
on the mercantile class, and hence, injuriously on the community at large.

Under four distinct heads we have now stated what seem to be secondary causes of
the decline of our national commerce. The disturbed condition of our currency might
have been named after the fourth of the series, because it is the direct conseqiience of
our civil war. It is too important to be overlooked ; it is too well understood, and too
keenly felt, to require comment. Would that there were any disposition in the people
at large to correct, what so many profess to deplore, and yet do nothing to amend!
Unless a better spirit appears than hitherto has marked the deliberations of Congress,
this fruitful source of demoralization and disability must continue and stand out as a
harm and a hinderance to our commercial progress. The depreciation of the national
currency, considered in connection with the other reasons for the depression of our
commerce, serves to intensify the claim on our government for the renewal, on a more
generous scale, of subsidies to ocean mail steamers. Assuming, as we do, that the contest
lor supremacy on the ocean did not cease in 1815, but has taken a new form, nothing
has transpired to signalize the wisdom of British statesmen more striking than the
plan so successfully pursued of subsidizing lines of mail steamers to all important parts
of the world. The wisdom on their part would be manifest enough if not contrasted
with our own folly ; and our folly would be more endurable if we had not been misled
by the arguments of our free-trade adversary, plausibly presented, instead of being
guided by his example.

The astute Emperor of France disdains not to listen to English counsel, but, with a
judgment better than our own, imitates English example. Indeed, it is beautiful to
behold two hereditary foes, in loving obedience to the doctrine of &quot; free trade, 77 steam
ing side by side, in quest of .the silk of China and Japan competing in generous
rivalry for the trade of the East. And observe the consequences! By degrees Lyons
becomes the distributing mart instead of London, and English manufacturers close their
doors in view of the French competition. France returns the chalice to the lips of
England ! In the face of sfich results it must have amused the friend of Cobdeu the
renowned Ernperor when it was declared in Parliament that to receive proposals from
the Messageries Impe riales for the transportation of her Britannic Majesty s mails
would be &quot; free trade run \nad,&quot; and the sentiment was applauded to the echo! Eng
land was for free trade just so long as England could profit by it, and no longer.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 51

The application of steam as a motive power to ships on the ocean about 1837 and 183?
inaugurated a new era in maritime history, and the statesmen of England were quick
to discern the importance of the epoch. Almost immediately a contract for the trans
portation of British mails to the United States was entered into, being the first of a
system of contracts which has been persistingly extended till it has become world-
embracing. Lines of steamers to Canada, to the West Indies, to Brazil, to the Cape oJ
Good Hope, to Australia and New Zealand, to British India, China, and Japan, are
among the most important of those hitherto established. These have not all been
uniformly successful. In the loss of ships at sea several have been unfortunate, and
financial disaster sometimes has been imminent ; but under every discouragement the
British government has been faithful, sustaining by large and larger subsidies the
waning fortunes of the weak, and by most liberal concessions strengthening others to
resist either threatened or actual competition. From the outset, the vivifying effect
upon the commerce of England of these swift messengers to different countries was too
apparent to escape observation. It was seen that under another name an international
express system had been established which was taking to Great Britain the &quot; quick
orders &quot; and also the most enterprising traders, to seek in the well-supplied warehouses
of England the merchandise they needed, while returning steamers conveyed goods and
buyer, at once, to his own doors at home.

The results of this extended, well-organized, and regular system of international
transportation were soon apparent :

1st. In the creation of a class of unsurpassed steamers.

2d. In raising up a select body of seamen, loyal adherents to the service in which
they were reared, and ready both to man the transports so useful in peace, and to sus
tain the honor of their flag in the emergencies of war.

3d. In educating a corps of accomplished officers, all the while acquiring familiarity
with the navigable waters, ports, and harbors constantly visited and revisited.

4th. In perfecting the skilled mechanics of the realm in the use of iron, and its adap
tation to the rapidly-growing steam marine.

5th. In imparting a stimulus to the manufacturing industries of the kingdom, so
abounding in resources and talent, garnered up and held in reserve for new and
enlarged uses.

6th. In drawing to the bonded warehouses of London and Liverpool the products ol
every country and every clime, to be distributed, through largely increased facilities,
to the less favored nations and the waiting markets of the surrounding world.

It were easy enough to extend the recital of advantages immediately resulting from
the adoption of a policy in the pursuit of which British statesmen have never wavered.
But the record is long enough and amply suggestive.

When ten years or less had borne abounding testimony to the success of this policy
on the other side of the Atlantic, the American Congress was awakened from its slum
bers, and manifested a willingness to follow a lead that was so full of promise, and to
strike for a share in the prize that was not yet beyond our grasp. A subsidy was
finally granted to the &quot;Collins line,&quot; and we recall, Avith melancholy pleasure, the
outgoing and incoming of those noble ships, the Atlantic, Pacific, Baltic, Arctic, and
Adriatic, as they entered on their brief, brilliant, unfortunate, disastrous career. The
time of service was long enough to establish their excellence as sea-going vessels, and
the record of their passages will compare favorably with any similar number made in
later years. But misfortunes, came apace. The Arctic and &quot;Pacific both foundered at
sea the Arctic in consequence of a collision with a French steamer ; the Pacific, proba
bly, in consequence of a collision with an iceberg. There was bad management on
shore, and it is said injudicious applications were made to Congress for increased pay.
These things disheartened and disgusted the friends of the enterprise, and it came to
an untimely end. The failure of this line to justify public expectation proved a death
blow to the hopes of all who had looked to Congress for a more generous support.
Unlike British statesmen, our own had yielded a reluctant assent to a pressing popular
demand. The statesmen of Great Britain embraced with ardor a great opportunity,
and adhered to it with courage and fortitude as in the prophetic strength of a grand
inspiration. All are familiar with the sequel. Three hundred thousand immigrants
come annually to our shores in British-built steamers ; and thirty to fifty thousand
Americana cross and rccross the Atlantic, paying tribute in gold to the superior genius
of British statesmanship ; and it is come to pass, in the great contest for supremacy
on the ocean, that the &quot;stars and stripes&quot; drocp beneath the cross of St. George.

It is disheartening to pursue the topic; but hope is not wholly banished. Amid
the host of lawyers, farmers, and politicians that throng the halls of Congress there
are many men of enlarged minds and noble impulses American in name and in heart.
It is not too late for them to ponder the lesson so dearly learned, and to fight out the
battle once more on the old line.

Brazil shares with our country the merit of sustaining by a feeble subsidy a number
of steam-packets, which, sailing monthly, touch here and there along the South Amer
ican coast. The Pacific mail, stretching out seven thousand miles across the ocean

52 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

whose name it bears, being subsidized by Congress, still lives, fulfilling all reasonable
expectations. But the subsidy it receives from the Post Office Department of $500,000
is wholly inadequate to an extension of the service. At anytime it may be driven from
the fiehlby the Peninsular and Oriental line of steamers, whose contract with the British
government for carrying her Majesty s mails has lately been renewed, with the subsidy
increased to 500,000, a sum greater than $3,000,000 of our currency. In this connec
tion, let it not be forgotten that when Cunard wanted to build the Persia and Scotia
to run off the Collins steamers, after a careful investigation by a parliamentary com
mittee, the contract with his company was renewed years in advance of the period of
its expiration. Some &quot;blue book&quot; that is yet to meet our eyes may enlighten us in
regard to the spirit and arguments that animated her Majesty s ministers in this
increase of pay to the Peninsular and Oriental line.

The recent completion of our great continental railway imparts a fresh interest to
the subject of this article. The munificent appropriation of sixty millions of dollars iu
aid of a single work of internal improvement, a work, too, that comes in direct com
petition with the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, presents in niggardly contrast the
annual appropriation of less than one million dollars to facilitate the transmission of
the mails on all the great highways of the ocean, when, as we have seen, so much else
depends upon the venture.

About two hundred millions in gold, annually, are derived from duties on imports ;
fifteen or twenty millions are voted, annually, for the maintenance of a navy ; and one
of the declared purposes of the national income is to protect our external commerce.

Indirectly much good results from the expenditure of this income in ways that have
been suggested in the course of this paper ; but far better returns would be obtained
if subsidies were largely and wisely bestowed in building up and sustaining lines oi
steamers on all the great ocean routes. Let the national money be so spent as to
restore, if possible, our lost prestige on the sea.

The foe to our commercial development is in cabinets, and not in hostile cruisers ;
money, instead of guns, is the instrument employed to secure supremacy on the ocean ;
and, in these modern days, victory is won under the banner of peace.

When our legislators cease to be mere politicians and learn to be statesmen, they
will heed the voices that come up from the sea. Then the &quot;stars and stripes,&quot; floating
at the peaks of our transatlantic steamers, will once more gladden our eyes, and the
mortification of the present hour will give place to a pride like that of our fathers, in
which some of us shared in our youthful days !

Mr. POILLON made a statement to the committee. He said that be
was a ship-owner and ship-builder in New York. He was engaged in
the construction of wooden vessels, and was part owner in some twenty-
four vessels. His views had been fully expressed previously by Mr.
Stirners. The views expressed by Mr. Stiiners were generally correct in
relation to the conduct of our shipping interests and the mode of its
revival. He should like, however, to correct the impression that the
Ship-owners Association reflected the views of the ship-owners generally
of New York. That was not so. He had in his hand the constitution
and by-laws of the Ship-owners Association, which contained all the
names of its members, to tbe number of one hundred and forty-one. Of
that one hundred and forty one there were forty who owned foreign
ships entirely, and whose interests were not identical with American
interests in any way whatever. Although among the remainder there
were some of the most respectable ship-owners of New York, yet there
were also many others whose business was confined entirely to the con
signment of foreign vessels, and who were thus identified with foreign
ships. He therefore considered that that association was not a fair ex
ponent of the ship-owners of New York or of the country. Many of the
most respectable ship-owners, among others Messrs. Low, Nesmith &
Sons, E. P. Buck & Co., and many others whose names he could not now
recall, had no connection with that association. Several ship-owners
connected with the association entertained entirely different views from
those expressed yesterday, and were most strongly opposed to the re
peal of the navigation laws. He thought that all that the ship-building
interest of the country required was a drawback of duties on all the
materials that enter into the construction of ships, particularly of the
duties on iron, copper, and cordage. The duty on copper at present was

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 53

a prohibitory duty, preventing any importation of copper, and compelling
American ship-builders to pay some seven or eight cents per pound for
copper more than the English ship-builders paid. The duties on iron,
he believed, were from thirty to thirty-five per cent., operating to that ex
tent against the American ship-building interests. As to labor, although
the American workmen were paid more than the English, yet he thought
that the superior skill of the American mechanics more than offset the
difference in wages.

Mr. HOLMAN. You say that the duty imposed on copper results in
actual prohibition $

Mr. POILLON. Yes, sir ; the act of last winter is a prohibitory tariff so
far as copper is concerned. It acts very seriously on the ship-repairing
interest. The ships that require to be recoppered will take a freight
which they know is not profitable, and sometimes where they know
that there will be real loss upon it, for the purpose of getting to England
in order to make a saving on their copper ; thus not only cutting off the
revenue that might be derived by this country from a moderate tariff
such as existed before the war, but also seriously injuring our mechan
ical interests in the coppering work being done in England which should
be done in this country. Not only was the coppering work thus lost to
this country, but also a large amount of repairs, which generally go with
the coppering of vessels, such as rigging and carpenter work. It strikes
at a dozen different kinds of mechanical interests.

Mr. HOLMAN. How does that occur, inasmuch as the duty on copper
does not exceed that on iron I

Mr. WELLS. It does exceed that on iron.

Mr. HOLMAN. Very slightly.

Mr. WELLS. The duty on iron is thirty -three or thirty-four per cent.,
and on copper seventy-five per cent.

Mr. POILLON. The copper is furnished in England at about l^d. per
pound, whereas here it is twenty-seven cents.

Mr. HOLMAN. Then the practical result is actually to exclude copper
from importation I

Mr. POILLON. Yes, sir. It operates also very seriously against our
docking interests. We have the best docking facilities in this port that
there are in the world. We can take up the largest vessels with the
most expedition. There are millions of dollars invested in the docking
interests in this port, and this prohibitory tariff on copper strikes them
very seriously.

Mr. WELLS. What effect would the imposition of a duty upon all
foreign-built ships coming to this country have upon our commerce 1 ?

Mr. POILLON. That would cause great excitement, and foreign gov
ernments would be inclined to put the same duty upon American ships,
so that I think it would not have the desired effect.

Mr. WELLS. Then the only remedy, you think, is to allow drawbacks
upon the materials used in the construction of ships I

Mr. POILLON. Yes, sir ; to put our mechanics on the same footing
with the English mechanics.

Mr. WELLS. In the event of Congress passing a law of that kind,
what would be your opinion as to the expediency of removing all obsta
cles in the way of purchasing ships abroad and affording them Ameri
can registration?

Mr. POILLON. I think that, after we once got a start, we would require
out a short time to be able to compete with England in ship-building,
and American ship-owners would find that ships could be built as cheaply

54 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

here as iii England $ and, wherever that has been so, American vessels
have always been preferred. .. .

Mr. WELLS. Under our present law a great number of ships owned
by Americans are sailing under the English flag, and that would bring
those ships back under the American Sag, and would, of course, give
our commerce more respectability abroad as well as at home?

Mr. POILLON. It occurs to me that all that the ship-building interest
of this country requires is to be put upon the same footing with the Eng
lish. If free trade in foreign bottoms y/ere to be allowed, and not free
trade in ships 7 materials at the same time, so that the two should go
hand in hand together, the result would be that our coasting trade would
be swamped with English bottoms before we could defend ourselves.
They would be nominally held by Americans, but in reality they would
be held by British subjects and would be controlled by British capital ;
and our immense coasting trade, the only thing of value left to us, would
be swept entirely from us.

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Stimers expressed the opinion that if drawbacks
were allowed to the extent of the duty on materials entering into the
construction of ships, and if free trade in ships were allowed at the same
time those two measures going together, without any reference to ad
mitting foreign -built bottoms to our coasting trade our commerce and
ship-building interest would revive. What would be your view on that
point, taking those two measures together ?

Mr. POILLON. I think that they ought not to go together at the same
time. I think that the ship-building interest ought to have the prefer
ence, so as to give sufficient start to put itself on a fair footing, so as to
make the responsibility equal. After the ship-building interest having
this advantage for two or three years, then the whole trade should be
opened ; but I think we should have a little chance first to recover our
selves.

Mr. CALKIN. Let us have your idea of the time required again more
definitely.

Mr. POILLON. Two years would be ample. What Americans cannot
do in two years they never can do.

Mr. HOLMAN. If you connect these two measures, free trade in foreign-
built vessels and drawbacks on materials entering in to ship-building, and
if you give American-built vessels exclusively the whole coastwise trade,
how would that affect commerce, the whole three going together from
the beginning?

Mr. POILLON. I think that that is all that our people could reasona
bly ask for.

Mr. WELLS. Do you not think that allowances of reasonable subsidies
to new lines of steamers, in connection with those other measures, would
have a tendency to increase our commercial interests ?

Mr. POILLON. I think that that is the only way we can ever recover
the European trade ; but it would not be requisite in regard to other
trade. The English have such an immense start over us in the Euro
pean trade that that is the only way we can ever place ourselves even
with them, even if we should build ships as cheaply as they do.

Mr. WELLS. Do you not think that our business men here would give
American bottoms the preference?

Mr. POILLON. American merchants have not the same unity of action
that the English merchants have. Capital is more abundant in Eng
land,&quot; and the English are content with less interest for their money.
For any enterprise that looks like paying at all there never is any lack
of capital there. The English and Erench have pursued the same policy

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 55

in the South American trade. They subsidize vessels to a large extent
in the Brazilian trade and in the trade to the west coast of Africa, and
wherever there is an opening to build a commerce, there they subsidize
ships. The result is that in the Brazilian trade the French lines are
superior to the English, as they have more encouragement.

Mr. WELLS. The French subsidize their ships heavier and have finer
ships?

Mr. POILLON. Yes, sir ; that is the opinion I have heard expressed
by Brazilians of them that the French ships are preferred to the Eng
lish.

Mr. CALKIN. Then I understand from you that the English and
French governments are subsidizing their steamers running to South
America and to other ports more than they do those running to this port?

Mr. POILLON. Yes, sir; that is done to get this Brazilian trade. That
has always been the policy of England. It was so in relation to this
country. It was the means employed to crush out the Collins line to
gether with the opposition of Vanderbilt, who failed to get a subsidy
for his line at that time, and then turned and helped to crush the Collins
line.

Mr. CALKIN. The English government formerly subsidized the Cu-
nard line more than it does now ?

Mr. POILLON. Yes ; the line is now more able to take care of itself.
But the English government would have supported that line to any ex
tent rather than see it broken down.

Mr. HOLMAN. You are not able, I suppose, to state the extent to which
the English encourage shipping by subsidies ?

Mr. POILLON. No, sir; I have seen the amounts that are paid by the
mail department, but I have not them in my mind at present. The
English government is more liberal with lines to South America and
other countries, than with lines to this country at present.

Mr. HOLMAN. You are not able, I suppose, to state the extent of its
subsidies to this trade?

Mr. POILLON. No, sir ; I am not. We would require something more
than free trade in ships in order to put us on a par with England.
Their policy is to allow a drawback upon all the articles that a ship re
quires for her outfit. They are taken out of bond duty free. An Eng
lish ship would still have a very great advantage over our vessels if our
vessels were not entitled to the same privilege.

Mr. HOLMAN. Does that system prevail generally among commercial
nations?

Mr. POILLON. I am not prepared to state how it is in France; but my
impression is that it does, because the French have been copying in a
measure the English laws so far as they relate to commerce.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would that system naturally exist with any nation
that was not peculiarity a commercial nation?

Mr. POILLON. I think not.

Mr. HOLMAN. Where commerce is the main object, such a policy
would be natural and proper enough?

Mr. POILLON. Yes, sir. The fostering of commerce has been the
source of England s wealth, and they have always had that in view.

Mr. HOLMAN. I understood you to express the idea that if free trade
were allowed in foreign-built vessels at the same time as a drawback of
duties on the materials used in the construction of ships here, and if a
preference were given in the domestic trade to American-built vessels,
those three measures going together would revive our shipping and com
mercial interests ?

56 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. POILLON. Yes, sir.

Mr. George Opdyke, banker, and vice-president of the New York
Chamber of Commerce, came before the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee would like to hear any suggestions
that you* may desire to make in reference to the subject of inquiry,
which is as to the causes operating to depress our navigation interests
and as to the remedies needed in order to revive them.

Mr. OPDYKE. My reflections on the subject of the depression of our
shipping interest have led me to the conclusion that the present de
pression is mainly due to three causes : The first is and perhaps in as
large a degree as any other the substitution of iron for wooden vessels,
and of steam for sailing vessels. Great Britain has a great advantage
over this country in the lower cost of iron and in her larger experience
in its manufacture. The English can build of iron much cheaper than
we can. When vessels were built mainly of wood we had the advantage
of the English in consequence of the superior abundance and cheapness
of that material in this country. In machinery, as well as in steam, they
have the advantage. The cheaper labor there for running vessels gives
them also another advantage. The second cause is the high duty charged
upon such foreign materials as enter into the construction of our ships.
Ships, after they are built in this country, have to compete, without any
protection, with the ships of other countries. If we charge a high duty
on the materials used in the construction of our ships, their cost is neces
sarily enhanced to that extent. And after they are finished, unlike our
domestic manufactures that are sold at home, our ships enter on the
ocean and have to compete, even, without any protection, with the
vessels of other countries. That I regard as a most onerous exaction
upon our shipping interest, and one that has done much to cripple it.
Then there is another cause, which is probably temporary, but which,
for the time being, has been more potent than either of the others named :
It is the effect of the premium upon specie. We know that everything
bought with our currency at home, including real estate, commodities of
all kinds, and the price of labor, which is the best criterion of all, is on
an average at least seventy-five per cent, higher than it was under our
convertible currency ; so that we are building ships and paying for mate
rials in currency at an enhanced cost of seventy-five per cent., and send
ing them out to a trade where the business is done upon a coin basis,
but where we do it on a currency basis. You see at once what an enor
mous disadvantage we labor under in competition with ships built for
coin, and the earnings of which are in coin. The difference between the
premium on gold and the depression of currency some thirty-five or
forty per cent. is an absolute loss to that interest. That, after a time,
will be corrected. The difficulty has existed since the war in consequence
of our dropping the use of coin as currency, save in a few of our transac
tions, and lessening the demand for coin at home. Our securities have
gone abroad to pay the adverse balance of trade, so that the demand
for the precious inetals in this country has not been equal to the supply,
and this has kept the premium far below the price of other things.
That, in brief, is my view of the cause of the present depression.

The CHAIRMAN. What measures would you suggest for the improve
ment of the navigation interest?

Mr. OPDYKE. The first advantage to the shipping interest would be
to exempt from duty all materials entering into the construction of ships.
I have long felt that that was due to the shipping interest, and without
it I do not think that we can ever fully or successfully compete with
foreign-built vessels. The last cause will correct itself very soon. It

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 57

does not need any legislation. The other cause is more difficult to over
come, and I fear it will be very many years before we can build steam
ships of iron, such as are now controlling nearly all the ocean trade,
as cheaply as they can be built in Europe. One remedy has been sug
gested, and that is to permit foreign-built vessels to have American reg
istration, and to make absolute free trade in ships. As a free-trader, I
am inclined to believe that that would be the true policy ; but so long
as protection is the policy of the country, we can scarcely expect an ex
ception to be made in favor of the shipping interest. It is one of the
last things that the American mind will accept. But if we had a policy
of absolute free trade, which I think would result in great benefit to the
country, (not to do it at once, but to do it gradually,) then I would em
brace with it ship-building, and the purchase and the sale of ships
abroad. The granting of subsidies is another remedy. While I am op
posed in theory to all government subsidies, it would seem to be essen
tial, if we desire to control the maritime commerce that properly belongs
to us on important lines, that our government should, to some extent,
follow the policy of Great Britain in that respect, as otherwise we can
not probably successfully compete with her. How far that policy should
go I am not prepared to say. In theory I am opposed to it altogether
But from the present crippled condition of our commerce, if we desire
to regain the position that we once held, I am inclined to believe that it
would be good policy for the government in proper cases, where valua
ble lines of steamers should be established between this and other im
portant ports of other nations, to meet Great Britain with her own
weapons and grant subsidies in some form.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to say that you are in favor both
of exempting materials used in the construction of ships from duty, and
also of amending the navigation laws, so as to allow the registration of
foreign ships?

Mr. OPDYKE. As an ultra free-trader I should be in favor of that ;
but that is not the policy of our country, and I should not be in favor
of it unless it is adopted prospectively as the policy of the government
in reference to other things. I mean absolute free trade.

The CHAIRMAN. At first you would be in favor of the exemption of
materials used in ship-building, and you would let all the other things
follow ?

Mr. OPDYKE. Yes; my policy would be to abandon gradually the
whole protective policy of the country not suddenly, which would be
disastrous to many interests and unjust to them, but by a system of
gradations extending over ten or twenty years, so as ultimately to get
out of this false system altogether. The navigation laws stand upon
the principle of reciprocity and are an absolute necessity for every mari
time nation. We cannot, for example, permit other vessels to coine and
join in our coasting trade, and to come into our ports and be exempt
from the charges and duties to which our vessels are subject in the ports
of other countries, except on the principle of reciprocity. It would never
do, therefore, to repeal the navigation laws, even with absolute free
trade. They are always necessary.

Mr. HOLMAN. Taking those three subjects in connection : the rebate
of the taxes, internal and external, on materials entering into the con
struction of ships ; free trade in ships built abroad ; and the giving to
ships built in America the preference in our domestic trade what effect
would those three measures together have, probably, upon our commerce?

Mr. OPDYKE. I take it that they would give us the supremacy of the
sea. The American people have more aptitude for maritime commerce

58 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

than any other people in the world, and all that they want is an oper
field and fair competition to win that supremacy. I mean by the
&quot; supremacy of the sea&quot; that we should have a larger maritime commerce
than any nation in the world.

The CHAIRMAN. What effect would those measures have upon oui
ship-building interests ?

Mr. OPDYKE. My impression is that they would greatly diminish the
building of ships in this country for a period. How long that period
would last would depend on circumstances.

The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion, is there not some protection needed
for a period to our ship-building interest from foreign competition, in
order to overcome the disadvantages under which it has labored for a
few years past, and the advantages which foreigners have acquired by
that condition of things ?

Mr. OPDYKE. In my opinion there is no means of protecting the ship
building interest successfully except by the granting of bounties. Our
ships have to compete with the ships of other nations, and inasmuch as
we have not the same advantages for building ships as cheaply in this
country as they have in Europe, the only way that the government, by
its interference, can annul that advantage possessed by foreigners, would
be by the granting of a bounty.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean by &quot;the granting of a bounty ,&quot; the exemp
tion from duty of the materials employed in the construction of ships ?

Mr. OPDYKE. That in itself would not be sufficient at present, on
account of the superior advantages of Europe in the construction of iron
vessels and of steam machinery, and in consequence of the cheaper labor
there, and also in consequence of the marked difference between the
value of coin and paper money. The purchasing powers are different.

The CHAIRMAN. The statement of steam engineers yesterday was that
we can now build steam-engines as cheaply as they can be built in
Europe.

Mr. OPDYKE. I am not sufficiently informed in regard to that ; but
judging from all other fabrics of metal, such as rails for railroads, and a
thousand other things of import paying a very heavy duty on tjiem and
competing with our home productions, I am satisfied that England has
great advantages over us. The rebate of duties upon foreign materials
entering into the construction of ships is no protection whatever. It
simply puts the American builder upon the same platform with his foreign
competitor. The ships would cost our people precisely the same as they
cost the people of England. And then, besides, we labor under the dis
advantage of a difference of thirty-five per cent, between the purchasing
power of gold and of paper money.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do the nations which admit foreign-built vessels to
their registration exclude them from their domestic trade !

Mr. OPDYKE. I am ignorant of the policy of other nations in regard
to registration ; but if England and France do admit foreign-built ships
to registration, I suppose they put them on the same basis as their own
ships in regard to the coasting trade.

Mr. HOLMAN. Supposing that to be a fact, taking into consideration
the extent of our coasting trade in connection with our foreign commerce,
if you exempt from, duty the materials entering into the construction of
ships, and give American-built ships the exclusive control of the domes
tic trade, and supposing the duty on the main material entering into the
construction of ships amounted to thirty-five per cent., would not the
protection to the American builder be equal to forty-five per cent, in the
construction of ships?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 59

Mr. OPDYKE. If I properly apprehend the question, I cannot say that
it would. There is another view, suggested by your question, which is
a very important one : If we should admit foreign -built vessels to register
here and put them on an equality with our own American-built vessels
in our coasting trade, I think the effect would not fail to be injurious to
American ship-building.

Mr. HOLMAN. Can you state the relation which our domestic shipping
interests bear at this time to our foreign shipping interest ?

Mr. OPDYKE. I suppose that our coastwise trade is at least three-fourths
of our whole trade, because our shipping interest in foreign commerce
is very small.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever had anything to do with the building
of ships, or have you ever contracted to have them built for you ?

Mr. OPDYKE. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever owned or sailed ships !

Mr. OPDYKE. I have had a very small interest in ships, but I have
not at present. I believe if anything is done in the way of admitting
foreign-built vessels to registration, it should be on the condition that
they should be only employed in the foreign commerce. I do not believe
that the government or the people will ever permit foreign-built vessels
to participate in our domestic trade. That is a prize of our own which
we have a right to make the most of.

Mr. HOLMAN. Agricultural people, however, may take one view of
that subject, and the strictly commercial and manufacturing interests of
the country may take a different view.

NEW YORK, October 16, 18G9.

Mr. HOWLAND, of the firm ofHowland & Frothingham, shipping mer
chants of New York, stated as his opinion that the loss of American
commerce resulted from various causes : First, that there is less carry
ing than heretofore ; second, that there is a superabundant supply of
tonnage in proportion to the business ; and third, on account of the
accident of the late civil war, which gave to foreigners an advantage in
shipping business, and in fact gave them the track for the time being,
and which he believed they would always keep. He did not see any
thing to prevent it. Foreigners could build their ships cheaper than
Americans, and could sail them cheaper, and their ships, he thought,
were better managed. They had better seamen, and better officers, as a
class, than Americans. Their iron ships were improving, whereas
American wooden vessels were growing old and out of date. Iron was
superseding wood for ships, and must take the place of wood for the
reason that it was much more economical. It would be some years, he
thought, before the United States would be able to cope with Great
Britain in building iron ships, because the English had had a longtime
to organize and to systematize their business, so that they could now
build ships almost in a day. He was a ship-owner and had been a ship
master. His ships had always sailed under the American flag. They
were American-built wooden ships. He had no iron ships.

The CHAIRMAN. What advantage do you consider the iron ship has
over the wooden ship ?

Mr. HOWLAND. Economy throughout. An iron ship carries her cargo
much safer and with less damage. The only in convenience is the not
being able to metal the bottom. But there is no wear and tear. They
are twenty-year ships.

The CHAIRMAN. Is not the matter of fouling the bottoms of iron
ships a serious one ?

60 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. HOWLAND. Yes; but they are getting over it. Barnacles will
grow on the bottoms of iron ships very rapidly in tropical climates.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand you to say that the English sail
their ships cheaper than we do?

Mr. ROWLAND. No, not cheaper. They carry more men than we do.
They are required by law to have twenty-five per cent, more men than
we carry. They can sail cheaper because they buy all their outfits in
bond, free of duty ; and not only that, but their wages are lower. I do
not see that it is possible for us to compete with them under our present
federal and State laws. So long as sailor landlords here have charge of
manning our ships they have it all their own way. and we cannot expect
wages to be any lower than now. A ship-owner has no control of his
vessel in that respect. My impression is that it will be some years be
fore we can compete fairly with foreign countries.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that if the materials entering into
the construction of vessels were admitted free of duty, we could build
ships here in competition with English ship-builders 1

Mr. HOWLAND. We could, after a certain length of time ; but I think
it would require a few years first, to build up our prestige again. We
must use machinery in building iron ships, and it will be some time
before we are fairly started. Then, again, there is another difficulty to
contend with. The shipping interest is not a favorite interest with
investors. On the contrary, it is probably the poorest interest. No
man will invest in a ship unless it pays him at least as much interest
as other investments ; and as to outsiders, who used to own small in
terests in ships, you can hardly find any person now in the city of New
York to make such an investment, because it is considered a poor one.
A man puts his money into a ship, and there it must remain. He puts
it entirely out of his own hands, and has not the least power over it.

The CHAIRMAN. Has it not been usual for ship-builders to get up par
ties to make a company for the ownership of the vessel 1

Mr. HOWLAND. That was done not so much by the builder as by the
agents. The agent would endeavor to make up capital for the ship.
The builder would generally take an interest in it. There Av&amp;gt;uld be
generally eight or ten owners of the ship ; but now it is almost impos
sible to get any man, who knows the history of our shipping interests
for the last six or eight or ten years, to put his money into a ship. There
is nothing to warrant him in doing it. There is no encouragement. I
think, however, that if all the duties were removed from ship-building
materials, and if ship s stores could be taken out of bond free of duty,
these measures would be the best that could be adopted.

Mr. CALKIN. Previous to the war, when ships could be built as cheap
here as in England, and when the carrying trade was gogd, is it not a
fact that, all along our sea-coast and in our large seaport cities, there
were many men who amassed large fortunes in running ships ?

Mr. HOWLAND. Not large fortunes. Many have made comfortable
fortunes. I do not know of any one who made a large fortune in this
city by running ships, whatever may have been the case in the East.
But what has been is evidently not Avhat is now, or what is likely to be.
I do not see any encouragement for building ships, except we can build
them and sail them as cheap as other nations. And we are worse off in
that respect in regard to steamers than we are in regard to sailing ves
sels, for there is the strongest competition in steamers.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you be in favor of an abrogation of the nav
igation laws as a means of restoring our shipping interest ?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 61

Mr. ROWLAND. I should not. I should be in favor of throwing off all
restrictions and duties on building materials.

The CHAIRMAN. You would be in favor rather of building ships at
home than of buying them from abroad ?

Mr. ROWLAND. Certainly. The foreigners have got our carrying
trade now ; and if we pay them for making our ships, and even after
that cannot compete with them for the carrying trade, we would be
worse off than we are now. Then, again, that would endanger our
coasting trade, for, once they get in the entering-wedge, we do not
know where they would stop. The right to buy and register foreign-
built ships would benefit a certain class of people, such as commission
merchants and shipping agents for British ship-owners ; but it would
not benefit our mechanics or ship-owners. On the contrary, it would be
a prejudice to our coasting trade, which has saved our shipping interest
for the last five or six years.

Mr. HOLMAN. What would be the effect on our commerce alone (with
out reference to the question of ship-building) of allowing foreign built
vessels to obtain American registers, and of excluding them from the
coastwise trade f

Mr. HOWL AND. It would increase competition.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would it increase largely ship-owning in the United
States ?

Mr. HOWLAND. I do not think it would ; because I think there is
already tonnage enough for the business of the world. I do not believe
that we would increase our tonnage ; but, at the same time, many ves
sels might come under the American flag.

Mr. HOLMAN. Suppose that a duty of twenty-five per cent, (the lowest
average of duties on manufactures) were imposed on vessels purchased
abroad by American citizens, so as to entitle them to American registry,
would such a policy increase the ship-owning interest in the United
States?

Mr. HOWLAND. I should think not, because that would bring ships
quite as high as they could be built for at home.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you know any good reason why a different protect
ive policy should be extended to the ship-building interest from that
extended to any other manufacturing interest in this country ?

Mr. HOWLAND. I do not. I think myself that the allowance of draw
back of duties on ship-building materials would be inconsistent, and an
exception to the general rule. I dp not think that we have a right to
claim free trade in ships more than in anything else.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is there any national interest connected with the sub
ject at all, except it may be that of having facilities for the construction
of vessels for war purposes in case of emergency ? Is there any other
reason to discriminate in favor of that particular branch of industry in
preference to others ?

Mr. HOWLAND. I do not see any.

Mr. HOLMAN. To what extent ought it to be the policy of a nation
like this to afford peculiar protection to the ship-building industry, with
reference to securing available means for the prompt construction of
war- vessels ?

Mr. HOWLAND. I should think to no great extent at this time, because
high wages will bring all the men that we want for our navy.

Mr. HOLMAN. Supposing that iron vessels supersede entirely wooden
vessels, (as may possibly be the result in the course of time,) in the
event of an emergency and necessity for the rapid construction of
ships taking into consideration the various branches of industry con-

62 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

nected with iron manufactures if the government did not specially pro
tect its ship-building interests, would there be a trouble in the construc
tion of ships resulting from the absence of skilled workmen in that
branch of industry f

Mr. HOWLAND. Yes ; I should think that that might have an effect,
because it would spread into other pursuits all over the country the
mechanics now engaged in ship-building, so that the government could
not avail itself of their services.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is the art of ship-building so peculiar and exclusive
that you could not readily get together bodies of skilled workmen to
construct ships, even if they had not been specially employed in that
particular branch of industry ?

Mr. HOWL AND. I take it for granted that all house carpenters, after
a little practice, could go in and assist in building ships. Still, every
man to his business and trade. I do not apprehend, however, that it
would affect the government much, one way or other, whether we build
iron ships or wooden ships. If ships were to be built rapidly, they
would be probably wooden ships, because iron ships cannot be built so
rapidly.

The CHAIRMAN. If I understand Mr. Holman s question, it is whether
there is any real necessity for a nation to have an educated class of
skilled workmen for the construction of ships, or whether that is a mat
ter that can be improvised at once, at any time whether ship-building
is really an art to be cultivated and that requires time and experience,
or whether workmen in any other business can be set to \vork at it?

Mr. HOWLAND. I should think it necessary to have men trained to
the business.

The CHAIRMAN. We have always been a ship-building nation ?

Mr. HOWLAND. Always.

Mr. HOLMAN. And would be, under any policy ?

Mr. HOWLAND. Undoubtedly.

Mr. JAMES W. ELWELL, a member of the Ship-owners Association,
stated that he had been a ship-owner and a ship-agent for over thirty years.
During the Mexican war and the famine in Ireland there had been a
great stimulus given to ship-building, and American tonnage had in
creased very rapidly, because the few ships then employed were finding
remunerative business. Up to 1854- 56 so many people entered into the
building of ships that the market became overstocked and the owners
suffered great losses. Then the commercial panic of 185 7 depreciated
the shipping business very much. Afterward a market was found for
American shipping in England, on the continent, and in the East Indies.
This, and the business resulting from the new article of guano, again
stimulated the building of ships. Up to the commencement of the late
war the size and number of American ships had been increasing, and
finer ships were being built. During the war the foreign demand for
American ships increased, owing, a good deal, to the difference in the
value of gold and currency, and a large number of ships, especially
those advanced in years, were sold abroad. Very few ships were built
here at the same time, on account of the great cost of materials and
labor; and as, in addition to these causes, many ships had naturally
been lost, American tonnage had decreased very materially perhaps
fifty per cent. The burden of the ship-owners now consisted in the
increased cost of building and equipping vessels, and in the increased
expense of running them. The present expense of the labor part
loading and unloading vessels and of the mechanical part, for repairs,
was, on an average, two hundred or three hundred per cent, over what

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 63

it was before the war. For instance, the stevedore s bill, which nsed to
be, say, $500, would be now from $1,200 to $1,500.

The CHAIRMAN remarked that that applied to all vessels, native and
foreign.

Mr. EL WELL assented, but remarked that foreign vessels kept their own
crews, and did the work with them, whereas American vessels did not.
Then the cost of repairs had increased so largely that the yearly in
surance on a ship, which was formerly from seven to eight per cent., was
now from twelve to fourteen per cent. The cost of building vessels now
was not so great in proportion as it was during the war. Ships that
cost, during the war, $100 per ton in currency, could now be built for
from $65 to $70. His impression was, that if there were a drawback
of duties allowed on all ship-building materials, American ship-builders
could build ships and make a small profit on them. Then the ship
owner should be allowed, as in other nations, to buy his outfit and
equipments, including provisions, in bond. Then he thought that
Americans could compete with foreigners in the carrying trade of the
world. At present the largest proportion of the repairs of American
ships is done abroad, and outfits of all kinds were purchased abroad,
thus causing large American expenditures to be made on the other side
instead of at home. Every two or three years a ship required a general
overhauling, and this was done abroad now, as well by American as by
foreign vessels, taking a large amount of employment from American
mechanics and giving it to foreign mechanics.

The CHAIRMAN inquired whether foreign vessels had any advantage in
that respect over American vessels running in the same trade, inasmuch
as the former had to employ American mechanics just as much as the
latter had to employ foreign mechanics.

Mr. KLWELL replied that the ship-owner made repairs on his ship
where he could do them most cheaply, but that still, as a general thing,
an American ship-owner preferred to have his repairs done, if possi
ble, at home, even at an advanced cost, because he could have them
done under his own- eye and supervision. The item of drawing stores
and supplies free of duty was a very important matter to ship-owners.
Americans had that privilege in England, but were liable to be called
upon at home to pay duty on any excess of stores that they might have
on board.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the remission of duties on ship
building materials would tend to restore American shipping ?

Mr. ELWELL. I think it would, very materially. It would produce an
interest in ship-building which would grow as fast as the country would
require it.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you in favor of the repeal of the navigation
laws as a means of restoring our commerce ?

Mr. ELWELL. Not at present. I do not think that the country is pre
pared to take that measure yet. I think it could have been done years
ago with more propriety than it could be now. And it may again, years
hence. Still, there might be an import duty imposed on vessels the
same as on merchandise. But even that would be objectionable, as it
would burden commerce with a great many old vessels at low cost,
unless there was a specific duty imposed of so much per ton, without
regard to the age or quality of the vessel. This, too, would be liable to
a great deal of fraud and of objection.

Mr. HOLMAN. To what extent, under that policy, would our people
become ship-owners more than they are now ?

Mr. ELWELL. It is difficult to answer that question, as I think that a

64 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

large portion of our ships might be owned in other nations, though
really sailing under the American flag.

The CHAIRMAN. Then you think that it would lead to foreign owner
ship?

Mr. ELWELL. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. For the purpose of obtaining the benefit of oui
coastwise trade ?

Mr. ELWELL. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Supposing our coastwise trade to be at present equal
to three-fourths of our entire commerce carried on by American citizens,
how would these three measures, taken together the relief to the ship
builder to the extent of a rebate of internal and external duties on all
materials entering into the construction of ships, free trade in foreign-built
vessels, only excluding them from the coastwise trade, and giving to the
home-built ships the exclusive right to that trade affect, first, the com
merce of the country, and second, the ship-building interest ? Would
they promote or diminish either ?

Mr. ELWELL. They would promote the commerce of the country, and
they would promote the ship-building interest, if the time for allowing
foreign-built ships to be owned and registered here were postponed until
our own ship-builders could commence operations. If that time were
not postponed, foreigners would come in at once and fill up all the
gaps in the way of commercial lines from place to place, before oui
people were prepared. I think that, in the course of a few years, our
people would be prepared, and that then we could compete with other
nations in building ships, whether with free trade or not.

Mr. HOLMAN. Taking into account the rebate of tax on materials
entering into the construction of ships internal revenue as well as
external and the exclusive benefit of the domestic commerce to Ameri
can-built vessels, what would be the approximate extent of protection to
the American ship-builder resulting from these two things together ?

Mr. ELWELL. It would vary from ten to fifteen per cent, on the value
of the ship. It would be more on iron vessels than on wooden ones,
because there would be a greater rebate of duty on the former. It would
not be over from ten to fifteen per cent. Our labor here is higher than
it is abroad. Our ship-builders are ready to contract for a ship of one
thousand tons, and would be satisfied with a profit of from $2,000 to
$3,000 for their superintendence and the use of their tools and yards.

Mr. WELLS. Have you any means of knowing the proportions of our
domestic and foreign commerce ?

Mr. ELWELL. I should think that forty per cent, of our tonnage goes
to foreign ports, and that sixty per cent, is engaged in the domestic
trade. The coastwise trade is not of so much importance for the last
two or three years as it was formerly. There used to be ten or eleven
lines to New Orleans, each line employing five or six ships 5 whereas now
there is not a regular line of sailing-ships to New Orleans. The domestic
carrying trade is now done a good deal by the laud lines of transporta
tion instead of by sea.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is not the tonnage employed in the domestic trade
increasing ?

Mr. ELWELL. I should think it is. Since the close of the war a good
deal of trade has been opened in the South. So far as large ships are
concerned, our domestic trade, except the California trade, is of very
little consideration. The California trade employs large ships, otherwise
there would be very little business for them. The domestic trade is
mostly done by a small class of vessels, and by steamers.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 65

Mr. HOLMAN. But these vessels require the ship-yards to be kept up,
and enter largely into the profits of ship-builders f

Mr. ELWELL. Our coasting trade has not been profitable.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you attribute the falling off in that trade to inland
land transportation f

Mr. ELWELL. Yes, sir 5 there has been an entire change. We used
to bring all our tobacco, cotton, lead, &c., from St. Louis and Cincin
nati by water, and vice versa, but now they all go by land.

Mr. HOLMAN. Suppose that our tonnage in 1860 was something over
five million tons, what proportion of that would naturally, in these nine
years, have been taken off by the use of inland land routes ?

Mr. ELWELL. I should say that the coastwise trade is not over one-
half of what it was previous to the war. It may not be. over a third.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to represent the Ship-owners Asso
ciation ?

Mr. ELWELL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. That association had a meeting and passed some
resolutions, and appointed a committee, of which you were a member f

Mr. ELWELL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. How many were present at that meeting ?

Mr. ELWELL. Perhaps between a dozen and twenty about as many
as generally attend the meetings of the Chamber of Commerce out of
a thousand members.

The CHAIRMAN. My ebject is to ascertain how full an expression of
opinion it was. To what extent do the ship-owners of the country (not
the ship-builders) favor a more liberal policy with regard to granting
American registry to foreign-built vessels ?

Mr. ELWELL. I should think they were about equally divided. They
are all unanimous in favor of some legislation to relieve the shipping
interest ; but I should think there was not a majority of them in favor
of free trade in ships.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose the policy were adopted of relieving the ma
terials entering into the construction of ships of all duty, what then, in
your judgment, would be the opinion of the majority of the ship-owners
in reference to admitting foreign ships to American registry ?

Mr. ELWELL. I do not think that at present there would be a largo
majority in favor of it. The one measure would, of course, increase the
number in favor of the other 5 but I do not think that that would satisfy
all parties.

The CHAIRMAN. But you think there would be a majority in favor of
excluding foreign ships from American registry I

Mr. ELWELL. I do ; but I think that, after a few years, it could be
done with greater unanimity of feeling among the ship-owners and ship
builders, and all connected materially with the interest of ship-building.
Their attention is turned now to the building of iron ships; and it will
require two or three years to get up all the machinery and appliances to
build them.

Mr. PAUL M. SPOFFORD, ship-owner, expressed the opinion that there
were various causes operating to produce depression in the American
shipping interest. Among them were the system of subsidies granted
by foreign governments to their lines of mail steamers, which had built
up their steam marine at the expense of that of the United States, and
the very great cost of constructing and navigating American ships.
He did not know but that these were among the chief causes. If it
were the policy of this government to revive the commerce of the coun
try, he thought that it would be conducive to that end to allow Ameri-
5 NI

66 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

cans to purchase ships wherever they could be bought cheapest, and
to allow those ships to American registry. He thought that the Amer
ican ship-owner should not be compelled to use American ships at the
high price that he has now to pay for them, when he had to come
into competition for trade with foreign ships. He thought it also de
sirable that on the materials used in ship-building there should be a
rebate of duty. The duty should either be entirely taken off, or only a
small duty charged, so that American ship-builders might have an
opportunity of competing on more favorable terms than they had at
present.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to be in favor of the abrogation of
the navigation laws ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. I should be in favor of the abrogation of the naviga
tion laws so as to permit American citizens to purchase foreign-built
ships and run them wherever they pleased. But I should not be in
favor of allowing the foreigner to engage in the coasting trade with a
foreign ship.

The CHAIRMAN. If foreign-built ships were admitted to American
registry, and if three-fourths of the vessel were owned by English and
the other fourth by the nominal owner, an American, would not three-
fourths of that ship s profit in the coasting trade go to the other side of
the water?

Mr. SPOFFORD. I presume so.

The CHAIRMAN. Would there be any practicable mode of preventing
that result ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. I do not know that there would be.

The CHAIRMAN. And might not the entire ownership, by some little
evasion of the laws, be on the other side, just as the entire ownership
of some vessels under the English flag is here*?

Mr. SPOFFORD. Yes, sir. I presume there would be methods of evad
ing the laws and giving the benefit of the coastwise trade to foreigners.

Mr. HOLMAN. There is nothing now to prevent a foreigner being the
actual owner of an American vessel engaged in the foreign trade?

Mr. SPOFFORD. No, sir. There is that disadvantage at present. If I
purchase a British ship and wish to employ her in the English coasting
trade, it is my impression that I must get a registry in the name of an
Englishman. The English grant registers only to citizens. That is
what I am in favor of. We should grant to our citizens a registry which
would enable them to purchase their ships wherever they pleased, and to
engage in our coasting trade or in any other trade; and if foreigners reap
any side advantage, or if in benefiting our own citizens we also benefit
foreigners, I do not think that the small advantage which we thus con
fer on them would counterbalance the great advantage which we would
be conferring on our own citizens. I am speaking now with reference
to the general advantage to the commerce of the country. I do not
suppose that, so far as the mere ship-building interests are concerned, a
measure of that kind would be particularly beneficial to them. But if,
in addition to that measure, ship-building materials were relieved from
duty, I think that there is that preference for American-built ships, and
that there is that skill and industry in this country, to enable our ship
builders to compete favorably, and that they would eventually carry
the day.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that if the duty on ship-building
materials were taken off, the demands of American ship-owners for ships
could be supplied by our ship-builders at as low a cost as they could be
got by purchasing them abroad $

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 67

Mr. SPOFFORD. I think that it would require some little time to get
things organized. Our commerce has received too severe a blow, not
only by direct but by indirect causes. Take, for instance, the case of
the Collins and Cuuard lines of steamers. The Cunard line has been in
the receipt of a very heavy subsidy, while the subsidy to the Collins line
was discontinued. We find that the English government is paying sub
sidies for its mail service all over the world. Of course that gives the
recipient of such subsidy a very great advantage. I do not say that it
is an insuperable advantage. I think that talent and attention to
business will sometimes overcome this advantage. But, all other
things being equal, it certainly gives a very great advantage. Gov
ernment subsidy has been the English idea for many years, and it
seems as if it was now being followed up by the French. The French
and English are building up a magnificent marine, and ours is all
going to decay. Within a comparatively few years the business of
ocean commerce has been much changed. Steamships have taken
the place of sailing-vessels. That alone is one cause of the decay of
the business of building sailing-ships. Take our own case. A few
years ago we had a line of packets from New York to Liverpool, com
prising five or six of the largest ships sailing out of port. We could
not run those packets now in opposition to the steamers. We have been
obliged to send them to the Pacific. It is not because they are under the
American flag as much as it is because we come right into competition
with steamers which, on these short voyages, can carry their freight at
a less rate. The English steam marine has been built up by subsidies
in the mail service, and by the efforts which have been made in every
way to develop that interest.

Mr. CALKIN. You now own steam-vessels f

Mr. SPOFFORD. Yes.

Mr. CALKIN. I believe that it is a fact, conceded by the merchants of
New York, that the Collins line was extravagantly and badly managed.
Do you not think that the merchants of New York have learned very
much, in running steamship lines, to economize and run them cheaper?

Mr. SPOFFORD. I think they have.

Mr. CALKIN. They can manage them more economically now than they
could when they first got into the business, so that, with a little help,
they would be able to compete with foreigners better than they could
ten or twelve years ago ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. It may be a little egotistical in me to make the remark
that my father, the senior of the firm, was engaged in the first ocean
steamboat line in this country, and we have thus far, until within a few
years past, found our steamship interest profitable. We have continued
the business steadily up to the present time.

Mr. CALKIN. Then I understand your answer to be that they do man
age the business with more economy than formerly, and are, of course,
getting more knowledge of the business I

Mr. SPOFFORD. Yes, sir; so that with some subsidy we should be able
to compete with foreigners.

Mr. HOLMAN. Your theory is that three measures are necessary to
give new impetus to American commerce: first, the drawback on mate
rials entering into the construction of ships to the extent of the duty,
external and internal; second, free trade in ships; and third, subsidies
from the government to encourage American lines in competition with
foreign lines ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. Yes, sir; these three measures I am in favor of.

Mr. HOLMAN. As to the coastwise trade, you think that whatever

68 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

vessel sails under the American flag, without reference to the nationality
of its birth, should be at liberty to participate in that trade ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. If the policy of admitting foreign ships to American
registry were adopted at once, do you not think that the tendency would
be to have our navigation interests owned, in a few years, very largely
by foreigners, and that, after a short time, our commerce would not be
essentially a foreign interest ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. I am hardly prepared to give an opinion on that sub
ject. So long as we keep the control of it under our flag, I do not know
that there would be any more disadvantage in that than in allowing for
eigners to own large interests in our railroads.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would they own in our shipping to the same extent?

Mr. SPOFFORD. I think not. Of course foreigners cannot be directly
interested in our shipping, on account of the oath required of the Ameri
can ship-owner, but they might be indirectly interested.

The CHAIRMAN. Is not the tendency to have ships owned and con
trolled where they are built ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. I am hardly prepared to give an opinion on that sub
ject. My impression is that the mere building of the ship does not give
the control. I do not know that the people of Maine, a large ship-build
ing State, control vessels as much as the citizens of New York do.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is it not a fact that foreign capital is to some extent,
interested in American shipping now, not only in ownership but in run
ning vessels ?

Mr. SPOFFORD. That is my impression. I know cases were it has
been so in former years. I am not prepared to say that that is any great
disadvantage. If we wish capital for the prosecution of other public
works, so long as we retain the management of it, I do not know that it
is any great disadvantage for us to have it.

Mr. WILLIAM WHITLOCK made some remarks to the committee on the
change that has taken place in substituting steamers for sailing vessels.
He said that to a large extent the coastwise trade was done by steam
ers. The lines of packets between New York and the Gulf were now
almost unknown. So with the Liverpool packets. Steamers were su
perseding them. He held that the application of all laws should be
made universal. If the navigation laws were repealed it would be for
the benefit of a class, thus introducing a species of class legislation in
order that the capitalist might invest his money to the best advan
tage. He had no objection to that, but the principle should be carried
out to its logical conclusions. He believed, however, that if the restric
tions which now interfere with the building of ships here were removed,
capitalists could invest their money in ships here as well as they could
abroad. He was in favor of the latter solution of the difficulty, but was
not in favor of the former, He had been a ship-owner and had been
more or less intimately connected with ships for some years. He thought
that all Avho were engaged in commerce, and who wanted to be able to
carry freight at the minimum price, would undoubtedly favor for the
time being the abrogation of the navigation laws, but he believed that
the true American policy was to continue to foster every interest which
would enable ships to be built in the United States rather than have
them purchased abroad. He did not see what harm could be done (but
rather benefit) by the invest ment of foreign capital in American shipping
interests.

Mr. NESMITH, ship-owner, remarked that they had been very much
puzzled by the question, What ought to be done to restore American
commerce whether that could be best accomplished by allowing draw-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 69

backs to ship-builders, or by allowing ship-owners to buy their vessels
where they could buy them cheapest? They had thought that the
idea of allowing drawback could not possibly be carried through, and
they had therefore about made up their minds that free trade in ships
was the only course that could give the country a commercial posi
tion. In order to show the condition of things in the East Indies,
for example he had brouglft with him, and he submitted to the com
mittee, the last Calcutta Freight Eeport, which showed that out of 101
ships in port only 6 were American, and that three-fourths of them
were iron ships. He also submitted the specifications for an iron sailing
ship of 1,030 tons, with a proposal from a Glasgow firm to build such a
ship, with outfit and all ready for sea, at 14 10s. sterling per ton.
They had had such ships offered, ready for sea, with double outfit, as
low as 12 sterling per ton.

The CHAIRMAN. If the American ship-builder could obtain his mate
rials, whether for an iron or a wooden ship, free of duty, could he, in
your opinion, build his ships to compete with foreign ship-builders, and
supply the demand as fast as ships are required here ?

Mr. NESMITH. I should think so ; but I do not think that, whatever
you do whether you open the door to free trade in ships or allow a
drawback on ship-building materials you can increase our commerce
largely at present.

The CHAIRMAN. You think, however, that whatever ships are required
to supply the demands of American ship-owners can be supplied by
American ship-builders as cheaply as by English ship-builders, if they
have the materials free of duty ?

Mr. NESMITH. As to wooden ships I should say that there is no ques
tion but that they can do better; but as to iron ships I am not so well
satisfied. In the first place, we must be able to get our material as cheap,
which we cannot do, even with the drawback. I think, however, that
if the American ship-builders were placed on the same footing with regard
to materials as the English ship-builders are, they could furnish ships,
whether of iron or wood, as fast as they are required, and better ships,
too.

The CHAIRMAN. You then do not believe it necessary to buy our ships
abroad for the purpose of supplying the demand providing the other
measure can be carried out ?

Mr. NESMITH. I should say not. We are altogether Americans, and
we want American ships and American everything. We do not wish
to be compelled to step out of the business because we cannot have iron
ships, and prefer that something should be done, either through free
trade in ships, or in some other way, to enable us to procure and run
ships in competition with other nations.

The following is the specification referred to in the statement of Mr.
Nesmith :

SPECIFICATION OF AN IRON SAILING SHIP.

DIMENSIONS.

Length for tonnage 208 feet.

Breadth of beam, 34 feet 9 inches.

Depth of hold, 21 feet 2 inches.

Break, 45 feet by 20 inches.

Tonnage register, about 1,030 tons.

To class A A 1 at Lloyds, and twenty years in the Liverpool underwriters book.

Keel to be of forged iron, 8 by 3 inches, in long lengths, scarfed together.

Stem of forged iron, 8$ by 3 inches, scarfed at least 7 feet into the keel.

70 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Stern post of forged iron, 8 by 4 inches, with solid forged gudgeons on back for rud
der braces.

Center keelson to be box form, 16 by 17 inches, of -}g-inch plates, with angle irons 3J
by 3 by fa inches, riveted to double-reverse bars on top for floors.

Frames of angle iron, 5 by 3 by fa inches, spaced 21 inches to center, to be in one
piece from keel to gunwale.

Reverse frames of angle iron, 3 by 3 by fa inches, extending to gunwale and lower
deck beams on alternate frames.

Floor plates, on every frame, 24 by \% inches, extending up to the bilges to the 4-feet
water line.

Bilge keelsons, four in number, of angle iron, 5 by 4 by fa inches, riveted back to
back and to double-reverse angle irons, and to be connected together at ends by breast
hooks.

Intercostal keelson to be fitted on at each side at halffloor for two-thirds the vessel s
length, of ] g-inch plates, connected to floor-plates by angle irons 3^ by 3 by fa inches,
and to project above floor-plates to form a keelson, riveted between double-angle irons
5 by 3 by fa inches, to have iron wash-plates.

Main deck stringers, 34 by \% inches in midships, reduced at ends to 26 inches, to be
fitted close to the sheer strake, and secured thereto by an angle iron 5 by 4 by fa
inches, with a flange formed round the scuppers. An angle iron 4 by 3 by fa inches,
to be riveted to the stringer plates, forming a gutter water-way 16 inches broad. The
butts of stringer plate in midships to be triple riveted.

Tween deck stringers, 25 by }% inches, riveted to top of beams, and connected to re
verse bars on frames by an angle iron 5 by 4J by fa inches.

Main and tween deck beams, of Butterby iron, 8| by fa inches, spaced 3 feet to cen
ters with double-angle irons 3J by 3 by f inches riveted on top edge, secured to side
of vessel by the ends of the beams being turned down and formed a knee of, which is
to be riveted to the frames 21 inches deep ; hatch beams and fore and afters to be 94-
inches deep.

Deck tie plates, 12^ by |f inches, to run fore and aft on each side of hatchways on
main and lower deck beams. Diagonal ties to be fitted, where practicable, on main
deck beams, and in wake of masts, on tween deck beams. &quot; Mast partners to take three
beams in length with bulb-iron combings.

Bulkhead One collision bulkhead, to be fitted forward, of ^-inch plates, riveted be
tween double frames, and stiffened with angle iron 3| by 3 by fa inches, spaced 30
inches apart. All stringers to be continued through the bulkhead, and collars fitted
round them to be perfectly water-tight.

Stanchions in lower hold 3| inches diameter, tween decks 3 inches diameter. Double
stanchions to form iron ladders at main hatch, to have option of hollow stanchions,
extra size.

Plating

Garboard strakes, If inch ; ^

From garboard bilge, } inch; T h rpf ] 1irpr i of PTU i s

From bilge to three-fifths depth of hold, U inch ; oe reuucea at enat&amp;gt;,

From thi-ee-fifths depth of hold to sheerstrlkes, & inch ; [ as aUowed ^ L1 y ds
Sheerstrake, -ff inch ; J

Butts of sheerstrake and main deck stringers to be triple riveted in midships.

Bulwarks to be of iron fa inch in way of break and forecastle, and fi 6 inch in body
of ship ; to be stayed with H-formed stanchions, 1 incn - Top-gallant bulwarks to be
neatly paneled with teak, varnished, and to have cast lead ornaments.

Main rail, of angle iron, 7-J by 3^ by f inches, riveted to bulwarks with angle iron on
inside edge, 2^ by 2 by f inches, for fixing greenheart pin rail, say 7 by 3 inches, or
teak rail, owner s option, and greenheart pin rail.

Top-gallant rail, of teak 7 by 3| inches, fixed to an angle iron 2 by 2 by fa inches,
riveted to bulwarks and caulked.

Rudder stock, of forged iron, 5f inches diameter at head and 3 inches diameter at
heel, with two short stays forged to the frame, and plated with ^-inch plates.

Riveting To be double riveted throughout, bevel necked rivets to be used on the
outside plating.

Decks, of yellow pine : main deck 5 by 4 inches, break-deck 4 by 3 inches, fastened
with galvanized iron bolts and nuts let well into the decks, and plugged with well-
seasoned turned plugs dipped in white lead. Decks to be well free from knots, and
have two coats of raw oil. Teak plank next water-way, 8 inches broad, and one for
ring bolts on each side of hatches 10 inches broad ; cabin deck 6 by 3 inches.

Half deck, laid on tween decks, 8 feet from side and from after-hatch to break bulk
head ; full deck also from fore bulkhead till afterpart of fore-hatch, 6 by 3 inches.

Hatches to be in size according to plan approved of by owners, with iron combings
.standing 15 inches above the deck. The fore and after hatches to have teak booby
hatches on top. Main hatch 17 by 12 by 6 feet; lower hold 21 by 12 by 6 feet, with
loose beams bolted with screw bolts. Fore and after hatch 6 by 5 feet.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 71

Ceiling, to turn off bilge, of red pine, 2| inches thick ; the flat of bottom to bo laid in
hatches, with rings to lift ; the ceiling at bilge and ends where no hatches are formed
to bo properly caulked ; the side, from top of bilge to main deck, to be sparred with
2i-inch battens, spaced 10 inches apart, the battens to be properly planed and beaded
on both edges.

Sweat boards The gunwale stringer to be fitted with movable shutter boards, to
carry off sweat from cargo. Shutters to be made of 1-inch pine and fastened with bat
tens.

Chain lockers, of sufficient size to contain the chains, fitted according to plan ap
proved by owners, to bo made of greenheart.

Hawse pipes Two on each bow, of cast iron, fitted in hard wood chocks, with iron
sliding shutters.

Timber heads, of cast iron, to answer for ventilators, with brass tops and elevators ;
also all necessary mooring pipes of cast iron.

Windlass to be fitted with a patent, say 23 inches purchase, with fluting whelps and
patent stoppers, spindle to run through the entire length of windlass ; the windlass
bitts to he of iron or greenlieart ; pall bitt of iron.

Winches One at main-hatch with triple purchase, and one at fore-hatch with double
purchase, and chain lifters ; one small, portable, for cargo.

Capstan Two on main-deck of the large size, and one smaller on forecastle-deck, to
have brass plates on top and brass mountings round the holes ; capstan plates to have
ship s name and port engraved.

Store-decks in fore and after peaks as required by owners.

Galvanizing All wrought and cast iron work connected with the hull, on deck, to
be galvanized.

Tanks, two in number, to contain 4,500 gallons, placed where required by owners.
Bread tanks, six in number, to contain 10 cwt. each, placed where required; or if re
quired by owner, one tank fitted in run to hold 20 cwt.

Pumps, of Wilson & Formby s patent, 7 inches diameter, with fly-wheel motion.
Bilge pumps, 5 inches diameter, to work of same spindle as main pumps. One small
pump to be fitted between main pumps, 4 inches. One head pump to be fitted, and
one pump in fore-peak. One brass or copper pump for water tanks, with all necessary
pipes, &c.

Deck house to be fitted between main hatches and foremast for officers, crew, and
boys, and galley store-room, &c., to be strongly built, and neatly finished outside with
teak pilasters and moldings, and have carved moldings round top.

Forecastle Fitted up in a plain style, for the accommodation of crew, with store
rooms, if required.

Cabin Fitted in mahogany and maple, polished, with gilt moldings, and trusses
between skin and ceiling to be filled with cork shavings. Captain s room to be fitted
with mahogany bed, front drawers, book case, sofa, &c. Chief officer s room to be
fitted in a comfortable style and painted oak. Pantry to be fitted with dresser with
lead top and brass basin, with all necessary racks and lockers, lined with zinc. State
rooms to be fitted according to plan, with wash-hand b^isin with marble top in each
room. The plan of the cabin to be approved by owners, and all to have first-class
finish.

Companions and skylight to be of teak, varnished. The cabin skylight to have
stained glass, and all locks and hinges to be of hrass.

Painting To have three coats of paint, inside and outside, to owner s satisfaction ;
the bottom inside to be cemented with the best Portland cement. Mclnues s or other
approved composition to be put on the bottom ; the ship to be tested with water before
cemented.

Boats, as required by board of trade. Boats beams to be fitted, also chocks for long-
boat, with swivel and a set of davits, with gear complete on each side. Boats beams
to be covered on top, and paneled on sides with teak wood, to owner s approval.

Masts Fore and main and mizzen masts, also bowsprit, lower yards, and lower top
sail yards, of best iron. The other spars of red and pitch pine, owner s option. The
smaller spars of spruce. The dimensions of masts and spars to be mutually agreed
on, and masting plans to be approved by owners. All the spare to bo of first-class
quality.

Rigging Standing rigging of best charcoal iron wire rope, 4 inches circumfer
ence, to be parceled and served over with small strings, the rest in proportion. The
running rigging of European or best St. Petersburg clean hemp, to be fitted with a
complete suit of ropes and blocks, brace halyards, and principal blocks to be patent
roller bushes and steel pins. Blocks and bushes to be to owner s satisfaction. Dead
eyes of lignumvitai 10 inches, brass caps for end of stays. In addition to tho above,
the vessel to be supplied with spare gear, as hereafter mentioned. Jibstays to be fitted
in wake of booms with chain.

Anchors and chains according to Lloyds and underwriters rules, and admiralty test.
Anchors to bo of Rodgers s patent. An anchor davit to be fitted on forecastle deck ;

72 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

90 fathoms of 1-inch mooring chain to be supplied, together with all necessary small
chain for rigging ; one box chain punches to be supplied.

Generally The whole to be of best workmanship and materials, as required for an
A A 1 iron ship by Lloyds, and for the twenty years 7 class in red, in Liverpool under
writers book.

GENERAL OUTFIT.

WARPS, ETC.

1 towline, 11 inches, 90 fathoms.
1 warp, 8 inches, 90 fathoms.
1 warp, 7 inches, 90 fathoms.
1 warp, 5- inches, 90 fathoms.

BOATS, ETC.

1 long boat, 26 by 8 by 3 feet 8 inches, bottom coppered, and round stern, &amp;gt; ,

1 skiff, 24 by 5 feet 9 inches by 2 feet 9 inches, 5 Carrel.

1 gig, 24 by 5 feet 9 inches by 2 feet 4 inches, ? r , ,

1 dingy, 18 by 5 feet 6 inches by 2 feet 3 inches, $ Ule

Rowlocks brass for gig and dingy. Brass yoke do., and with rudders for each boat.
Boats to be of larch, and thoroughly copper-fastened. Necessary back boards,
gratings for boats, &c. Long boat to have cover over top, with teak- wood top-
sides, and fitted under on deck for live stock. Iron rowlocks for long boat and
skiff.

SAILS.

1 flying jib.

1 standing jib.

2 small jibs.

2 foretopmast stay-sails.

1 fore stay-sail.

2 fore-sails.

2 sets foretop sails.
2 foretop-gallant sails.

1 fore royal sail.

2 mainsails.

2 sets maintop sails.

2 main top-gallant sails.

1 main royal sail,

1 main stay-sail.

1 top-gallant stay-sail.

1 main topmast sail.

1 royal stay-sail.

1 main spencer.

2 mizzens.

1 cross jack.

2 sets mizzen top-sails.

1 set mizzen top-gallant sails.

1 set mizzen royals.

1 mizzen stay-sail.

1 mizzen top-mast stay-sail.

1 mizzen top-gallant stay-sail.

3 topmast studding-sails.

2 lower studding-sails.

3 top-gallant studding-sails.
2 royal studding-sails.

2 wind-sails.

1 set awnings to mainmast and foremast, with stanchions and ridge chain complete ;
also, forecastle awnings, with same.

6 bolts canvas, Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.
24 pounds seaming twine.
18 pounds roping twine.

1 set boat sails and spars for long boat and skiff. (Owners .to &amp;gt;be iallowed .to make

sails at Is. Wd. per yard, dropping \d. each number.)

2 sets fids.

6 palms, assorted.
6 dozen sail needles.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 73

6 sail hooks.
2 iron rubbers.
Canvas covers for skiff, gig, and dingy.

CARPENTER S AND BOATSWAIN S STORES.

1 hand copper pump.

4 pump spears.

4 lower boxes.

1 break and weegee and wheel motion.

1 pair rigging screws.

2 sounding-rods.

1 spare top-gallant mast or yard.

1 spare top-mast or lower yard of red pLu?.

1 spare jib-boom or topsail yard of red or pitch pine.

4 spare Norway spars.

1 full set studding-sails, booms, and yards, with blocks and gear complete.
1 side accommodation ladder, fitted and mounted complete, of teak wood.
1 Jacob s ladder, complete.

hold ladder.
. half-deck ladder.

forecastle ladder.

store-room ladder.

larzarette ladder.

1 set hatch bars with brass padlock^

2 sets tarpaulines.
6 handspikes.

2 sets tarpaulines for small cargo hatches.

2 log chips. Full set capstan bars, fitted in rack where required.
1 pitch pot and ladle.

1 booby hatch for half-deck and fore hatch, teak wood.
30 gallons lamp oil.

35 gallons raw oil.

3 gallons turpentine.

5 gallons olive oil.

10 oil tanks, 10 gallons each.

2 five-gallon tanks. All to be fitted where required.
1 bladder patty.

1 leaf hog s lard.

1 brass bell and stand with ship s name and port on.

1 small brass bell for quarter-deck, with stanchions complete and ship s name and

port on.
Mahogany wheel and teak-wood cover, and ship s name carved and gilded on each

side of cover, and bound with brass, and ship s name engraved.
Screw steering apparatus, with spare tiller and blocks and chain, to owner s ap
proval.

3 forecastle lamps.
1 cook s lantern.

1 shark hook.

1 portable filter.

1 medicine chest, with ship s name on brass plate, mahogany or teak, fitted com
plete for India or China voyage, say 30 inches by 17 inches.

1 ensign.

1 union jack.

1 burgee.
Ship s name.

1 house flag.

1 set signals and halyards and book, Maryatt s, and commercial code complete, in
addition to full set of gear.

1 coil If-inch rope, 120 fathoms.

1 coil 2 j-inch rope, 120 fathoms.

1 coil 3-inch rope, 120 fathoms.

1 coil 31-inch rope, 120 fathoms.

1 coil 3f-inch rope, 120 fathoms.

1 coil 18 thread.

1 coil lanyard rope, 5-inch.

1 coil 2 yarn-spun yarn.

4 skeins amberline, &amp;gt;

4 coils marline, Vsay 2 hundred-weight.
4 coils house line, )

74 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

2 buoys and ropes.
2 patent life buoys.

1 spare shackle for each anchor.

2 dozen assorted forelocks.
2 dozen washers for bolts.

Fids for masts, iron.
1 hundred-weight nails, assorted.
1 axe.
1 adze.
1 saw.
1 maU.
1 hammer.

4 cork fenders, large size, to be worked over with hemp ropes by hitching.
1 set boat s chocks, complete.

1 pig-house, with iron bars.

2 dozen assorted connecting shackles.
2 dozen small shackles.

Iron check blocks on lower yards for top-sail sheets.

Iron hoops on lower yard for jack-stays, and quarter hoops for top-sail sheets, with
rollers for studding-sail booms.

1 portable forge.

2 hundred-weight rivets, assorted.
1 set riveting jacks.

1 ratchet.

Set of drills from -J inch to 1 inch, with knee.
4 chisels.
1 screw wrench, with patent spanner.

1 chain-purchase sling.

2 pairs skeets for ship s side, with covers for the rail in way of fore and main

hatches.

60 feet hard wood, 12 by 3.
8 scrapers.

400 feet red fir planks.
4 spare ash oars.
4 iron crowbars.

2 dozen hooks and thimbles, assorted.
2 dozen clip hooks.

4 large ventilators, to be properly placed.
6 deck scrubbing brushes, with weegee.

1 register box and locks, with ship s name.
8 paint scrubbing brushes.

2 whitewash brushes.

18 paint brushes, assorted.

4 pencil brushes.
48 birch brooms.

4 joiner s scrapers.

2 plumber s scrapers.

2 cabin sweeping brushes, long and short.
12 hundred-weight paint, assorted.

1 cask M Innes s paint, or tallow, say 3 hundred-weight.
40 gallons paint oil.

1 transparent compass, fitted on tripod, or some other suitable place.

1 azimuth compass.

1 steering compass, fitted complete in brass dolphin binnacle, all properly adjusted.
Compass fitted with 10-inch card and storm gimble center, owner s approval.

1 cabin compass, transparent.

2 spare compass cards marked with degrees,
thermometer.

sympiesometer, $ C

pair glasses.

telescope, to be approved of. :

log glasses.

patent log and line.

1 half-hour glass.

2 mops and handles.
1 log slate.

1 log book.

1 log reel and line.

1 patent deep-sea lead line and reel, 200 fathoms.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 75

1 patent sounding machine.

2 band leads and lines.
1 harpoon.

1 pair grains.

1 side pump leather.

1 side service leather.
Brass signal lamps, to be fitted up per board of trade requirement, say 4.

1 flash light.
12 fishing hooks.

1 box blue lights.

1 box rockets.

3 fishing lines.

2 spare log lines.

1 brass speaking trumpet.
1 fog horn.

Gratings between skylight and wheel ; also, between cabin doors and skylight, with
gratings front of poop, and gutter waterway on poop, all of teak wood.

1 grindstone and trough.

4 long tar brushes.

2 short tar brushes.

1 set ash oars to each boat.
-J cask pitch.
i cask rosin.

1 cask Stockholm tar.

2 hundred-weight oakum.
18 chain hooks.

7 luff-tackle blocks, say 13 inches double.
7 luff-tackle blocks, say 13 inches single.
18 spare blocks.
2 spare dead-eyes and pins.
2 spare cargo pennants, with blocks and fall.
2 chain stoppers.
2 shank-painters.
2 chain claws.

1 spun-yarn winch, iron.

2 double 21 -inch purchase blocks.

1 triple 21-inch purchase block.

2 cat-blocks.

2 top blocks, say 5 and 6 each rope.

3 snatch-blocks.

1 purchase gin and chain.
1 gaff fitted to mainmast.
1 ballast gin and chain.

1 anchor nshho^Jf.

2 boat-hooks.

2 watch tackles.

12 marline spikes, flat pointed.
6 serving mallets.

3 serving boards.

2 pair chain can-hooks.
2 pair chain nippers.
1 pair chains for puncheons.
1 pair chain-purchase slings.
9 ballast shovels.
9 coal shovels.
16 feet hen-coops, teak.
1 fire-engine and hose, with teak cover.

COOPER S STORES.

4 water casks, 100 gallons.

2 breakers, 20 gallons each.

2 oval harness casks.
12 deck buckets.

1 water can.

1 wash deck tub.
12 mess kids.

1 water funnel.

2 draw buckets.
4 bread boxes.

76 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

1 cask for flour.

3 vinegar casks, 20 gallons each.

2 lime casks, 20 gallons each.
1 molasses cask, 15 gallons.

All casks and 12 buckets to have galvanized iron hoops ; also, 12 buckets and 2 har
ness casks which are to have brass hoops, and to be of teak.

CABIN STORES.

1 iron tea-kettle.

1 copper tea-kettle.

1 britannia metal tea-pot.

1 britannia metal coffee-pot.
12 table-spoons, E. P. No. 1.
12 tea-spoons, E. P. No. 1.

1 dozen table knives and forks, with white ivory handles.

1 dozen table forks, E. P. No. 1.

1 dozen dessert knives and forks, with white ivory handles.

1 dozen forks, E. P. No. 1.

1 basket for electro-plates.

1 metal tureen and ladle.

1 electro-plate tureen and ladle, No. 1.
12 electro-plate dessert spoons, No. 1.

1 electro-plate inustard-pot spoon, No. 1.

2 electro-plate salt spoons, No. 1.

6 common knives and forks, with 6 table and 6 tea-spoons, britannia metal.
1 carving knife and fork.
1 steel, ivory handle.
1 set castors, E. P. No. 1.

4 dish covers, E. P. No. 1.
1 blackjack.

4 brass candlesticks.
4 pair snuffers and tray.
4 dozen plates, assorted.
1 dozen dishes.
6 vegetable dishes.

1 dozen mugs.

2 butter boats.
2 butter pots.

1 dozen egg-cups.

2 glass salts.

2 sugar basins, (1 glass.)
Crockeryware to have ship s name on.
\ dozen basins. ^

1 wash-hand basin and jug to be fitted up in each state-room.

2 water jugs for cabin.

2 dozen cups and saucers.

4 decanters.

1 dozen tumblers.

1 dozen wine glasses.

1 dozen champagne glasses.

2 brass cocks.

4 chamber pots.

1 pair flour scales and weights.

1 pair steel-yards.

1 set weights and scales complete.

2 coffee mills.
1 candle box.
1 spice box.

1 flour dredger.

1 set pewter measures, Bay 6

1 plate basket.

corkscrew.

dust pan.

hand bell.

fancy bread baskets.

cabin lamp, to be approved.

brass bar, to be fitted in skylight, with swing tray attached

berth lamp to each state-room and pantry.
Damask curtains in each room.
1 cabin stove, with copper funnel complete.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 77

Iron funnel inside of copper, to bq approved.

1 coal box, japanned.

1 set fire-irons.

1 chair for end of table.

1 stool for each room.

1 forecastle stove and funnel.

1 teak or mahogany table, to draw out.

1 stove for house on deck, and funnel.
Settees on each side of cabin table, with swinging backs.
All hair-cloth to be covered with hollands and bound with red.
Sideboard to bo fitted in cabin of Spanish mahogany and marble top and brass rail.
Sofa, drawers, and book-case of teak in captain s room, with small table for chronom
eter.

Settees and after-lockers to bo covered with best hair-cloth.
All hiuges or locks in cabin or elsewhere to bo brass.
Furniture for locks, to be glass, owner s approval.

1 cloth for cabin table.

1 oilcloth for cabin table.

1 carpet for cabin floor, and oilcloth for each state-room and pantry, with runners.
Carpet for captain s room, with oilcloth and all necessary table-cloths and towels for
the voyage.

1 side light in each room, and all to be approved by owners.

Steward s pantry and lazarette to be properly fitted up, with all necessary pease and
other lockers, lined with zinc throughout.

1 water-closet and bath to be fitted in cabin, to have double-action valves, and 1 in

wing of monkey, forecastle.
Cabin stairs to be leaded, and to have brass diamond step plates, fitted with brass

rods from deck to cabin.
All small ladders on deck to have diamond brass plates.

1 looking-glass over sideboard, and one in each room, to owner s approval.

1 time-piece to match mirror.

2 guns complete, with carriages of teak, say 4-pouuders.

24 rounds cartridges, ammunition, 24 shots for the voyage, with copper magazines.

6 muskets.

6 pistols.

6 bayonets.

6 cutlasses.

6 hand-cuffs.
Ship to have female figurehead.

The poop skylight companion grating over wheel.
12 buckets and harness casks and fore

forecastle scuttle to be of teaK.
All cooking utensils to be supplied, with caboose of first-rate quality for East India
voyages, to owner s approval.

COOKING EANGE, (to be sufficiently large to cook for 24 hands.

2 copper boilers and steamer.

3 lined oval pots.

4 saucepans.
1 fish pan.

1 cullender.

2 frying pans.
1 cooRs ladle.

1 basting spoon,
1 cook s knife.
1 cook s axe.
1 saw.
1 cleaver.
1 steel.
1 tormentor.
1 mincing knife.

1 bread grater.

2 pudding pans.

3 bread tins.

3 pudding molds.
2 roasting pans.

2 gridirons.

1 pepper box.
1 slice.
6 skewers.

3 baking dishes, enameled.

78 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

It is understood that anything enumerated twice is only to be singly supplied. No
extras to be supplied without the same be given 111 writing to any party appointed by
the owners, and having their approval by signing the notice, a copy of which is to be
sent to

Anything left out of this specification which it is customary to supply to this class oi
vessel, it is understood that the same will be supplied by the builders. And anything
left out of this specification must be supplied in this case in accordance with contract,
and everything to be carried up to Lloyds and underwriters rules.

Everything of first-class material and of the best workmanship. Delivery at the
Broomielaw, Glasgow, after being in graving dock, on the , or before, if

practicable.

Model to be approved of before laying the vessel down, and finished model sent to
purchasers during the building.

Builders present price, as per specification, 14 10s. per register ton.

Mr. WILLIAM H. WEBB suggested that the committee should, before
adjournment, request the ship-owners of Kew York, and the under
writers, to communicate their views in writing on the question before
the committee. He himself would be prepared to do so, and could give
more information in that way than he could orally.

The CHAIRMAN stated that the committee intended to address circu
lars to gentlemen interested in the various branches of the business, and
to get all the information that it could, in writing as well as orally. The
committee would be very glad to have Mr. Webb communicate his views
in writing.

Mr. WEBB said he should be very glad to do so.

The following was received, and ordered on file :

MR. CHAIRMAN AND GENTLEMEN OF THE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE : I have here
tofore been quite a vessel owner and builder, but not so now, and therefore cannot com
plain much ; but I feel proud to think that there has been enough evidence before your
honorable body by the merchants and ship-builders of the United States to convince
you that the taxes and tariffs on ships and ship-building materials ought to entirely
cease, for the protection of commerce. But there is another branch of taxes which I
wish to call your serious attention to. I have been for the last three years contesting
the illegality of State and municipal taxes on the commerce of the United States.
Those sort of taxes on vessel property are enormous, and attended with obstructions,
delays, and damage. I hope, Mr. Chairman, you and your committee will not be un
mindful in assisting us in pressing our claims at the next session of Congress to abrogate
and finally break up the different and various State and municipal taxes that are im
posed upon and exacted from commerce at the various ports in the United States, as
partially set forth in this petition, which has been presented to Congress, but which
has not been acted upon at present.

I also wish to state to you that within the walls of this edifice the collector of the
port of New York has collected millions of dollars, and up to this date is collecting
State and municipal taxes and tonnage dues from commerce, in violation of the Con
stitution of the United States ; in violation of the Congress of the United States ; in
violation of. the supreme court of the District of Columbia in a case decided October
24, 1867, (Nautilus case;) in violation of the Supreme Court of the United States, de
cided December term, 1867, (steamship Charles Morgan New Orleans case;) and, last,
in violation of the orders of N. Sargent, Commissioner of Customs at Washington, dated
August 13, 1869.

C. F. BAKNES.

The committee adjourned to meet in Boston on Monday, 18th October.

BOSTON, TUESDAY, October 19, 1869.

The committee met in the rooms of the Board of Trade.

Present : the Chairman and Messrs. Buffinton, Morrell, Calkin, Wells,
and Holman.

The CHAIRMAN stated the object of the committee, and invited the
gentlemen appointed by the Board of Trade to express their views in
reference to the cause of the depression of American commerce and nav
igation

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 79

Mr. EDWAED S. TOBEY, chairman of the Board of Trade, welcomed
the committee to the city of Boston and to the rooms of the board, and
said that the Board of Trade hailed the meeting of this committee as an
auspicious omen to the interests of commerce, and as showing that Con
gress had become impressed with the importance of doing something
to restore the shipping interest of the country. It was not his purpose
now to present at length any views that he might hold on the subject,
but rather to call upon other members of the Board of Trade to present
their views, and in the course of the investigation he would endeavor
to take some proper opportunity to give a statement of facts which had
come within his own knowledge, and such deductions from those facts
as might suggest themselves to his mind. He mentioned the presence
in the room of one of the prominent representatives of the iron steam
ship-building interest, the treasurer of the Atlantic Works of East
Boston, Mr. Smith, who was already known extensively throughout the
country by his very able communication on the subject of iron steam
ship construction.

Mr. FRANKLIN W. SMITH, treasurer of the Atlantic Iron Works of
Boston, addressed the committee. He said that he would not take up
the time of the committee by repeating what it was better informed of
than himself, the history of American commerce, its prosperity and de
cline. Nor would he trouble members of Congress with statistics,
among which they were buried for a great part of the year. He only
wished that a moiety of the intelligence possessed by members of Con
gress on this matter were possessed by the people. If that were so this
committee would not be in session to-day. He need not recall how, in
1861, the American tonnage was greatly in excess of the tonnage of any
other nation. Nor need he recall the record of the decline of that com
merce. In 1868 there were but six iron vessels built in the United
States, and at present he believed that there was not one iron vessel on
the stocks in this country. A bark of six hundred or seven hundred
tons, and the iron bark Novelty, built by the Atlantic Works, were the
only iron sailing vessels built in this country. As to wooden shipping
he was not able to follow its decline, the decline being so rapid. What
was the reason for this 9 The answer might be given in one word the
tariff. The contrast on this matter between the United States and Great
Britain was most painful. In 1867, out of two hundred and twenty-
seven ships built upon the Clyde, there were but fourteen of wood, and
these averaged only one hundred and sixty tons each. He held in his
hand a slip from the Glasgow Herald of August 7, 1860, detailing the
launches which had taken place during the previous month. There were
thirteen of them, amounting in all to thirteen thousand nine hundred
and ninety-one tons, averaging nearly eleven hundred, and all of iron.
Why could not this be done here ? Because of the tariff. He was in
debted to one of the able articles of the New York Evening Post for a
record of the changes in the tariff, and of the pressure which those
changes had brought to bear upon the ship-building interest. In 1857,
common rounds and squares of iron, such as are used in the wooden 1
ship-building interest, and which were then the great item to be taxed
in ship-building, were taxed twenty-four per cent, ad valorem. In 1861
they were taxed fifty per cent., and in 1864 one hundred and twelve per
cent, ad valorem. It was stated that by the proposed bill introduced by
Mr. Moorhead in 1868, those very bars of iron, essential in wooden ship
building, were struck at for a rate of one hundred and sixty-eight per
cent. He held in his hand a list showing the charges to-day of an iron
Bhip of one thousand tons burden, supposing that all her materials of

80 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

foreign construction were imported. He submitted it in detail to the
committee, as follows :

Duties on materials for a 1,000-fo/i iron ship.
IRON.

53 per cent., plate 530, 000, duty, H cents .

18 per cent., refined iron and rivets, 180, 000, duty, 1 cent

23 per cent., T. and angle or beams, 230, 000, duty, 1 cents.

3 per cent., forgings 30, 000, duty, 2 cents .

3 per cent., castings 30, 000, duty, say 1 cent

$7,950 00
1, 800 00
2,875 00
600 00
300 00

100 per cent. 1, 000, 000 Ibs., divided by 3, 13, 525 00

4,508 33
$18,033 33

RIGGING.

35,000 pounds chain cable, duty, 2 cents, gold \ #, 1 ft7C - /^

8,000 pounds small rigging-chain, duty, 2| cents, gold $ ** u

8,000 pounds anchors, 2 cents, gold 180 00

8 tons Russian hemp, $40 ton, gold duty ; or if cordage be im
ported, 10 tons, 2,000 pounds each, 20,000 pounds, 3 cents 600 00

5 tons Manilla hemp, 2,240 pounds, at $25 ton, gold ; or if cord
age be imported, 12,000 pounds, at 2 cents 300 00

2, 155 00
Add 33i per cent 718 33

2,873 33

20, 906 66

If wire rigging be used, 5 tons, cost 22 shillings sterling for 112 pounds, duty 35 per
cent, ad valorem ; costs now 7-J- cents, gold, for galvanized, duty paid.

That was about twenty-five per cent, extra on the cost of an iron ship
of one thousand tons in England. The Atlantic Works had recently
invented a tank vessel for the carriage of molasses in the bulk a pecu
liarly difficult liquid to carry, because of its expansive and fermenting
qualities. A vessel for this purpose must be constructed of iron, so far as
experience went, because it had been found impossible to get a wooden
vessel strong enough and fixed enough in its joints to hold those tanks
under all conditions. Those tanks, therefore, were constructed with the
ship, adding strength to the ship. That vessel had been invented here
and had been patented both here and in England, and had made two
voyages which had been deemed to have been an absolute and unquali
fied success. He might state with entire safety that there had been a
saving of five per cent, on each of those cargoes of molasses. The saving
might have been much more. That vessel would bring five cargoes in
the season, which would be a saving in a single season of twenty-five
per cent. The molasses imported into Boston alone in a single season
employed fifteen vessels, and one concern in New York employed fifteen
vessels in the trade. The Atlantic Works had built one such tank ves
sel, and the firm for which they built it, as well as other parties, desired
to have more such vessels. They were ready to build two on their own
account; but, singularly enough, they had been actually stayed in the
building of them, by the expectation of the benefits which they were
now asking at the hands of Congress. They did not dare to build
those vessels, in the expectation that Congress would strike off the duty
and reduce the valuation next spring from $10,000 to $15,000. The
building, therefore, of at least three of those vessels had been post
poned to another season. But meanwhile the Atlantic Works Com
pany finding their hands tied as iron ship-builders, and finding it im-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 81

possible to build those brigs themselves, wrote to England and had an
offer from England to build them on the Clyde at twenty-live per cent,
less than they could build them themselves. They were seriously de
bating the building of those brigs abroad, and having them under a
foreign Hag. This would probably be the case next year unless the
necessary relief were granted. He had no doubt that the American
merchants* interest in the molasses trade would insist upon this saving
of $5,000 per cargo. If America could not supply those vessels England
would ; and if American merchants were too patriotic or too timid to
put their vessels under the English flag, they would go abroad and give
to England, not only the building of the ships, but the transportation
besides. All that the Atlantic Works asked was a royalty on their
patent which was registered abroad.

He had given the committee the rates on bars and plate iron, but there
was another item to which he should call especial attention. The duty
on beams and angle-irons was practically prohibitory. They were now
rolled in this country by only three concerns. In iron ship-building they
constituted twenty-three per cent, of the entire work, and the commit
tee would see the disadvantage of a monopoly even in the hands of the
best of men, from this fact, that no matter what rate of tariff was im
posed, so long as the construction of those beams paid a profit as they
had paid a large profit for many years those three mills had only to
raise their scale of prices up to just below the cost of importation ;
and the consequence was that at present all beams and all angles had
their prices adjusted by the rate of importation. It was natural that
this should be so, and he did not wish to be understood as reflecting, in
the least degree, upon the patriotic impulses or business course of any
concern that might pursue this policy. Doubtless every concern in the
country would consider it perfectly legitimate; but with our commerce
to-day depending upon the closest possible competition and upon the
most advantageous circumstances both as to material and labor, it was
certainly a most discouraging feature that twenty-three per cent, of the
materials that enter into the construction of iron ships should be abso
lutely in the hands of a monopoly of manufacturers. It was not so with
pig or other descriptions of iron.

He had placed in a pamphlet, which he had had the honor to submit
to Congress, the reasons, drawn from most experienced authority, show
ing why wooden ships were to-day practically superseded by iron ships.
In Calcutta and San Francisco iron ships commanded five shillings ster
ling a ton premium in charters, because of their durability, because of
their increased capacity, because of the fine condition in which mer
chandise could be transported in them, and because of the rates of in
surance. While America had in her magnificent forests the monopoly
of material, and thus gained her prestige on the ocean, England was
at the disadvantage that America was at now. Now things were re
versed; the advantages of coal, iron, and labor England had to-day,
and she was building ships and selling them all over the world. Prus
sia was protecting her iron interest by charging ten per cent, upon the
iron ships bought abroad, while she charged only five per cent, upon
the wooden ships. But England, despite that, was building for all the
world. J. S. Forbes & Co., of Boston, had, last March, sent to the At
lantic Works specifications for a first-class iron ship for Chinese waters.
The Atlantic Works had not pretended to do any better than build the
ship at cost. They had got one contract from the Boston and Balti
more line of steamships, and were glad to get it at cost, because such
establishments as theirs were better kept running. To stop them,
GNI

82 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

causes great deterioration. They had received those specifications from
Messrs. J. S. Forbes & Co., and had endeavored to figure them down to
the necessary point ; but they had despaired at the outset of getting
the contract. While they were at it they had received a note from
Forbes & Co., stating, &quot; Gentlemen : We are informed by cable that
this ship is ordered in England.&quot;

A few days since he had gone to New York to meet a gentleman who
would have ordered an iron ship for the trade between New York and
Mexico. This gentleman had said that his judgment was that in every
respect iron ships were preferable to wooden ones, and that he intended
to build of iron, but that when he came to figure out the cost and found
that the absolute taxes on the materials entering into the construction
of such a ship would be from $40,000 to $50,000, he had determined to
build a wooden ship, take the chances, and let her rot out in ten or fif
teen years, considering that the interest on the difference would build
another ship. These were the facts as to the entire and absolute sup
pression of iron ship-building in the United States. As to a remedy,
he should not suggest that American ports should be thrown open to
foreign produce. For his own part he should be glad to see American
products used in preference to foreign ; they were better. He desired
to see, through the influence of Congress, or through an organization of
the merchants of the country, the establishment of the authority of the
American Lloyds in rating ships equal to the authority of the British
and French Lloyds. They should then have the opportunity to take
into account the admitted and unquestioned superiority of American
iron, and could make out a gain of twenty per cent, in the cost of iron
ships. He had been astonished to see that with the American prestige,
they had not before this time asserted an authority which should be
equally authoritative before the world in the matter of rating ships.
He could not understand why the underwriters should compel Ameri
can ship-owners, who a few years ago owned more ships than any na
tion in the world, to bring everything up to a standard of British or
French engineering. It seemed to him that Americans had proved in
the history of the last war that the judgment of their mechanics as to
what was strong and as to what was required to give strength, was
equal to the judgment and intelligence ot foreign engineers. If Con
gress could secure for American ship-owners the privilege of having
their ships rated by underwriters as authoritatively as they are now
rated by English or French companies, Americans could go into their
own mines and dig out an iron superior, by from twenty-five to thirty-
three per cent., in strength to English iron, and they could thus, with a
modified tariff, be in a position to ask no favors from any source for the
restoration of their commerce.

Mr. SAMUEL HALL, of East Boston, ship-builder, made a statement
to the committee. He said that the wooden ship-building interest had
been much depressed since the war. He had built but one ship since
the war, and had one upon the stocks now. This depression was owing
wholly to the high cost of the ships. The high duties upon the materials
entering into the construction of ships, made ships cost from fifty to sixty
per cent, higher than they did previous to the war. Iron which they used
to buy for not exceeding forty dollars per ton was now eighty dollars per
ton ; rigging which they used to buy at eight cents per pound was now
sixteen cents per pound ; duck which they used to buy at twenty-eight
cents a pound was now worth fifty-six cents ; and everything else was
in the same proportion. Unless there was something done to relieve
ship-builders they would have to give up their business entirely.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 83

Mr. MORRELL. The prices that you speak of now are in currency, as
compared with gold prices before the war ?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. Formerly we used to take ships to England and
sell them. I believe that I took the first ship to England from this country
and sold her there. Now I presume that if the trade were thrown open so
that the English could send their ships here to be sold, there would be
no ships at all built on this side. We cannot compete with theln. They
can build iron ships cheaper than we can build wooden ones.

Mr. CALKIN. How does the mechanical labor here compare with the
mechanical labor of England?

Mr. HALL. It is much higher here than it is there.

Mr. CALKIN. Do our ship-carpenters here do any more work than
their ship -carpenters do?

Mr. HALL. I think they do.

Mr. CALKIN. What would the average be ?

Mr. HALL. I think that we are degenerating very fast on that point
in this country, so far as my experience goes.

Mr. CALKIN. The reason why I ask the question is because the builders
of New York gave it as their opinion that the American mechanics were
superior to the English mechanics and did more work ; and I want to
get the opinion of a Boston builder on that point.

Mr. HALL. I think that they do, as a general thing. I think that the
English hold on to their own notion of doing things. I do not know
but that their workmen work as hard as ours ; but the means that they
take to accomplish the work is different. Their tools are not so good as
ours. I think that if Congress would relieve the ship -builders by re
moving the duties on the materials that enter into the construction of
ships, it would be a great advantage to them. Unless they do so, I think,
in the course of a few years, there will be no more ship-yards in this
country.

Mr. WELLS. I understood you to state that it costs to build a ship
now from fifty to sixty per cent, more than it did before the war ?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. WELLS. By removing all the duties and allowing a drawback on
the materials entering into the construction of wooden ships, would you
then be able to compete with ships built in the provinces, where timber
is equally as plenty as it is here I

Mr. HALL. If they used the same quality of timber that we do, we could
build as cheap as they can in the provinces ; but they build their ships
out of cheaper timber, such as spruce and birch. I have worked in the
provinces and know the manner in which they do their work.

Mr. WELLS. You have been carrying on that business for many years ?

Mr. HALL. About forty-six years.

Mr. WELLS. What is your opinion as to the necessary legislation of
Congress in order to enable ship-builders in this country to compete
with foreign ship-builders ?

Mr. HALL. I think that if all the articles used in ship-building were
admitted duty free, American ship-builders would be able to go on as
formerly.

Mr. WELLS. Suppose you were able to go on, would you find a market
here for your ships?

Mr. HALL. I see no reason why we should not. Nothing but the high
prices prevents our finding a market now. Enough of people want ships
but cannot pay the prices for them.

Mr. WELLS. I notice several ships lying idle here, and also in New
York, as if they had not any business. How do you account for that ?

84 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. HALL. There is not a large amount of tonnage now, I think not
near as much as there was before the war. There are not half the ships
in New York now that there were formerly. If it were not for the coast
ing trade I do not know that there would be hardly an American ship
to be seen. If our ports were thrown open to other nations and our
coastwise trade opened to them, we should not have any use at all for
our ships.

Mr. WELLS. Your opinion is that if Congress should remove all the
obstructions in regard to duty, allowing ship-builders a drawback, and
at the same time should throw open the purchase of ships in Europe,
the mechanics in this country could compete with English mechanics in
the building of ships?

Mr. HALL. I do not think they could. If the English were allowed
to put their ships into the market, and if our navigation laws were re
pealed, I do not think there would ever be any more ships of any kind
built here.

Mr. WELLS. American merchants are free now to go and buy ships
abroad and to sail them under the English flag?

Mr. HALL. Yes; and I am told that quite a number of them are doing
it.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you understand that the business as now carried
on by the English nation is profitable ; that they are making money to
day in their commercial marine I

Mr. HALL. I cannot say as to that. I should not think that the busi
ness is depressed there as it is here, because they build much more
there, and people are not apt to follow a losing business a great while.

Mr. MOREELL. But they are willing to keep their ships running even
when they are not making money ?

Mr. HALL. I cannot say as regards the English whether their shipping
is depressed or not ; but I know that in this country it is very much
depressed.

Mr. CALKIN. The question was asked you whether, if the drawback
on the materials were allowed, and if the navigation laws were repealed
so that capitalists could go abroad and buy ships, American mechanics
could compete with English ship-builders, and you answered that they
could not. Do you think that if the time were extended for instance,
if the drawback were allowed, and then in the course of four or five
years the navigation larws were repealed the ship-builders of this coun
try could get themselves in a position by that time to compete with
foreign builders ?

Mr. HALL. I do not think they could.

Mr. CALKIN. You think it would take a longer time ?

Mr. HALL. Yes. If the navigation laws were repealed almost all the
ships in the world would be built in England.

Mr. CALKIN. You understand niy question. It is whether, if a draw
back were allowed for four or five years before the navigation laws were
repealed, the American mechanics would then be in a position to com
pete with the English mechanics ?

Mr. HALL. I think not.

The CHAIRMAN. How long a time would it take for American ship
builders to compete with foreigners ?

Mr. HALL. I do not think they ever can. If Congress anticipates
repealing the navigation laws it may as well do so to-day as wait for
five years hence. The result would be the same.

The CHAIRMAN. What are the wages paid at present to ship-carpen
ters and mechanics here I

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 85

Mr. HALL. About three dollars a clay in currency.

The CHAIRMAN. What were they paid before the war say from 1854
to 1800 f

Mr. HALL. Not exceeding two dollars a day from that to one dollar
and seventy-five and one dollar and fifty cents. I built the first clipper
ship, I believe, that was built in Boston, the Surprise, in 1850, and I
then paid one dollar and seventy-five cents a day.

The CHAIRMAN. 1850 was a year of great depression. How was it in
1854, which was a year of great activity in the building of ships ?

Mr. HALL. Not so much as in 1852. In 1852 we had the greatest
activity in ship-building in this country that we ever had. I recollect
that I built four ships from March to December of that year, of eleven
hundred tons each.

The CHAIRMAN. What were the average rates of wages paid to first-
class nuechanics from 1850 to I860 ?

Mr. HALL. It would fall below two dollars. I should say that one
dollar and seventy -five cents would be about the average, and sometimes
it went down to one dollar and fifty cents for first-class mechanics.

The CHAIRMAN. So that there has been an advance of fifty per cent,
in wages?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. The carpenter work on a ship which would then
cost about seven thousand dollars would now cost about twelve thousand
or thirteen thousand dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. You think, then, that something more than the
admission of the materials entering into the construction of ships duty
free is necessary to enable American ship-builders to compete with for
eigners J ?

Mr. HALL. As long as things remain as they are now, the cost of
labor will not recede much. Mechanics are going out of the business
and seeking other employment, and there is great scarcity even now of
mechanics in ship-building. That, of course, enhances the cost of
wages.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think, from your knowledge of the character
of workmen here, and in Europe, that the difference in labor would be
overcome or nearly overcome by the greater efficiency of the American
workmen ?

Mr. HALL. I do. It takes the English a great while to do a little
work. They are diligent men, but they are very slow.

The CHAIRMAN. How would the cost of materials that enter into the
construction of ships stand now free of duty as compared with the price
of materials before the war, making an allowance for the difference
between gold and currency ?

Mr. HALL. The cost would be considerably higher now.

Mr. MORRELL. Does that refer to timber as well as to iron ?

Mr. HALL. No, sir ; to nothing but the iron ; the wood we get here.

Mr. MORRELL. What is the value of the iron in wooden ships as com
pared with the value of the other materials?

Mr. HALL. A ship of one thousand three hundred and fifty tons, such
as I am building now, will take about seventy-five tons of bolt iron and
square iron.

Mr. WELLS. Do you not use a great deal of copper in the building of
wooden ships?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. WELLS. &quot;VVhat is the difference between the cost of copper now
and its cost previous to the war ?

Mr. HALL. We do not now use clear copper.

86 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. WELLS. You cover the outside with copper ?

Mr. HALL. That is sheathing copper. Before the war it was worth
seventeen cents a pound ; now it is worth twenty-seven cents.

Mr. CALKIN. In case of a repeal of the navigation laws, what would
be the effect upon ship-carpenters labor in this country in the course oi
four or five years ?

Mr. HALL. There would not be any at all.

Mr. CALKIN. Can you take a house-carpenter or a wood- worker of any
kind and make a ship-carpenter of him readily 9

Mr. HALL. No, sir ; no more than you can take a common mechanic
and set him to make a watch.

Mr. HOLMAN. What will be the policy of ship-builders hereafter in
regard to the building of wooden vessels I Are wooden ships likely to
be built hereafter to any extent, or will iron ships supersede them 1

Mr. HALL. I do not think that iron ships at present, unless they are
built much cheaper, will compete with wooden ships.

Mr. HOLMAN. Take the commerce of the world.

Mr. HALL. I thkik the tendency is toward iron vessels.

Mr. HOLMAN. Supposing that Congress should adopt a more liberal
policy by admitting foreign built vessels to American registration, only
excluding them from the coastwise trade, and supposing that a rebate
were allowed upon all the materials entering into the construction of
ships, what effect would these measures, taken together, have upon our
commerce and our ship-building ? Would they promote the one and
injure the other, or would they promote both ?

Mr. HALL. I should think you would not promote the ship-building
interest by throwing the trade open to foreign vessels.

Mr. HOLMAN. By giving the coastwise trade exclusively to American-
built ships?

Mr. HALL. I do not think that there is enough of that to make it
worth while building ships.

Mr. HOLMAN. In 18GO, when our commercial marine was much larger
than it is now, was not our domestic trade equal to fifty per cent, of the
whole of our commerce ?

Mr. HALL. Congress can tell better than I can about that.

Mr. HOLMAN. You had no occasion to inquire into that question ?

Mr. HALL. No, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. You think that the advantages resulting from the
domestic trade to American-built ships are not very important, and
that the reservation of that trade to American-built ships, combined
with the use of free materials in the construction of ships, would not
promote our ship-building, if registration were granted to foreign-built
vessels ?

Mr. HALL. No ; I do not think that these measures would be of any
great benefit; I think that ship-building here would finally die out. If
the government does not do something to protect the ship-building in
terest it certainly will die out, and that very soon.

Mr. HOLMAN. And you think that this would be done in two ways :
first by preserving the navigation act ; and secondly, by allowing ma
terials exempt from, internal and external taxes to be used in the con
struction of ships?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Are American capitalists willing to employ their capital
at as low rates of interest in ship-building as English capitalists are ?

Mr. HALL Yes, I think so.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Can you tell whether the business of building

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 87

wooden ships in the provinces is about as much depressed as it is here ?

Mr. HALL. I cannot tell you. I think there is very little business
doing there.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Have you any means of knowing whether it is de
pressed there as much as it is here ?

Mr. HALL. I have not.

Mr. JOHN TAYLOR, ship-builder of Chelsea, next made a statement to
the committee. He said that he agreed in the main facts that had been
stated by Mr. Smith and by Mr. Hall. What had been said in regard
to iron ships was equally applicable to wooden ships, so far as half or
more of the whole cost of the ship was concerned. He would not add
to or take from what had been already stated. There was great de
pression here in the ship-building interest. The cause of that depres
sion had been stated, and he did not know that he could add anything to
the statement. He had been thirty-five years engaged in ship-building,
and had constructed over one hundred large ships. He was not con
structing any ships at present, nor did he contemplate doing so, as he
had made up his mind to abandon the business altogether, and never to
build another ship. This was for the simple reason that it could not be
done; that American ship-builders could not compete with the ship
builders of other nations so long as the difference in the cost of materials
existed. He believed that there were two ships at present on the stocks
in this port, but that in two weeks from this time there would not be a
ship on the stocks in Massachusetts. He accounted for the fact that
there was any ship-building going on now in Boston, by saying that it
was in order to keep the yards in existence and to employ the mechanics.
He himself had done as little as he could possibly do, so as to employ
his materials and workmen, hoping ere long that some assistance would
come to the ship-building interest.

The CHAIRMAN. Can the ships which are now being built be sold at
profit to the builder ?

Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir; they are being built merely on account of the
mechanics, and for the purpose of using up the materials and keeping
the men together, in the hope of better times.

The CHAIRMAN. Where have you constructed heretofore ?

Mr. TAYLOR. In East Boston for the last few years.

The CHAIRMAN. How long is it since you have built any skips?

Mr. TAYLOR. I have one now just about finished.

The CHAIRMAN. Please state to the committee the rates of wages
which you are paying to first-class mechanics.

Mr. TAYLOR. From three to three and a quarter dollars a day.

The CHAIRMAN. What were the average rates of wages for the same
kind of mechanics previous to the war say from 1852 to 1860 ?

Mr. TAYLOR. In 1852- 3 wages were very high. In 1850 and 1851,
and again in 1856- 7- 8, they were low. My experience would vary a
little from Mr. Hall s. I think that the average would reach quite as
high as to-day, and perhaps a little higher for first-class mechanics. For
second-class mechanics wages would be very much below that. A great
portion of them would be hired at from nine shillings a day to one dollar
and seventy-five cents.

The CHAIRMAN. Reduced to gold, the present rate of wages would be
about thirty-five per cent, higher than the rate of wages then ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, about that. There has been a great deal of tam
pering with labor here, and that, in my estimation, has injured the cause
a great deal. These societies here have formed laws regulating labor,
determining the hours of labor, &c.

88 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The CHAIRMAN. How many hours do your mechanics work now?

Mr. TAYLOR. We have worked ten hours. The navy yard here em
ploys about seven-eighths of all the ship-carpenters in this vicinity. There
they work for only eight hours, and are paid three dollars and twenty-
four cents a day, so that all the ship-carpenters are nocking to the navy
yard.

The CHAIRMAN. What hours did your mechanics work previous to
the war ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Ten hours.

The CHAIRMAN. What effect does the navy yard have upon labor ?
Does it tend to increase the rates of wages in the neighborhood of the
yard?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir ; it always does.

The CHAIRMAN. So that a ship cannot be built as cheaply in the
neighborhood of a navy yard as remote from it ?

Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir ; men will always seek employment in a navy
yard even at lower rates of wages than they can get at private yards.

The CHAIRMAN. How does the price of materials at the present time
(keeping in mind the difference between gold and currency) compare
with the price of materials before the war say from 1852 to 1860?

Mr. TAYLOR. If we used white-oak plank it would be very much
higher ; yellow pine would be very little higher.

The CHAIR3IAN. How would it be, taking the materials for a ship right
through by the ton ?

Mr. TAYLOR. All the outfits, everything like spars and rigging, sails,
iron, copper, and all finishing work, trimmings, brass work, and every
thing of that kind, is more than one hundred per cent, higher in currency.

The CHAIRMAN. Eeduce it to gold and take the duty off, and how
rould the price of materials then compare with the prices previous to
*,he war ?

Mr. TAYLOR. If the duties were all taken off, I do not think there
orould be a great deal of difference, with the rates reduced to gold.

Mr. CALKIN. Do not navy yard commandants send to the different
manufacturing establishments in the community and base the price of
Aabor in the yard upon the price of labor outside ?

Mr. TAYLOR. I do not think that they do. That is to say, I do not
think that they get a fair representation of labor outside. Labor is
always higher in the navy yard than it is out of it. We have several
classes of labor. There is the repairing of ships. That labor fetches a
higher price than new work does. For instance, if new work were paid
at the rate of three dollars a day, old work would be paid at the rate of
four dollars. The navy yard people are more inclined to take that kind
of labor as a criterion ; or, at all events, they take that kind of labor and
the new, and they draw a line between them which would make the labor
on the new ships higher than is paid outside.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you think that ship-carpenters get any higher wages
than they ought to according to the price of everything ?

Mr. TAYLOR. I do not think they do. I do not find any fault with the
price of labor. We do find some fault with the time that mechanics
propose to labor.

Mr. MORRELL. You say that you believe that the vessels now being
built cannot be sold at a profit to the builder. Do you think that they
could be sold at a profit, provided the duty on all the materials were
refunded or a drawback allowed ?

Mr. TAYLOR. I do.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 89

Mr. MORRELL. Do you think that an additional number of vessels
could be profitably put into the service and run at this time?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, I think we can run our ships against the world.

Mr. MORRELL. Is there a demand at this time for ships at any price?

Mr. TAYLOR. Perhaps not at the present moment.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think that the want of a demand for ves
sels has something to do with the depression in the business just now?

Mr. TAYLOR. Undoubtedly ; there is no question about that.

The CHAIRMAN. I suppose that you experienced periods of depression
before the war ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Oh, yes.

Mr. MORRELL. You have seen dull times in ship-building before ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir; very dull indeed.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think that the introduction of iron vessels
and of vessels of larger capacity propelled by steam has had a great
deal to do with the depression of the ship-building business?

Mr. TAYLOR. It may have ; I should think, however, very little now.

Mr. MORRELL. One vessel of large capacity takes the place of several
vessels of smaller capacity and makes quicker trips?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, that affects the coastwise trade and perhaps the
trade between here and Europe. It has been asked whether iron ships
would finally supersede wooden ones entirely. There are some trades
which iron ships are not fit for. For instance, the China trade. There
they prefer wooden ships. In Calcutta and Bombay iron ships have
quite the preference over wooden ones some half dollar a ton, I think,
in freight. The question was asked about our competing with foreign
labor. I am inclined to think that we can do so. I am satisfied in my
own mind that we can. Three years ago I was in Liverpool and had
some large repairs done upon a ship there, and I made up my mind that
so far as the labor was concerned we could do the work quite as cheap.
Two years ago I was in Bremen, where labor was very low only sixty
cents a day for the best mechanics. I am satisfied that labor there costs
more than it does here in Boston, although we pay four dollars a day
and they only pay sixty cents.

Mr. WELLS. Why do they prefer wooden ships to iron ships in the
China trade ?

Mr. TAYLOR. I do not know. I think that I know the fact, but why
it is I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. If you have any other suggestions to make, the com
mittee will be pleased to hear them.

Mr. TAYLOR. In reference to repealing the navigation laws, it occurs to
me that in that case the government would be more seriously affected than
even ship-builders or merchants, for, as Mr. Hall says, the ship-carpen
ters would become extinct in a short time, there would be scarcely
enough left to repair old vessels, and then in case of a war like the last
one, or in case of a war with England, (and such a thing may be,) we
should be in no position whatever to provide ships of war, because our
mechanics would be all gone.

Mr. WELLS. Is not the navigation law virtually repealed already?

Mr. TAYLOR. I think not.

Mr. WELLS. There is nothing to prevent American ship-owners buy
ing ships in England and running them under the English flag ?

Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir; but that has its disadvantages.

Mr. WELLS. It has been shown before the committee that it also has
its advantages, as they get their stores cheaper and labor cheaper.

Mr. TAYLOR. Perhaps so.

90 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. WELLS. I suppose that the disadvantages are with reference to
the title to the property and to the management of it ?

Mr. TAYLOR. That is the disadvantage that I have spoken of.

Mr. MORRELL. Would not the allowance of a drawback of duty on
all the materials going into the construction of a ship operate to exclude
the. use of American materials I

Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir ; it would affect the prices of American materi
als, as Mr. Smith represented.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not suppose that other interests are affected
by legislation the same as your own J ? Do you not suppose that other
interests can be entirely wiped out, as well as the ship-building interest,
by adverse legislation ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir ; there is no question about that.

Mr. MORRELL. If you render it impossible to produce those materials
in the country profitably that is, if the labor that produces them can
be employed more profitably in other pursuits than in producing materi
als for ship-building Avould it not operate to prevent their production
here, and to compel you to buy foreign materials ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir ; that would be the tendency, beyond a doubt.

Mr. HOLMAN. It is a fact, however, that certain interests have been
rather protected by the events of the war J ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Has not ship-building been entirely depressed by the
war ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Very much so. It was effectually destroyed. Those who
were engaged in it were carrying it on under great disadvantages and
loss ; whereas the iron trade has been protected, so that the people en
gaged in it have been making money.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you think that if you were able to build ships cheap
in Boston the Boston merchants would put their money in them ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir, I do.

Mr. HOLMAN. At as cheap a rate as foreign capitalists ? For instance,
will not an English or a French or a Prussian capitalist invest his money
in ships at from four to five and six per cent. ? And with the various
advantageous modes of investing money in the United States, will
American capitalists do that ?

Mr. TAYLOR. I think they will. I think that a certain class of Amer
ican capitalists would prefer to invest in ships rather than in anything
else.

Mr. HOLMAN. That would be the case, perhaps, in commercial cen
ters and in ship-building districts ?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.

Mr. PAUL CURTIS, ship-builder, next made a statement to the commit
tee. He said that he could not add much to what had been already said.
It was very evident that under the existing tariff ships could not be
built in this country. If a ship-builder should goto a merchant and ask
him to buy a ship, the merchant would say, &quot; No, our ships are taxed
too much. I cannot invest money in them.* He thought that there
would not be any ship-building done in Boston, at present, were it not
for the purpose of keeping up the ship-yards. He himself was not
building any at present. He had built a Ship this summer of 1,418 tons,
new measurement.

The CHAIRMAN. Please state to the committee the difference in the
cost of the labor on that ship now, and what it would have been before
the war both in gold.

Mr. CURTIS. If you take gold at one-third higher than currency, I do

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 91

not think there would be any great difference. Ship-carpenters are work
ing probably as cheap as they can work.

The CHAIRMAN. What were the average rates of wages paid to ship-
carpenters before the war, say from 1852 to 18GO &quot;?

Mr. CURTIS. In California times we were paying a great deal more
than we are paying now. That was from 1852 to 1854. There was a
great deal of building then, and frequently when we got a ship built
she would fetch ten thousand or twelve thousand dollars more than the
contract price. Now it is quite the reverse. We get a ship built and
there is no chance to sell her so as to make anything out of her. Lately
I have not built any ships except on contract. This ship that I built
was built on English account. They sent over word that if we could
build a sjiip at so many pounds sterling we might go ahead and build
her. We could not meet them at first, but finally we did get together
and took the ship very low and built her. One of the parties in Eng
land, however, thought that he preferred an iron ship, and he requested
us to sell her on his account. That ship was built at some four thousand
or five thousand dollars less than we could duplicate her for, and yet we
would not find a merchant who would buy that ship. She was offered
here at two and a half per cent, on the cost, and there was no one to
step forward and buy her.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you made any estimate as to the difference in,
th^ enhanced cost of materials at present and before the war &amp;lt;?

Mr. CURTIS. Hard pine is about a third higher. Before the war we
could get hard pine at twenty- five cents, and now we are paying from
thirty-six cents to thirty-eight cents.

The CHAIRMAN. How is it as to the cost of iron ?

Mr. CURTIS. Iron is a great deal higher.

The CHAIRMAN. How much is the total cost of iron to-day that is put
into a thousand- ton ship all fitted for sea ?

Mr. CURTIS. I do not know exactly. All that I know is that the low
est ever paid for iron was thirty-seven dollars a ton, and now we are
paying somewhere about eighty dollars.

Mr. MORRELL. When did you buy iron at that price ?

Mr. CURTIS. J guess four or five years before the war. I imported it.

The CHAIRMAN. You were going on to state the cost of all the mate
rials entering into the construction of a ship ?

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. McKay says that he went into a careful calculation,
and that he made out the difference in the cost of a thousand-ton ship,
caused by the tariff, to be from eight thousand to ten thousand dollars.

Mr. WELLS. What does it cost to build a wooden ship of that ton
nage?

Mr. CURTIS. We can build her for about eighty dollars a ton in cur
rency.

Mr. MORRELL. What would she have cost from 1855 to 18GO ?

Mr. CURTIS. You would have got her for about fifty-five dollars a ton.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean fitted out for sea 1 ?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir. I have rigged many a ship for eleven thousand
or twelve thousand dollars. This ship which I have just sent away cost
us twenty -five thousand dollars for rigging, over and above the hull.

The CHAIRMAN. That is a great deal more than the difference which
you have just stated as the difference on all the materials.

Mr. CURTIS. These ships may not have been quite as large; but for
a number of years the price of rigging a ship did not vary a thousand
dollars. It would be from eleven thousand to twelve thousand dol-

92 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

lars. At present they are using iron with the rigging, and they would
probably use it more than they do if it were not for the high tariff on it.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it used to any great extent upon wooden ships ?

Mr. CURTIS. There have been three or four lately rigged with it ; -this
one which I have just sent away was rigged with iron rigging; but I
believe our merchants think that they would rather have the hemp rig
ging, because the old hemp will sell for enough to pay for the wear;
they use the hemp here for some time, and then they go to England and
put in wire rigging, and the hemp is then worth as much to sell as the
wire costs in England.

Mr. HOLMAN. Prior to I860 to what extent were vessels built by ship
builders of Boston for foreign capitalists ?

Mr. CURTIS. When we built ships on our own account, if -we could
not sell them here we sent them to Europe; and there were a great
many built here and sold in that way.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you know of any having been built by contract
with foreign capitalists prior to 1860 ?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir; I built some myself, and I believe two or three
since 1860 for the firm of Warren & Co.; four years ago I built a
wooden ship for them of one thousand three hundred or one thousand
four hundred tons ; two or three years before that I built one of one
thousand one hundred or one thousand two hundred tons for them.
I do not know whether we can compete with the English in iron-ship
building ; we cannot at present ; but I am satisfied that we can in
wooden-ship building if we could have some relief on the tariff on our
materials.

Mr. HOLMAN. You think that if the materials were relieved from taxa
tion our ship-builders could compete with English ship-builders as to
wooden vessels ?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. But you think it doubtful as to iron- ship building, sup
posing that iron were relieved entirely from duty?

Mr. CURTIS. We should want a little more experience than we have
got; the English are building their iron ships very scientifically that is,
they have got fairly under way, and it would require some time for us
to do so.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is it not an advantage to the English ship-building in
terest that the rate of interest for capital in England is low ?

Mr. CURTIS. Undoubtedly ; at the same time I have built three ships
for an English house within the last six or seven years.

Mr. CALKIN. Where does the government get its mechanical labor
from for the navy yards ship- carpenters, calkers, engineers, boiler-
makers, &c. *?

Mr. CURTIS. It gets them, of course, from private yards.

Mr. CALKIN. The government does not educate mechanics of any kind
in the navy yards ?

Mr. CURTIS. Xo, sir ; apprentices are very seldom taken.

Mr. MORRELL. I understood you to say that a ship which formerly
cost fifty-five thousand dollars would now cost about eighty thousand
dollars f

Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir ; it would not vary much from that.

Mr. MORRELL. That is eighty thousand dollars in currency against
fifty-five thousand dollars in gold beforcfthe war ?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORRELL. That is twenty-five thousand dollars in currency over
the gold cost ?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 93

Mr. CURTIS. Perhaps eighty dollars a ton is a little more than a ship
would cost now.

Mr. MORRELL. I think it was stated in New York that a ship could
be built for seventy-five dollars a ton.

Mr. CURTIS. We took an account of stock before we commenced to
build this last ship, and we took an account of stock after we got through.
We took the contract for less than eighty dollars a ton ; but we lost
money on it. For a thousand-ton ship I should say that eighty dollars
a ton was a fair price j but for a larger ship it could be done cheaper.
It does not cost so much a ton to rig a large ship as it does to rig a
small one.

Mr. MORRELL. If all the duties were taken from the materials that
entered into the construction of that ship, how much cheaper could you
have constructed her f

Mr. CURTIS. 1 have not gone into that question ; I only know, from
what Mr. McKay says, that on a thousand-ton ship the difference would
be about eight thousand dollars.

Mr. MORRELL. About eight dollars a ton ?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORRELL. Would the cheapening of a ship eight dollars a ton
enable you to find work for it in this port ?

Mr. CURTIS. I think it would ; I think our merchants would give con
siderably more for an American-built ship than for a foreign-built ship.

Mr. MORRELL. Then it seems that the whole matter lies in the cheap
ening of a thousand-ton ship from eight thousand dollars to ten thou
sand dollars ; would it not be a greater boon to the ship-owner if he
could get the supplies of that ship relieved from duty rather than have
the cost cheapened to that extent ?

Mr. CURTIS. The ship-owner would evidently want some other things
off. For instance, if Mr. McKay is going to carry his ship to New York,
he has got to pay a year s license on her in order that he may carry her
to New York and sell her. I understand that it costs six hundred dol
lars to get a ship sent there.

Mr. MORRELL. Is not that tax in itself more important than the duty
on the materials ?

Mr. CURTIS. All these things go to depress the business.

Mr. HOLMAN. After the vessel is constructed can the American owner
mil her as cheap as the English or the French owner?

Mr. CURTIS. I have no doubt that he can, and cheaper ; he pays a
little more to his men j but he takes less of them, and they are more
efficient.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you run ships as well as build them ?

Mr. CURTIS. I am to some extent a ship-owner. We are often obliged
to take one-eighth of a vessel for the sake of getting the contract to
build her.

The CHAIRMAN. Do ship-builders here generally own interests in the
ships that they build ?

Mr. CURTIS. There has been very little of that business done here.
Ship-builders have depended upon the merchants. There is where we
have not done so well as the people of .Maine have. The ship-builders
in Maine have owned parts of the ships, and there is more money made
in running ships than there is in building them.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do our merchants attach any importance to the custom
that prevails in some European countries of allowing ships stores to be
taken out of bond free of duty ? Is that a matter of any importance in
any of our lines of trade!

94 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. CURTIS. That is not a subject with which I am familiar.

The CHAIRMAN. Please state the effect oil the ship-building interest
of the tariff 011 copper.

Mr. CURTIS. I hear it stated that you can get your yellow-metal
some seven or eight cents a pound cheaper in England than we can get
it here.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the general practice of ship-builders and
ship-owners in reference to the coppering of vessels ? Is it generally
done here or on the other side of the water ?

Mr. CURTIS. If vessels are going to California, they are coppered
here. If they are going to a cotton port and thence to Europe, they
wait till they get over there.

The CHAIRMAN. If the cost of a ship at the present time is eighty
dollars per ton here, would it be as low as that if there was the usual
amount of ship-building being done? In other words, is not the cost
reduced by the limited amount of business ?

Mr. CURTIS. Probably wages would go higher if there was much
work doing ; but they are repairing vessels at the navy yards and are
employing a great deal of labor. That, however, is local and tem
porary.

The CHAIRMAN. If the navy yard were not in operation would the
rates of wages be lower?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And on the other hand, if ship-building for mercan
tile purposes were increased, that would increase the cost?

Mr. CURTIS. That would bring it up again, probably.

The CHAIRMAN. If there were ten or fifteen ships building here when
you were building yours, would it have cost you any more for the labor ;
and if so, how much more ?

Mr. CURTIS. Undoubtedly, if there were more ships building with
the same state of things in the navy yard, there is no doubt but wages
would be higher ; but that is merely local and confined to the neighbor
hood of navy yards. Of course the more business that there is doing,
the more wages we have got to pay.

The CHAIRMAN. Does not that thing always regulate itself? Does
not the increased business alwavs enable you to pay the increased cost
of labor ?

Mr. CURTIS. Certainly.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that you could build a ship for eighty
dollars a ton if labor was in as large a demand at present as it was in
1860?

Mr. CURTIS. I do not suppose that I could. I suppose that that
would increase the cost of the ship.

Mr. MORRELL. Was there not a time previous to the war when there
was a large demand for ships, and when you could not produce them
for fifty-five dollars a ton ?

Mr. CURTIS. In California times, when everybody went on ships, and
when they could get freight enough to pay for the ship, they wanted
ships built in a hurry, and then wages were high ; but just before the
war the business was very much depressed ; labor was low, and
materials and everything. That is the time when ships could be built
at fifty-five dollars per ton.

The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion, providing the materials that enter
into the construction of ships were admitted free of duty, you could
then build ships in competition with foreign ship-builders?

Mr. CURTIS. We could build wooden ships j I have no doubt of that.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 95

As to iron ships, I have no experience that would enable me to answer
the question.

The CHAIRMAN. But you think there is no doubt that the remission
of the duties would enable you to build wooden ships here as cheap as
before ?

Mr. CURTIS. I have no doubt of it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe there would be the demand for the
ships in case they were&quot; built at that reduced rate I

Mr. CURTIS. I can only say that that is what the merchants estimate.

Mr. MORRELL. Is it not more the tax to which the ship is subjected
after she is built that merchants object to, rather than the enhanced
cost of the ship itself?

Mr. CURTIS. That is a question which had better be answered by the
merchants.

Mr. WELLS. Speaking about coppering those ships, what is the ex
pense of coppering a thousand-ton ship ? How many tons of copper
does it require?

Mr. CURTIS. I do not know that I can answer that question. Cop-
peri Dg is an extra charge, and it is not very often that we copper ships
ourselves.

The CHAIRMAN. If the price of a ship is eighty dollars per ton fitted
out for sea, does that include a copper or metal bottom ?

Mr. CURTIS. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. How much would that increase the cost of a vessel
of one thousand tons ?

Mr. CURTIS. I suppose about $4,000 or $5,000, or four dollars and
fifty cents a ton.

Mr. E. H. DERBY next addressed the committee. The committee
was aware that the American tonnage, when it culminated in 1851, had
reached the point of about five and a half million tons. It had risen
just above the tonnage of England. Now, American tonnage had de
creased to 4,300,000 tons, and the English tonnage had risen to
7,300,000, and was at present about seven millions. During the late
war, and while England drew the great bulk of her cotton from India,
the voyage occupied nearly a year ; but, when the war ended and Eng
land again drew her cotton from America, the voyage was shortened
more than half, so that less than half the tonnage was required for that
business. That had some effect in diminishing English tonnage, and an
immediate check was given to ship-building in England, which had been
exceedingly rapid during the war, the tonnage having nearly doubled.
Many American vessels had been placed under the English flag, and
the consequent increase of English tonnage and decrease of American
tonnage had been very great. With the close of the war, when American
ships again entered into the field of commerce, there was a great check
given to English tonnage ; from the end of the war to the present time
there had been rather a diminution than increase of English tonnage;
but still the disparity between that and the American tonnage was very
great.

By referring to statistics of American tonnage it would be found that
now the coasting trade preponderated greatly over the foreign trade.
By analyzing the returns of about nine months of the past fiscal year
from June to April he found that the arrivals and clearances in the
domestic trade were fifty-one million tons, and the arrivals and clearances
in the foreign trade only seventeen millions, showing that the amount of
business done in the coasting trade (the voyages being shorter) was nearly
three times as great as in the whole foreign trade. When he came to

96 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

analyze the foreign trade he found that of this seventeen million tons (of
which, in former times, two-thirds were American and one-third foreign)
two-thirds were foreign and one-third American, the American dwindling
from year to year, and the foreign increasing. He found that, during
those nine months which he had examined, the increase in the foreign
tonnage was at the rate of fourteen per cent., and the diminution in the
American tonnage was at the rate of twenty-eight per cent. ; so that it
would be seen that the American tonnage engaged in the foreign trade
was being very rapidly extinguished, and was being driven from the
ocean.

There was on the files of Congress at Washington a very valuable re
port on the commerce of the United States, which contained the reports
of the United States consuls at all the foreign ports. That of Mr. Morse,
consul to London, showed that before the war the American tonnage
engaged in the carrying trade of the world was two and a half million tons,
of English shipping very nearly an equal amount, the aggregate of all
the rest not coming up either to the American or English. He (Mr.
Derby) entertained no doubt that that two and a half millions of Ameri
can tonnage was now reduced to five or six or seven hundred thousand
tons, (less than one-third of what it had been,) and that that small pro
portion was rapidly diminishing.

The condition of American shipping at present was, that in the coast
wise trade it was gradually and slowly increasing, particularly on the
rivers and lakes, and a little on the coast ; and that in the foreign trade
there was an immense diminution. While the schooners, brigs, and small
steamboats were increasing there was a great diminution in the construc
tion of ships. For instance, before the war there were on the average
three hundred and fifty ships a year built ; now that three hundred and
fifty had dwindled to sixty, and those were employed almost entirely in
the coastwise trade. It had become apparent from the course of events
that American vessels were being driven from the ocean in competition
with foreign vessels, that Americans could not hold their own in the
foreign trade, and that all they could do was to cling to the coastwise
trade.

What had caused this; and how was it to be remedied ? It had been
said that the diminution in American shipping was due to the war. They
had lost by privateers and British pirates between one and two hundred
thousand tons of shipping, but that did not explain the loss of tonnage.
The explanation was in the diminution in ship-building, and in the de
parture of vessels from the American flag to the British flag. Thus the
tonnage of England had been increased, and that in the United States
very materially diminished.

The difficulty in which commerce was at this moment was that, by the
legislation of Congress, American vessels were shut out from the foreign
trade. First, the vessels that had gone under a foreign flag were for
bidden by law to return. They could not come back again. If a sheep
were lost it might be recovered and brought back to the fold, but the
ship once gone was gone forever. Such was the legislation of Congress.
He would say a word for those parties who had parted with their ships.
He regarded them as among the most meritorious merchants of the
country. The duty of the Bailor was to save his ship, to cling to his ship,
and to bring her safe back to port. From, time immemorial it had been
the custom in time of war to put ships under a neutral flag, and it had
always been considered perfectly legitimate to do so. During the late
war the United States navy could give no protection to commerce. No
armed ships could be spared to take care of American commerce oil the

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 97

open sea. He believed that there had not been a convoy during the
war, the armed ships being employed in blockading southern -ports, and
properly so employed. The question that addressed itself to the com
mittee and to Congress was a question of common sense. Was it to the
interest of the country to save its ships ? He held that it was to the
interest of the country to save the ship, and to bring her safe to port.
She could now return safe to port if Congress would only permit her.
The question was whether Congress would compel an American owner
to continue still to sail his vessel under the English flag, or permit him
to bring her back to her own country. These ships could still make good
whalers, and render good service in carrying oil from the Pacific and
Atlantic. They could render good service in the Pacific trade, carrying
lumber from Washington Territory to California, He did not represent
one of them directly, but he would respectfully ask that the door be
opened to them and that they may be brought home to diminish by so
much the tonnage of England and increase that of the United States.

He presumed that at the end of the war there were nearly a million
tons of American shipping sailing under the British flag. He did not sup
pose that there were now more than four or live hundred thousand tons,
and he would ask that every American-built ship be permitted to come
back. If the government did not take care of them during the war was
it not proper that they should take care of themselves, and should they
not now have the opportunity to return I

Passing from that subject to the subject of those duties that precluded
the building of ships in the United States, he would say, in the first
place, that by the navigation act foreign-built ships are prohibited from
getting an American registry. He suggested that it would be politic
to permit some foreign-built vessels to be owned and registered in
the United States on the payment of a duty. If iron ships could be
built cheaper in England than in America let them come not freely, so
as to break down American mechanics, but under a duty of ten or fif
teen per cent., or $10 or $15 per ton ; and then let a remission of duty to
the same amount be made to the American ship-builder. He would not
be in favor of taking the duty directly off the foreign commodity used
in ship-building, but would make a general remission of duties to the
amount of $10 per ton. That was Mr. McKay s estimate of the differ
ence in the cost of a thousand-ton iron ship caused by the tariff, not $8
per ton, as had been mentioned to-day. He would let that sum go to
the American ship-builder, and let it go to buy American goods instead
of foreign. He had been lately in the provinces, (having made four
reports on the subject of reciprocal trade,) and he found that labor there
was little less than in the United States ; that ship-building materials
were inferior in quality, but were suitable for building a cheap class of
vessels that would endure for only two-thirds or one-half the length of
time that the white-oak vessels built in the United States last. Still,
they made them very cheap, and, for certain purposes, they came in com
petition with the vessels built in the United States. Formerly those
vessels had carried lumber to England, Ireland, and Scotland, but, under
the free-trade system, they were now excluded from all but the western
coasts. Norway, Denmark, and Prussia were sending supplies to the
eastern coasts, and TV ere getting round to the Bristol Channel, where the
competition was about equal. He entertained the very confident opinion
that if the duty on ship-building materials were virtually taken off , by
making a concession of so much per ton, American merchants and ship
builders would be enabled not only to supply their own wants but to go
into the market and again sell ships abroad. There should be a reinis-

7NI

98 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

sion of $10 per ton, and at the same time there should be another change
which he had seen foreshadowed the other day in California .the resto
ration of gold and silver as the circulating medium. A specie currency
was needed to relieve the shipping interests. If a man were now to
build or buy a ship at $85 per ton, and if next year the country were to
go back to the gold currency, he would find his investment reduced to
$60 per ton. Therefore it was necessary to get back to the gold currency
as soon as possible, because the present condition of the currency de
terred men from going into that kind of investment.

Another view of the subject was, the change produced by substituting
steam for sails and iron for wood. They had undertaken recently in
Boston to build two magnificent steamers, two of the finest vessels in the
world. But Congress had virtually provided, by refusing to grant sub
sidies, that the United States should have no steamers carrying the mails
across the ocean. The only subsidies allowed were to a few vessels run
ning to Brazil and China, not half the number that ought to run between
China and California. How could Americans under such circumstances
run lines of steamers in competition with English and French lines which
were largely subsidized 1 ? England had a fleet of a hundred sail of
steamers running to the east, to Bombay, Calcutta, Japan, and China.
And how was this immense fleet supported? How was it that England
had to-day something like 500,000 tons engaged in steam navigation, and
a navy more powerful than the navies of all the rest of the world 3 ? It
was by her subsidies. She gave one, two, three dollars a mile to steam
ers, and, if necessary, was prepared to give four dollars. France had
put on a line to China, and had begun to press the English line a little;
but the English government had come forward and said, &quot;We will give
you $3 a mile on condition that your profits shall not get up beyond a cer
tain sum; but you shall run your steamers and not be put down by the
French.&quot; When other governments pursued the policy of granting lib
eral subsidies, why should not the American government do the same ?
Kot one of the great steamship lines could have paid expenses without
a subsidy, and the subsidy had been the sole basis on which they had
run. If that were the case, if they could not run without subsidy,
how could American lines run without subsidy, and with all the duties
imposed upon them? Were Americans prepared to abandon the ocean?
They were abandoning it to-day. If they wished to win fame and wealth
on the ocean, as their fathers had done, their steam lines must be sub
sidized. They must be put on an equality with foreign lines, and then
they would compete with the rest of the world.

It had been suggested that navigation should be made free, and that
foreign vessels should be admitted to American registry. In theory that
might seem to do very well, but would not Congress have to go a step
further? When it dealt with navigation in that way, would it not have
to go further and take the high duties off manufactured goods, and off
iron and other things? If Congress took the high duties off ships, and
kept them on everything else, who would want to own ships? What
seemed essential to him was that a great reduction should be made in
the cost of American-built ships, without doing injury to American
manufactures, and that a tax should be put upon foreign-built vessels.

He had been in California the other day, and had seen that there was a
competition between the Pacific railroad and the Pacific mail steamers, but
he was certain that if the steamers running to Panama could be diverted
to China, the diversion of each of the til-monthly steamers would be
worth a million dollars .to the railway. In the one case the steamship
line was an opponent, in the other case it would be a feeder. He thought

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 99

it would be extremely desirable to have a line of propellers established
between San Francisco and China, and he understood that the English
were thinking of it. It seemed to him that&quot; there was so much need of
some iron screw propellers for that trade that, if they could not be built
cheaply here, some of them should be let in from England, and run on
American account.

He had to say a word on another point in this connection. If they
were to have shipping, the shipping must have something to carry. But
Congress, by its legislation, provided that the foreign business should
be to a great extent destroyed. He was rather inclined to give some
protection to manufactures ; but he thought there were certain limits to
the protection which should be given. When duties were higher than
thirty per cent, they encouraged smuggling. He found that there was
a large amount of smuggling going on from the provinces, which op
erated in weakening and impairing the force of the United States duties.
In the article of woolens particularly there was a very great amount of
smuggling. He wished Congress to take off the duty on foreign wool,
and to have the wool come in free, as it does in Europe, so as to give
American shipping something to do in the way of carrying wool. He
had been to California, and had learned something there about the manu
facture of wool. The current price of a three-quarter pluck wool
nearly up to the full-blood grade was twenty-one cents a pound ; and
he was told they could raise it a good deal cheaper than that. A gentle
man, Colonel Halliday, had crossed the mountains in 1854 with a flock
of twelve hundred sheep, and lost four hundred on the way.

Mr. WELLS. I understood that it was eight thousand, and that he had
lost two thousand.

Mr. DERBY. &quot; I tell the tale as it was told to me&quot; at the Pioneer Woolen
Factory in San Francisco; but whether the flock was eight thousand or
twelve hundred will not matter materially, because the result is so pro
digious that either will answer. That flock has increased to sixty-four
thousand, and is yielding $100,000 a year to him, with wool at twenty-
one cents a pound. And yet we have gentlemen from Ohio and Iowa
saying that they must have forty or fifty cents a pound on wool, while
here is a man making $100,000 a year out of what was originally worth
little or nothing, by selling wool at twenty-one cents a pound in Cali
fornia.

That carries me to the story of La Plata wool. They have on those
plains seventy-five million sheep, yielding a large amount of wool. In
18G5 we received, principally from that country, Australia, and Africa,
eighty-seven million pounds of wool. While we were receiving this
large quantity of wool the government threw on the market some army
clothing. Probably the country was a little overstocked with woolens.
Wool fell in price; an excitement was got up; and a duty equivalent to
thirteen or fourteen cents was put on foreign wool. The result was that
the importation of wool was reduced from eighty-seven million pounds
to twenty-three or twenty-four million pounds, and that sixty million
pounds were excluded from the country by that duty. I want to show
its effect on shipping. That wool gave employment to several hundred
thousand tons of shipping. The vessels engaged in the trade carried
back flour, furniture, fish, domestics, and a great variety of commodities
from this country. They were exchanged for wool, and the wool was
brought here and manufactured. The duty on wool was put up; and
what became of La Plata? They sent their wool to England, France,
and Belgium, where it was sold very cheap. We who give away our
land to the .settlers have put on a duty of fourteen cents a pound on an

100 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

article which has since been selling in Liverpool at ten cents a pound a
duty of one hundred and forty per cent. The effect is that, in La Plata,
they arc getting out of the wool business, and are raising cattle instead
of sheep. They have advertised a great fair, and have invited our gov
ernment to send out specimens of all the machines of Yankee invention.
They are abandoning the sheep business and are going into the cultiva
tion of wheat and the raising of cattle. We are excluding them from the
sheep business, and now they are going to take the cattle business and
the wheat business out of our hands. Instead of shipping our wheat
from California, England is going to get it more or less from La Plata,
because we have excluded her wool.

You are sitting here on the question of ships, but let me say we do
not want the ships unless we give them something to do. If you are
going to destroy the foreign trade, and to say that foreign wool shall
not be imported, what occasion have we for shipping ? If the importa
tion of wool employed three or four hundred thousand tons of shipping,
and if you say that no more can be imported, we do not want the ships.
Give us the trade.

Take the article of salt. I passed the other day through the very
flourishing village of Syracuse, where salt is made. They have a pro
tection of two hundred per cent, on salt. After the Revolution our
ancestors put on duties of ten per cent., thinking that that was sufficient.
We put on two hundred per cent. The result is that Syracuse is a flour
ishing village. They are said to have made $5,000,000 from salt since
the war. But the salt trade and the navigation that should bring the
salt home is very much broken down. In New Brunswick the duty on
salt is three per cent., in the United States two hundred per cent. We
compete with New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in the fisheries. Some
relief was given by Congress. It was provided that all the salt which
our fishermen could buy in New Brunswick (and no thanks to Congress
for that, for our fishermen could stop at the Nova Scotian ports and
take the salt) should be free of duty. And what do you think the
Syracusans do ? They determined that we should not have a salt trade
with the West Indies. They come to Gloucester and say, &quot;We have two
prices of salt that which is used on shore and that which is used
on sea. We will take the duty off the price of that used at sea.&quot;
They go over to Canada and sell salt, duty free, at a certain price; but
if New York wants to buy salt it must pay two hundred per cent, addi
tional in order to get it. The Syracusans go to Saginaw and say, a Gen
tlemen, you are trying to get salt out of your springs ; we will under
take to supply you with what you want cheaper. 7 Thus they monopo
lize the salt business of the country under a duty of two hundred per
cent. The result is that they have come here to Boston, and stolen one
of our clergymen and made him a bishop in their country. They are
showing an unbounded prosperity, as I understand, on this basis of two
hundred per cent, duty on salt. We ought to have a million tons of salt
imported over what we do import to-day. The sun makes it gratuitously,
and you can put it on board ship in the West Indies for eight cents a
bushel or two dollars a ton. All the salt that you want you can get at
the West Indies, or Cadiz, or up the Mediterranean to Sicily at about two
dollars per ton, made by solar evaporation j while we put the duty at two
hundred per cent., and burn up our forests for the purpose of benefiting
Syracuse, and deprive our shipping of its legitimate business.

What I would suggest in regard to shipping is this : Take off the du
ties on ship -building materials. The question is, can you afford it? Mr.
Wells told us a year or two ago that the surplus jevenue was one hun-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 101

dred and twenty million dollars. Mr. Wells is a very careful man. He
always underrates. He does it habitually. He holds a responsible office
and does not want to be deceived. I feel confident, from looking over
the same figures, that our customs are paying to-day two hundred mil
lion dollars a year, and our internal revenue two hundred million dollars.
We are also running from twenty to thirty per cent, ahead of last year
on our incidental revenue. We are selling every week one or two mil
lions of gold at about thirty, and putting into the treasury from this
source about thirty millions a year. There is a revenue of four hun
dred and thirty millions. Our estimated expenditures are two hundred
and ninety millions, leaving a surplus of one hundred and forty millions.
By reducing the duty on a few articles, such as Spanish cigars, spirits,
spices, and wines, you can actually increase that surplus up to one hun
dred and eighty millions. Just as by reducing the tax on whisky from
two dollars to fifty cents a gallon you increased the revenue from it from
eight millions to eighty. So that, with our revenue capable of being
made, by reduction of duties, equal to one hundred and eighty millions
surplus, you can make very large reductions in these foreign duties, and
so aid shipping. You will aid shipping -more by reducing the duties than
in any other way. I speak as one in favor of protection incidental to
revenue. I do not speak as a free-trader. 1 do not go to those extremes.
Perhaps I am not wise in not going further than I do. But I stand on
moderate protection. Your protection to-day is forty-eight per cent, on
the average on everything that you import. How was it before the war ?
Fourteen and a half per cent, was the average. Is Congress aware of
that great disparity ? Is Congress aware that we have crept up from
fourteen and a half per cent, to forty-eight per cent, duty on everything
that we import? Does Congress believe that forty-eight per cent, is a
proper stage of duties, or that we are to maintain them at that rate ? Is
it just for this nation to do it ? I respectfully submit that it is not wise
nor just for this nation to do it.

In reference to the facilities for smuggling from the provinces into the
United States, Mr. Derby related an incident which came within his own
knowledge, of a merchant tailor in Halifax who showed him his order-
book containing orders for suits of clothes from a large number of Amer
icans, some of them wealthy residents of Boston, and which were deliv
ered in Boston free of duty and at the same price as if they had been
delivered in Halifax. He said that the only way was to do what the
English and French and Belgians had done, that is, to go back to free
trade in wools. The man who had his land gratuitously, or who could
get it with scrip at seventy cents an acre, certainly did not need protec
tion as against the Frenchman whose land cost him four hundred dollars
an acre, or against the Englishman whose land cost him three hundred
dollars an acre. Some employment must be given to American ship
ping, and if Congress was going ta favor the shipping interest, the duties
on imports should be at such a rate as that goods could be imported
into this country.

The CHAIRMAN. Speaking of the vessels which sought protection
under the English flag during the rebellion, you say that it has been the
policy of all nations in times of war to allow their subjects to put their
ships under a neutral flag. Do you think that dining our late war Great
Britain occupied the position of a neutral toward us ?

Mr. DERBY. Only nominally. I do not think she was really a neutral,
but she was nominally so, and the merchants had a right to consider
her so.

102 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. CALKIN. In regard to subsidies, can you inform the committee
how much money the English government is now paying for subsidies i

Mr. DERBY. The London Times of April 1, 1809, states that the
Cunard Company was paid prior to 18G8 178,000 a year for one weekly
service, and then 80,000 a year, and all the postages on letters from
America. Seventeen lines of steamers have made during the last year
1,322 voyages between England and America. The Inmaii line is now
paid for one weekly service. Three lines of British steamships sub
sidized for the carriage of the mails, viz., the Cunard, the Eoyal, and
the Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Companies, employ more than
200,000 tons of shipping propelled by steam. The amount paid them
has ranged from $1 to $3 per mile. In addition to these many other lines
were subsidized from England, viz., a line to Montreal, a line to the
coast of Africa, the Inmaii line, a line to Brazil, a line to Australia, and
a line to the coast of Chili and Peru. The last named has fourteen
steamships. The trade between Liverpool and the Mediterranean, chiefly
conducted by them, amounts to 600,000 tons a year. In 1843 the Cunard
line had four steamers, of 5,000 tons. In 1805 it had thirty-seven steam
ers, of 07,000 tons.

Mr. MORRELL. I infer from your remarks that a large proportion of
the seeming decline in American commerce is only nominally so, and
that the difference consists in vessels sailing under a foreign flag but
still belonging to American citizens ?

Mr. DERBY. That element, however, is diminishing. As these ships
perish they are not supplied, and when the owners can sell them they
do so. They are reluctant to have foreigners hold a trusteeship of their
property.

Mr. MORRELL. At the present time the apparent falling off has not
been entirely real ?

Mr. DERBY. Not entirely. I think that we own still four or five hun
dred thousand tons sailing under the British flag; but I think that that
tonnage is diminishing at the rate of 100,000 tons a year.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the average life of a wooden ship ?

Mr. DERBY. There is a difference of opinion upon that. It depends
very much upon the class of ship. A good white-oak built ship will
last sometimes twenty or thirty years ; but taking the chances of life, I
suppose that twelve or thirteen years would be the average duration of
a wooden ship. The average duration of the wooden ships built in the
Provinces is not more than six or eight years. I have seen a ship that
was built by my grandfather, and which, I think, was run after being
forty or fifty years old. Ships are like individuals ; some of them have
greater longevity than others.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is there any commercial power that entirely excludes
from its registration foreign-built vessels ?

Mr. DERBY. I am not aware of it.

Mr. HOLMAN. What is the most general policy ? Do any of the con
tinental powers admit foreign-built vessels to register except on the pay
ment of some duty ? And what is the average of that duty ?

Mr. DERBY. My knowledge does not extend that far. I know that
there is a disposition among continental nations to increase their marine.
Their duties are very low.

Mr. HOLMAN. What would be the effect on our commerce (discon
nected with ship-building) of allowing foreign-built vessels an American
registration on payment of a duty of ten or fifteen per cent., and at the
-same time excluding them from the coastwise trade f

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 103

Mr. DERBY. I am inclined to think that that would be the best
policy.

Mr. HOLMAN. If Congress should allow foreign-built vessels to obtain
an American registration on payment of, say, ten per cent., relieve the
ship-building interest of the United States from the taxes on the ma
terials entering into the construction of ships, and secure to American
ship-builders the coastwise trade, what effect would these three measures,
taken together, have both upon commerce and ship-building ?
* Mr. DERBY. If you allow me to make one modification, and instead of
ten per cent, duty on foreign vessels, say $10 per ton, I would go for the
measure heartily and think it a most beneficial one.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would it, in your judgment, promote our commercial
interest, and at the same time afford a reasonable protection to the ship
building interest ?

Mr. DERBY. With the modification I have suggested, I think it would.
I would allow ten dollars per ton on wooden ships, and from fifteen to
eighteen dollars a ton on iron ships. I am fearful of taking off the
duties on the materials. In the Provinces there is a very strong dispo
sition to join the United States, particularly in the maritime provinces ;
but if you let in their vessels free, or at a duty of ten per cent., they
would not join us. They would stay where they are. I would have the
duty high enough to induce them to come.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know of any nation which puts a duty on the
raw materials that enter into the construction of ships f

Mr. DERBY. I do not recollect any. I think that these materials
ought to come in free, either by a remission of duty or in some other
way. I think the remission of duty would be the fairest way. I am
very much impressed with the importance of subsidies to steamers j so
much so that I volunteered to speak before the Post Office Committee
at Washington on that subject.

Mr. CALKIN. Is it your opinion that we cannot support steamship
lines without subsidies f

Mr. DERBY. I do not see how we can.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that steamers were super
seding sailing-vessels, and that that was one of the causes of the decline
of our tonnage. How do you account for the fact that in the whole for
eign commerce of New England, neither a foreign nor an American line
of steamships has been able to sustain itself in competition with sailing-
vessels ? Does not this prove that steamers, standing on the same foot
ing, cannot compete with sailing-vessels in long voyages, and in foreign
commerce, unaided by any subsidy ?

Mr. DERBY. I am inclined to that opinion, that steamers require the
aid of subsidies to compete,

Mr. MORRELL. Are not subsidies confined to vessels that are required
to make quick time 9

Mr. DERBY. I understand that of late they have been building a class
of vessels at Glasgow cheap vessels that will run for twenty-four hours
with one ton of coal to the hundred tons, or ten tons of coal to the
thousand-ton ships. I presume that that class of vessels running slowly
would be able to compete with sailing-vessels ; but I believe that the
great increase in the steam navy of England has been due to the subsi
dies which have given it a stimulus. Congress did give a subsidy to
one European line, the Collins line ; but the vessels of that line were so
expensive that even with the subsidy they could not get along. If they
had followed the policy of the Cunard line, with a liberal subsidy of
Congress, they would have been sucessful. One of the mistakes of

104 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

our countrymen is, in undertaking to strike out new paths instead of
following others which have already been discovered. Since the intro
duction of screw steamers, the English government has reduced the
subsidy.

Mr. WELLS. But only a portion of the English lines are subsidized.

Mr. DERBY. I believe that that is so ; but the steamship lines have
been built up by the aid of previous subsidies. I think that that class of
screw steamers which I have just alluded to might possibly be built to
run slowly, carrying merchandise which would make money without a
subsidy.

Mr. WELLS. It has been stated that not only in England but also in
Germany and France ships 7 stores are taken out of bond without pay
ment of duty.

Mr. DERBY. That is the case in England. I know that their wines
and supplies of that kind are taken out of bond duty free ; and with
respect to coal, 1 believe that the foreign coal was taken out of bond
here duty free by the Cunard line, under a certificate that it is con
sumed at sea.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that the case now ?

Mr. DERBY. It was the case some years ago.

The CHAIRMAN. It is the same, I suppose, with American vessels ;
they would have the same advantage as the foreign vessels ?

Mr. DERBY. Yes, sir; I am told that in the matter of coal the Cunard
line had ultimately to refund the duty. They gave bond to have the
question passed upon afterward. I am told that they made a test case
of it, and that the decision was against them.

The CHAIRMAN. In either case, whether they paid the duty or ob
tained it free, the American and foreign vessels would be on the same
footing ?

Mr. DERBY. Certainly. The question has been asked to-day, whether
ship-owners should not be favored in getting their supplies free of duty,
so as to compensate for the duties on the ship-building materials. I
should apprehend that the compensation would not be sufficient. The
great expense of ship-owners is in fuel.

Mr. WELLS. Which would be the better policy ; to remit the duties
on the materials entering into the construction of ships, or to make an
average allowance per ton ?

Mr. DERBY. The difficulty that I see in allowing a drawback upon
the materials actually used would be that American ship-builders would
use no American iron ; they would use nothing but foreign materials.

Mr. WELLS. So that in reality your suggestion is in favor of a bounty
to ship-builders, rather than a remission of duties 1 ?

Mr. DERBY. Yes, sir ; an inducement to build.

Mr. WELLS. Would not the opening of ship-yards for building iron
vessels in Massachusetts, Maine, and New York, actually stimulate the
manufacture of iron materials that enter into the construction of iron
ships ? There is none of that material of any consequence made in the
United States.

Mr. DERBY. There is a certain amount of it made, because we are
building ships for the coasting trade.

Mr. WELLS. Would not the industry in the manufacture of iron for
the construction of ships be actually increased by adopting a more lib
eral policy in reference to the use of foreign materials for ship-building?

Mr. DERBY. I think it would give a great stimulus to the industry of
the country. We can build vessels for the coastwise trade ten dollars
a ton cheaper, and we can carry the iron and coal cheaper, and thus

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 105

stimulate the iron industry. There is one suggestion which I have
omitted. It is this : If you can enlarge American shipping and build a
half million tons every year, as we did a few years ago, you make an
immense market for American products. If a Hamburg ship does the
business, or if an Italian ship does the business, they get most of their
supplies from Germany and from Italy. But if an American ship does
the business its supplies are got here almost entirely, and you thus make
a great market for the produce of the farm by reviving the navigation
interest. All that market is now lost, and the men who have been sail
ors, and who have been using the products of the West, are now liable
to become farmers in the West.

Mr. WELLS. In making this remission of duty or this bounty, should
vessels for the inland commerce have the same benefits as ships for for
eign commerce ?

Mr. DERBY. That question is in my mind. It is not so essential for
vessels in the coastwise trade as it is for vessels in the foreign trade;
because in the foreign trade we meet foreign competitors,- but in the
domestic trade we meet only domestic competitors.

Mr. WELLS. Do we not meet the foreign competitor in our coastwise
trade as competing with the railroad interest owned by foreigners ?

Mr. DERBY. There is a competition there with the railway, unques
tionably.

Mr. WELLS. And the more steamboats we can build, and the greater
facilities, and the more drawbacks we can give them, the cheaper we get
our wheat to market.

Mr. DERBY. Certainly, sir. But I am so much of a railroad man
myself, that if we do anything for steamers I should like the same thing
to be done for railroads, which are a benefit to them. But I was look
ing at the foreign competition which is driving us from the ocean.

Mr. CALKIN. I take it that this question resolves itself down to a
question of developing the labor of the country generally on all points ?

Mr. DERBY. Yes, sir ; to a great extent the promotion of navigation
benefits the whole country.

Mr. CALKIN. Exactly. Your whole argument has been that if we
build ships we encourage all the other interests of the country?

Mr. DERBY. We do; and I think that by discouraging ship-building
we are building up a competition with our farmers and depressing the
labor of the West.

Mr. HARRISON LoRiNG, iron ship builder, argued against the policy of
a rapid contraction of the currency and return to specie payments, and
submitted citations and figures from an English atlas (Tullock s) to
show the effect in Great Britain of expansions and contractions of the
currency expansions being followed by general prosperity and con
tractions by stagnation in business.

He also called attention to the high rate of interest paid by the United
States government as being injurious to business interests. Six per
cent, was a rate that was above the labor of the country; and ho
thought he was safe in saying that, somewhat in proportion as the rate
of interest is above the labor of the country, so will money go with
increased rapidity from the hands of the masses of the people to those
of the rich and to the great cities. At compound interest money at
six per cent, would double in eleven years ; and it was not possible for
labor to produce the same result. He was inclined to think that one of
the first steps toward relieving commerce would be the reduction of
duties as far as possible.

Mr. CALKIN. You are an iron-ship builder ?

106 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. LORING. Yes, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. Have you any information to give the committee as to
the cost of building iron ships, and as to your ability to compete with
foreign builders ?

Mr. LORING. In 1857, 7 5S, 7 59, 7 60, and 61 I could deliver a ship in
India or China at the same price as English ship-builders could, but
without profit, while the English ship-builder would have from five to
ten per cent, profit. In 1857 I built one steamer for parties in Calcutta,
and in 1858- ? 59, one for parties in China. The chairman asked Mr.
Derby if steam could compete successfully with sailing-vessels. I be
lieve Mr. Derby did not answer that question. I will say that steamers
are competing successfully with sailing-vessels without a subsidy. In
fact, most of the business with the principal cities on the coast is done
by steamers.

Mr. CALKIN. They are really running off sailing-vessels ?

Mr. LORING. Yes ; from the trade between Boston, New York, Balti
more, Norfolk, Charleston, New Orleans, and Savannah. That is a
question which will take care of itself. American steamers can compete
successfully with American sailing-vessels in our waters.

Mr. HOLMAN. What, in your judgment, can the government do to
revive the ship-building interests of the country I

Mr. LORING. I did not come .here prepared to take up the different
points and discuss them, and whatever I say will be said in a desultory
manner. We all know that no nation can become wealthy on manu
factures or on agriculture or on commerce alone, and that nations, to
increase in wealth, must encourage two or more of those interests. My
idea is, in relation to the whole business of the country, that we must
aim to furnish the labor of the country with everything that it con
sumes, outside and inside, at the lowest possible cost, with a view of
reducing the cost to commerce. An additional cost of one per cent, will
prevent millions of exports.

Mr. HOLMAN. A nation may promote its commerce at the expense of
the manufacturing industry engaged in the construction of ships. That
can be done, of course, by allowing the purchase and registry of foreign-
built vessels. But, looking at the question in connection with ship
building alone, and as only a mere agent of commerce, can the govern
ment do anything to promote the interests of the ship-builders except
by relieving ship-building materials from, the payment of internal and
external duties ?

Mr. LORING. Of course the best way would be a reduction of duties
on imports ; but no one expects that we are coming to free trade.

Mr. HOLMAN. Take only those materials that enter into the construc
tion of ships in which foreign labor comes in competition with our own.

Mr. LORING. That, as Mr. Derby remarked, would interfere with
American manufactures. It seems&quot; that the only way would be the
allowance of a drawback.

Mr. WELLS. What drawback would you suggest for the purpose of
encouraging the building of iron ships here ?

Mr. LORING. No more than the amount paid in duties.

Mr. WELLS. How much is that per ton ?

Mr. LORING. I have not gone into a computation. I presume that
ten dollars per ton on wooden vessels is about correct. Wooden ships
cost about eighty dollars a ton, and iron ships one hundred and twenty
or one hundred and thirty dollars. To encourage iron-ship building of
course a drawback should be allowed in proportion to the extra cost.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 107

Mr. WELLS. Would a drawback of twenty dollars per ton be suf
ficient?

Mr. LORING. It is easily computed. I do not know what the cost of
iron ships in England is. It is some three years since we have given
up all idea of building. I have all the facilities for building. I am
keeping up an establishment and organization in hopes of having some
relief.

Mr. WELLS. It was stated before the committee in New York that
twelve dollars per ton would be sufficient to justify the building of iron
vessels in this country.

Mr. LORING. I think it was set too low. That would be discriminat
ing in favor of wooden vessels. If ten dollars per ton be allowed for a
wooden ship, the amount for an iron ship should be in the proportion
to the cost, which is one hundred and twenty-five dollars per ton to
eighty dollars for a wooden vessel.

Mr. WELLS. It was remarked there that a wooden ship could be built
in England at from fifty-five to sixty dollars, and here at about seventy
dollars, and that an iron ship cost in England about one hundred and
twelve dollars a ton, and here from one hundred and twenty to one
hundred and twenty-five dollars the difference being from ten to fifteen
dollars.

Mr. LORING. If these are the facts, of course an allowance of twelve
dollars per ton would be sufficient.

The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion, as an experienced iron-ship builder,
if the duties on iron were remitted, could American ship-builders then
compete with foreign ship-builders \

Mr. LORING. There is no question as to that ; we have one great ad
vantage in this that an American ship of the same weight of metal
would be very much stronger than an English vessel, and would havo a
better reputation all over the world.

The committee here took a recess for dinner.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

Mr. ANDREW T. HALL, of Boston, ship-owner, said that there could be
no question as to the very positive decline in the shipping interests of
New England. This had always been a great point for building ships.
There was no time within the past fifteen years that ships on the stocks
could not be counted by dozens in and around Boston. Now there were
none on the stocks. Iron was so very heavily taxed that, without some
thing in the nature of a drawback, American ship-builders could not
compete with English ship-builders. Iron ships had been recently in
troduced in England for commercial purposes, and would enter largely
into the carrying trade of the world. Americans could not begin to com
pete with the English in iron ship building. As to wooden ships, they
were still trying to keep the business alive. He had, himself, built a
large wooden ship within the last few weeks, but there was very little
opportunity for profit in the business. What ship-builders wanted, he
thought, was a drawback of duty on the iron used in the manufacture
of ships. There was a good deal of iron rigging used now in ships,
which had not been the case heretofore, and a drawback of duty upon
it would be a material help.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you make a specialty of the iron, or dp you require
a drawback on all the articles entering into the construction of a ship?

Mr. HALL. Iron is the principal object, because the wood we have
ourselves, and the copper also.

108 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you speak of iron ships particularly ?

Mr. HALL. I am speaking of iron ships. There is not so much differ
ence in the foreign and American value of copper as there is in that of
iron. We are producing such a large quantity of copper that the price
has been reduced somewhat.

Mr. BOLIVIAN. To what extent, if it should be done at all, do you think
this government should adopt a more liberal policy than its present one
with reference to the admission of foreign-built vessels to American
registry^?

Mr. JUALL. I should think that that would be the means of driving
every ship mechanic out of the country.

Mr. HOLMAN. What effect would it have on the commerce of the
country alone, apart from the ship-building interest?

Mr. HALL. We should have no commerce but in foreign-built ships.

Mr. HOLMAN. Suppose that all articles entering into the construction
of ships were relieved from taxation, that the coastwise trade was re
served exclusively to American-built vessels, and that foreign-built ves
sels were admitted to American registry on the payment of a small duty,
say ten or fifteen per cent, on the value, what effect would these three
measures, taken together, have on our commerce as well as on our ship
building ?

Mr. HALL. I have not thought of it in the view that you present it.
I should suppose, however, that any mode which would introduce for
eign-built ships into our mercantile marine would be adverse to Ameri
can interests.

Mr. HOLMAN. Our policy, however, up to the present time, has been
more restrictive than that of any other commercial nation ?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. We have a reputation in New England of build
ing good ships ships that last. The reputation of the Provinces in
that respect is far inferior. Their ships will rarely last over four or five
years, whereas New England ships frequently last from fifteen to twenty-
five years.

Mr. HOLMAN. If the materials used in the construction of wooden
vessels were relieved from taxation, how far do you think that would
enable the American ship-builder to compete with the foreign ship
builder?

Mr. HALL. I think it would enable him to compete entirely.

Mr. HOLMAN. And as to iron vessels ?

Mr. HALL. As to iron vessels also.

Mr. HOLMAN. As successfully?

Mr. HALL. It would take us some time to compete with England in
iron vessels. We would have to get up large establishments like theirs.
There are establishments in England where they are building fourteen
or fifteen iron ships at a time. We could hardly expect to go into the
business so extensively at present, but we would arrive at it in course
of time.

Mr. HOLMAN. W^hat probability is there, in the immediate future, of
iron vessels superseding wooden ones?

Mr. HALL. Judging from what they have done in England, I should
think that half our ships for the foreign trade would be iron ships.
There are objections to iron ships which do not apply to wooden ships
as, for instance, if an iron ship gets on a rock she is gone, whereas a
wooden one, although injured, may be got off. But, keeping them off
the rocks, the iron ship lasts much longer than the wooden one. In
England they class iron ships for insurance at twenty years. At the end
of that time she is examined and is classed for twenty years more, so

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 109

that they run on a low rate of insurance for forty years. Then they
require no calking. They require, once a year, to go into dock to be
cleaned. And they run at much less expense than wooden vessels. I
cannot say what the difference in the rates of insurance between an iron
and a wooden vessel is. The difference is in favor of the iron vessel.

Mr. CALKIN. Is there any difference in the insurance here?

Mr. HALL. I do not know.

Mr. CALKIN. You spoke of their having advantages in England over
us in building iron ships. Is their machinery for constructing iron ships
superior to ours?

Mr. HALL. They have a greater magnitude of machinery. They have
larger establishments. We could come to it here if we had a demand
for the ships. There is an immense capital employed in the business
there, which in this country we are hardly able to furnish. Mr. Laird s
concern, opposite Liverpool, is almost a town. All along the Clyde,
in Glasgow, there are immense establishments. Where we commence
with dollars they do with pounds.

The CHAIRMAN. What preference do iron ships have over wooden
ones in freight?

Mr. HALL. They have no advantage in carrying except that they can
be sailed cheaper.

The CHAIRMAN. Do iron vessels command higher rates of freight than
wooden vessels?

Mr. HALL. I should think not. I should think that, if anything, the
reverse would be the case. I think that wooden ships would have the
preference for our East India voyages. There are some cargoes, salt for
instance, that cannot be brought as well in iron as in wooden ships.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the cargo is generally carried as
well in wooden as in iron ships ?

t Mr. HALL. I should think so. I should give the w r ooden ships the
preference.

Mr. HOLMAN. Can you suggest any other means by which the Ameri
can shipping interest can be improved than what you have mentioned
the abatement of the duty or internal and external tax on the materials
used?

Mr. HALL. I know of no other advantage that we should have the
right to claim. I do not think that the ship-builders of New England
would call on the government for any other aid.

Mr. HOLMAN. That would be more practicable, you think, than boun
ties?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir. I am not in favor of any bounties for American
ships. We want to be allowed a chance of competing with foreign
ship-builders by having the materials that enter into the construction
of ships free of duty. It would be very beneficial to the ship-owner,
and would increase the production of our own iron founderies.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would you regard it as consistent with the interests of
other branches of industry to encourage the production of iron to a
greater extent than at present, and at the same time to relieve ship
builders from the duty imposed on that article ?

Mr. HALL. I am not prepared to advocate that. I only regret, as an
American, that we are so dependent on abroad for the immense supply
of iron that we should furnish ourselves. It is for Congress to suggest
a remedy.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you think that the iron interest is protected suf
ficiently to warrant the construction of other founderies?

Mr. HALL. I do not know enough of the trade to answer the question.

110 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Practically speaking, it does not appear to be, judging by the enormous
quantities landed on the Constitution dock here from Liverpool. That
is all that I judge by.

The CHAIRMAN. To what extent would allowing vessels to take ships 7
stores in bond, as is done in England, relieve the shipping interest?

Mr. HALL. I think it would be proper to allow ships going on for
eign voyages to take goods in original packages free of duty.

The CHAIRMAN. How much of an item would that be ? Would it be
any measure of relief to the ship-owner ?

Mr. HALL. Not to a very great extent, except in packet-ships, where
they carry a large number of passengers. There it would be quite a
relief. It would be a very great advantage to the steamship lines.
You can get a bottle of champagne on the English steamers cheaper
than you can get it in Liverpool, although they put on large profits on
board ship. It might lead to abuse ; but I think that where goods can
be taken out of bond in original packages bags of coffee, barrels of
sugar, &c. it would be a very important relief to the shipping interest
to allow it to be done. I regret very much to see mooted the subject of
admitting foreign ships to registry in this country. I think that it
would be, if anything, more destructive than the high duty on ship
building materials.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the admitting foreign ships to
American registry would have a tendency gradually to transfer the
shipping interests to the other side of the water, and make our ships
largely foreign and only nominally American?

Mr. HALL. I think it would. I think it would be a death-blow to
ship-building in this country.

The CHAIRMAN. And that the ownership, as well as the building,
would go to the other side ?

Mr. HALL. In a great measure.

Mr. HOLMAN. No nation, I suppose, allows a foreigner to hold the
title to a ship registered there?

Mr. HALL. I think not.

Mr. HOLMAN. So that, if the American government adopt a more
liberal policy, the title would have to be in an American citizen ?

Mr. HALL. Yes. During the war many of our citizens put their ships
under the English flag, put in captains, and took mortgages on the
ships. I was told in England that those mortgages were of no legal
effect, as being in violation of the law.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you not understand that there are a great many
Americans owning ships that do sail under a foreign flag?

Mr. HALL. I do not think it is so to a great extent. I have no means,
however, of knowing.

Mr. HOLMAN. And, on the other hand, I suppose there are foreign
capitalists interested in our vessels sailing under an American register ?

Mr. HALL. Unquestionably, to some extent. All the lines of steam
ships to this country are owned by foreigners. I take it that the
amount owned by Americans in those ships is a mere bagatelle, if any
at all.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is it your opinion that the commercial interests of the
country are promoted by adhering to our present policy in regard to the
nationalizing of foreign bottoms ?

Mr. HALL. Decidedly so.

Mr. HOLMAN. You think that it would promote the permanent com
mercial interest of the country to adhere to that policy ?

Mr. HALL. I do.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. Ill

Mr. HOLMAN. Yet it is not the policy of any other commercial power ?

Mr. HALL. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know how long Great Britain adhered to the
policy of excluding foreign ships from English registry I

Mr. HALL. ]STo, sir, I do not.

Mr. HOLMAN. Has not the policy of Great Britain rather been to
increase and enlarge her carrying trade than to promote specially ship
building ; and has not the ship-building interest been promoted by her
more liberal commercial policy ?

Mr. HALL. I have not seen any evidence of it. I judge that the com
mercial activity of the Euglisb has arisen solely from their having advan
tages over us in building iron ships. They certainly have not increased
their wooden ships. It is the iron marine that has been affected most.
That has been increased many hundred thousand tons.

Mr. HOLMAN. Up to I860 we had considerable advantage over Great
Britain in the construction of wooden vessels ?

Mr. HALL. I think we had. American ships had always the prefer
ence all over the world for freight. There was no port where English
and American vessels were together that the American vessels had not
the preference. There was some difference in the China trade, for which
their ships were built with a great deal of care and elegance.

Mr. CALKIN. It has been advocated here this morning that those ships
which were once under the American flag, and that went under the
British flag, should be allowed to come back. What do you think?

Mr. HALL. I should hope that it will never be done. An American
who put his vessel under the English flag should be let keep her there.
I have some national feeling about it.

The CHAIRMAN. How many ships did you own during the war ?

Mr. HALL. About six.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you sail them under the American flag under all
the disadvantages ?

Mr. HALL. Entirely. I had one ship which was unfortunately put
under the English flag without my knowledge. I owned half of her.
She lay at Hong-Kong four months and could get no freight. We sent
out a power of attorney to sell her. The captain put her under the
English flag, brought her to Australia, and there sold her. I am too
much of an American to want to have a ship of mine sailed under the
English flag.

The CHAIRMAN. You sailed your ships under great disadvantages in
keeping them under the American flag ? Those who put their ships
under the English flag had a great advantage over you in insurance and
rates of freight f

Mr. HALL. Decidedly. I had to pay double insurance all through
the war, which I could have avoided by putting my vessels under the
English flag as others did theirs.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not consider the present depressed condition
of American commerce largely due to the unfriendly action of England
during the war, in permitting the departure from her ports of such ships
as the Alabama ?

Mr. HALL. It had an influence, but to what extent I am not prepared
to say.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to say that if the materials entering
into the construction of ships were relieved from duty you could compete
successfully with the English ship-owner in the foreign carrying trade.

Mr. HALL. I believe entirely so. I believe that we build better ships,

112 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

more convenient and sightly ships, than the English do, and I believe
that we could have a large share in the carrying trade of the world.

The CHAIRMAN. You have to pay higher rates of wages, I presume,
to officers and crew than the English do ?

Mr. HALL. I should think that our officers are better paid; but I
think we sail our ships quite as well as the English do, and with as
little expense.

The CHAIRMAN. You think that, on the whole, you sail them as econom
ically as they do ?

Mr. HALL. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. In sailing them with a less number of men 1

Mr. HALL. No, I think there is better care taken of the ships. I think
that American ship-captains are men of a higher grade than English
ship-captains that they are men of more understanding and more
mind.

The CHAIRMAN. You think that the greater efficiency of American
officers and crews overcomes the difference in the rates of wages that
you have to pay 1

Mr. HALL. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. So that, on the whole, you can compete with the
Eoglish in sailing your ships ?

Mr. HALL. I think that our intelligence is such that we can manage
our ships to better advantage than the English do. Of course there are
exceptions ; but it is a well-known fact that the captains of American
ships are altogether a grade higher than the captains even of English
ships. Many of our American captains are part owners of the vessels.
The crews are supplied with better provisions than in foreign ships.

Mr. CALKIN. The ship-owners of New York complain on account of
the assessment or tax put upon them by the State authorities of New
York, as being quite a detriment to the shipping interest. How does
that affect it here in Massachusetts? Is there a tax here on the shipping
interest ?

Mr. HALL. Individual taxation. If a man owns a ship he pays a tax
on it as on other property ; but there is no special tax on ships. Every
man is assessed according to his property, whether it be in ships or
anything else.

Mr. MoRRELL. Is not that species of property taxed abroad as other
property is taxed ? Would a shipowner in England be exempt from
paying the same rate on ships as he pays on real estate ?

Mr. HALL. I do not know how that is.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is not the decline in our ship-building interest partly
attributable to the fact that there are so many other more profitable
modes of investing money in this country ?

Mr. HALL. I do not think that that enters into the question at all.

Mr. CALKIN. In case the government relieves the ship-building inter
est and enables American ship-builders to compete with foreigners, do
you think that the merchants and capitalists of Boston will put their
money in ships again, and go on and build as usual?

Mr. HALL. They will, the moment they see that they can get a return
for their money. Show them a probability of success, and there will be
capital enough invested in the business.

Mr. HOLMAN. Can a capitalist in this country afford to invest money
in ship-building unless he has a profit of eight or nine per cent.?

Mr. HALL. If he is sure of his eight or nine per cent, he will go in ;
but as a general thing shipping pays better than that.

+ NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 113

Mr. CALKIN. Ought it not certainly to pay ten per cent., to make
allowance for the deterioration of shipping?

Mri HALL. Yes, sir j it must be a very badly managed ship that does
not pay it.

Mr. HOLMAN. Yet there is a material difference between ship-owning
and ship-building the one is merely an agency of commerce, while the
other is but an article of manufacture.

Mr. HALL. There is a difference to what extent I do not know. I am
^iot able to say what the profits of ship-building are, but I know that
ship-builders are men who acquire a handsome competency in course of
time. You will find that the ship-builders in Maine are all more or less
interested in the ships that they build. It is so in London also.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you think that it is the policy of the government
rather to protect the interests of ship-building than to look to the pro
motion of commerce at the expense of the ship-building interest ?

Mr. HALL. I do not see how you can separate them.

Mr. HOLMAN. The United States might be a very powerful commer
cial nation and yet its vessels might be built elsewhere, as is the case
with some continental nations.

Mr. HALL. I have not thought of that subject, but my impression is
that the two interests are so connected that you can hardly separate
them.

The CHAIRMAN. Speaking of the profits of ship-building, so far as
your knowledge and observation extend, have not ship-builders, prior
to the war, been as successful in proportion to the amount of capital
employed as any other class of manufacturers?

Mr. HALL. They appear to me to have done as well. Now that their
yards are idle they are living, of course, on what they made before.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to give it as your opinion that it
is necessary to revive the ship-building interest in order to revive the
ship-owning interest, and that the building of our ships abroad would
carry the ownership and business abroad ?

Mr. HALL. It would have that tendency. You revive our commercial
interest by creating ships. We do a large carrying trade all over the
world. We have three or four ships in the guano trade. That trade
employs two or three hundred American ships. I would venture to say
that more than half of that guano trade has been done by American
ships. .

The CHAIRMAN. Do the ships that are in that trade go back in bal
last!

Mr. HALL. No, sir ; after landing their cargo of guano at a port in
Ireland, England, or Scotland, or at Antwerp or Rotterdam, they gen
erally go to Cardiff, where they take a load of coal, which they carry to
Rio Janeiro or some other South American port, and then go to Peru
for the guano. They generally get enough from the cargo of coal to
pay their expenses round to where they get the guano.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there much of that guano trade done with the
United States now?

Mr. HALL. Not so much as formerly. I have not noticed any of it
coming this way of late years.

Mr. CHAIRMAN. Before the war it was carried principally to the south
ern ports !

Mr. HALL. Yes; and a good deal of it went to New York at one time.

Mr. HOLMAN. There is, then, an actual profit resulting to American
citizens in a commerce that lias no direct relation to the United States.
Now, would you not consider it a wise measure of national policy, if

8NI

114 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

both the ship-building and the commercial interests cannot be revived
together, to promote the commercial interests of the country without
reference to the kindred question of ship-building; and can that be done
by adopting a more liberal policy with reference to the registry of foreign-
built vessels in the United States ?

Mr, HALL. I think the two are so combined that you can hardly sepa
rate them. If you want to revive the commercial interests of the coun
try you must do it by creating ships.

Mr. HOLMAN. We have a separate and peculiar industry connected
with commerce and disconnected from ship-building?

Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. And we have a peculiar industry connected with ship
building and not connected with commerce?

Mr. HALL. Exactly.

Mr. HOLMAN. Now if ship-building cannot be revived if, from the
nature of the impediments thrown in its way by the national debt, by
the opportunities for making more profitable investments and other
causes, it cannot be revived would it not be the policy of the United
States (supposed to have peculiar advantages as a commercial power)
to adopt a more liberal policy with reference to nationalizing foreign-
built vessels?

Mr. HALL. No, sir. I should think that we were throwing all the
advantages to the foreigners which should be retained to our own citi
zens. The commerce of the country and the ships of the country are
so identified that you can hardly separate them. It is only a small pro
portion of our ships that are always abroad.

Mr. WELLS. If there is nothing done to relieve the ship-building
industry here, and if foreign-built ships be allowed to come under the
American flag, how long will it be before there will be no American
vessel in the foreign carrying trade?

Mr. HALL. It would not be many years before the foreigners would
monopolize the whole of it.

Mr. CALKIN. Outside of the point of view of national pride, would it
have any particular effect on the commerce of the country if those ves
sels that struck their own colors and hoisted the English colors were
admitted back ?

Mr. HALL. It would deprive us of the building of just so many ships.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there many of those ships in existence at the
present time ?

Mr. HALL. There are probably a good many of them.

Mr. CALKIN. I speak of commerce, not of the ship-building interest.
Would it have any particular effect on the commerce of the country if
those ships were allowed to be brought back?

Mr. HALL. It would prevent the commercial interests of America
from receiving the profits they now get from, their own ships.

Mr. CALKIN. Would it be beneficial or not?

Mr. HALL. It would not be beneficial to the commerce of the country.
I am unquestionably opposed to their being brought back.

Mr. WELLS. During the late war more than half of the vessels
engaged in commerce on the Mississippi River went down into rebellion
and hoisted the confederate flag. When the blockade was removed
from time to time those vessels came back under the American flag.
There was no objection to that. But, according to your doctrine, that
property should have been sacrificed ?

Mr. BUFFINTON. If I understand it, those vessels are now under the
American flag?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 115

Mr. WELLS. Certainly.

Mr. HOLMAN. What flag would they get under f

Mr. WELLS. (To Mr. Hall.) Are you aware of the fact that blockade-
rmmers which were captured by the government were sold and are now
under the American flag?

Mr. HALL. I was not aware of it.

Mr. E. S. TOBEY. Those vessels were sold under a decree of the United
States district court, which entitled them to registry.

Mr. THEODORE NICKERSON next addressed the committee. He said
he was associated with one of the largest ship-owning firms in the city.
They were ship-owners and ship-builders. They could not afford to buy
ships, and therefore they built them. They could not afford to pay
another man to build ships for them, and therefore they built them for
themselves, saving thus so much. They had been long of opinion that
the remission of the duties on materials entering into the construction
of ships would be a decided advantage, and would enable them to com
pete successfully with foreign tonnage. The prosperity of English ship
building was coincident with their iron ship building. For himself and
his firm, they would prefer wooden ships ; but the question seemed to
turn really on the point whether they would be allowed to build iron
ships and to compete with England in that respect. Iron ships were
sought for, and higher rates of freight were paid to them, and lower
rates of insurance charged. A prominent Calcutta merchant had given
him as a reason why he preferred to ship goods by an iron vessel that,
if an accident happened, that was the last of her, and he was paid his
insurance, whereas a wooden ship would go into port and be repaired,
and after a lapse of time he would get his goods to market. He (Mr.
Mckerson) believed that the matter of iron shipping would decide
whether Americans could successfully maintain their commercial marine.
Although wages were higher in the United States than in England, he
thought that the superiority of American labor counterbalanced the
nominal difference in wages. He thought that, in coppering vessels, the
relative cheapness of the copper in England was offset by the greater
difficulty of having the copper put on in a workmanlike mariner;

As to admitting foreign-built vessels to American registration, it
occurred to him that, aside from the question of embarrassing American
ship-builders, the demand for ships from this side, added to the demand
at home, would necessarily increase the price, and eventually make the
cost of ships greater than they could be built for at present in the
United States.

As to the coasting trade, he thought that if English ships were ad
mitted to it, under ever so great a tax, (unless it amounted to prohibi
tion,) the only avenue open to the employment of the American mer
chant marine would be closed. Fully half the tonnage of the United
States ships was employed in the trade between Boston, New York, and
San Francisco ; and if that avenue were closed, American tonnage would
not be worth fifty per cent, of its present value.

As to admitting back the ships that were put under the: English flag
during the war, he was opposed to it. Although his firm held a grpat
many ships during the war, it had not put one of them under a foreign
flag. He could not agree with the argument of Mr. Derby in that
respect, and he failed to see any advantage that would result fiwm
restoring them to the American flag.

Mr. EBEN HOUSE, an underwriter and representative of the French
Lloyds, next came before the committee. He said that his business was
more particularly to examine the quality and merits of ships, and to

116 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

classify them for the benefit of underwriters. He inspected ships
during their construction to see that they had all the requirements
which the rules and regulations prescribed to make them sea-worthy.
His impression was that there was no difference in this country in the
rates of insurance charged on iron and on wooden vessels of the same
class. He presumed that in England they did make such a difference.
His experience in England, which country he frequently visited, was
that there had been an effort made there to create a prejudice against
wooden ships and in favor of iron ships for many years past, the reason
being that the English had iron to build ships and had not wood. That
was one reason, and, he presumed, a very proper one.

The CHAIRMAN. Your business has led you to observe the revolution
that has been spoken of in the construction of ships. What is your
opinion in reference to iron ships superseding wooden ships ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. I have no doubt that that will be the case when we
get out of wood to build ships, and when they can be built cheaper and
to better advantage of iron. Previous to 1862- 3 we could compete with
any nation in the world in the building of sailing-vessels. We asked
no favor from the government then ; we wanted none. We were having
a fair chance and could compete with all the world. Since that time,
and since the high duties have been put on, we have not been able to
do so. There is the simple fact. Everything is so high in building a
ship, and in sailing her, (that is, in regard to provisions,) that we cannot
compete with England. In England they get all their supplies out of
bond free of duty, and this advantage amounts to a good deal.

The CHAIRMAN. What relief, in your judgment, would be sufficient to
enable us to restore our commerce ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. Simply put us back where we were previous to 1861
in reference to duties on the materials in ship-building.

The CHAIRMAN. You think that the exemption of ship-building ma
terials from duty would be sufficient ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. I have no doubt that it would help a great deal. We try
to struggle along to build a ship now and then; but it is a very poor
business.

Mr. MORRELL. In the examination of wooden ships for registration
you take into account the materials of which they are built as well as
the manner in which they are built ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. Certainly.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you take into consideration, in the examination of
an iron ship, the quality of the iron of which the ship is built ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. That is always taken into consideration. The iron
has to bear .certain tests.

Mr. MORRELL. What are those tests ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. I really do not know. I have had very little to do
with iron-built vessels, and 1 would have to refer to the rules and regu
lations respecting iron-built vessels.

Mr. MORRELL. It was tested in New York that the English Lloyds
require iron vessels to be built at a certain weight per ton, and that
they make no requirements as to the quality of the iron except that it
should boar a test of twenty thousand pounds to the square inch ; and
it was stated that the iron which would stand two or two and a half
times that tensile test would not require to be of so much weight.

Mr, E. HOUSE. It depends upon the length and depth and breadth of
the ship. The weight of iron must be according to that.

Mr. MORRELL. It was stated there that if the American ship-builders
were permitted to use an iron of the same strength, yet lighter in

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 117

weight, they could build American iron ships, of the same tensile
strength, as cheap as English iron ships.

Mr. E. HOUSE. I presume that it is according to the goodness of the
iron.

Mr. MORRELL. It was stated there that the fact of the greater
strength of the iron was not considered in the insuring of a vessel in
England. Is that considered here ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. I really do not know what rules they have here in
regard to iron ship-building.

Mr. MORRELL. I believe it was stated there that they would not rate
a vessel A No. 1 that did not weigh so many pounds to the ton measure
ment, regardless of the strength of the iron.

Mr. E. HOUSE. 1 have not attended to the statistics about iron-built
vessels. I have asked the question several times at headquarters in
Paris, where I get my instructions from. They had a meeting in Liver
pool this last year to revise the rules and requirements of ship-buiMing,
and to try to get a uniform regulation, and I have not got the result
yet.

The CHAIRMAN. Areyo&quot;u aware that, so far as English iron vessels are
concerned, the question of their insurance rests on the rules and specifi
cations prepared by the English Lloyds as an English requisite to pass
those ships ?

Mr. E. HOUSE. Yes, sir ; that is the fact. I believe that the French
and English engineers have now entered upon one uniform mode of
building iron ships.

Dr. OSBORN HOUSE next addressed the committee. He said that he
was a ship-owner in the foreign trade. His vessels were entirely wooden
ships, trading to California, the East Indies, and Europe. He had some
interest in iron steamers running between Boston and New Orleans.
There were two English-built iron steamers on the line.

The CHAIRMAN. What measures would you suggest to be adopted in
order to revive our navigation interests $

Mr. O. HOUSE. I think, if we were placed as we were formerly, ,with
but little if any duties on our ship-building materials, we could compete
with foreigners. Formerly we felt that we could take care of ourselves.
I think&quot; that until quite recently ship-owners have never asked any aid
or assistance from the government. They have always said, &quot; Let us
alone and we can take care of ourselves.&quot; But for seven or eight years
past we found it pretty hard work to get along, on account of the high
duty on many articles&quot; used in the construction of ships. The cost of
ship-building materials in this country is double the cost that they have
to pay in England.

The CHAIRMAN. How would it be if the iron of which you manufacture
were duty free?

Mr. O. HOUSE. It would be a great saving to us, of course. Then
there is Manila hemp, for which there is no substitute, and that article
pays a duty of twenty-five dollars per ton in gold. It does not come in
competition with any hemp raised in this country.

The CHAIRMAN. Does it not come i n competition with Kentucky hemp ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. Not at all ; for it is used for running rigging, and Ken
tucky hemp is never used for that purpose.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the exemption from duty of all
the raw materials that enter into the construction of a ship hemp, iron
in a crude state, bars, bolts, sail-cloth, and duck would enable Amer
ican ship-builders to compete with foreign ship-builders ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. I think so.

118 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you ask any exemption on manufactured duck ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. The price is much higher here than cotton duck. Dur
ing the war we were obliged to use foreign duck altogether, as cotton
was so high, and we got a very poor article at that.

The CHAIRMAN. You think that the exemption of duty on the raw
materials would be sufficient to revive American ship-building?

Mr. O. HOUSE. I think that with that we would be able to compete
with foreigners.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any interest at all in ship-building?

Mr. O. HOUSE. None at all.

The CHAIRMAN. As a ship-owner, would you be in favor of granting
American registration to foreign-built vessels ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. 1 think not. I think that would be a great injury to
our mechanical industry.

The CHAIRMAN. What effect would it have upon our navigation
interests, aside from the ship-building interest?

Mr. O. HOUSE. It is impossible to say. It would have a very serious
effect upon the ship-building interest ; there is no doubt about that.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose that the two measures were put together,
the exemption from duty of all the materials entering into the construc
tion of a ship, and the free registry of foreign-built ships, what effect
would they have upon the ship-building interest ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. Since the English have commenced building iron ships
I think they have rather an advantage ov&amp;lt;3r us. It is possible that if
the duties were taken off, or a drawback of the duty allowed on iron,
we might successfully compete with them ; but we probably could not at
first. It would take some time to get things properly arranged so that
we could build iron ships as cheaply as they can. They can build an
iron ship almost as cheaply as we can build a wooden one.

Mr. CALKIN. How is the coasting trade now ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. It has not been very profitable these few years past.

Mr. CALKIN. A law relieving the ship-building interest would help
very much the present ships in the matter of their repairs.

Mr. O. HOUSE. It would in their repairs. I think that most of the
repairs that are now done on the other side would then be done here.

Mr. HOLMAN. If the policy were adopted of giving to the American
ship-builder the benefits that may arise from the exemption of his mate
rials from internal and external taxes, and if American-built ships were
given the exclusive benefit of the domestic trade, as they have now, and
if at the same time Congress were to allow the registration of foreign-
built vessels purchased by American citizens on tbe imposition of a duty
of ten or fifteen per cent., what effect would these three measures com
bined have on ship-building and on. commerce ? How would they affect
the ship-building interest on the one hand and the commercial interest
on the other ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. I should think they would have a favorable effect ; it
strikes me so. I never thought of that mode of dealing with the ques
tion.

Mr. HOLMAN. Two of those measures would be friendly to the ship
building interest, and the other one to the promotion of commerce ?

Mr. O. HOUSE. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would not these three measures taken together have
the effect of increasing the ship-owning of the country, at least?

Mr. O. HOUSE. I should think they would.

Mr. HOLMAN. And might they not have that effect without necessarily
impairing the interests of the ship -builder ?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 119

Mr. O. HOUSE. I do not see how they, would injure him.

Mr. HOLMAN. Looking at the subject as a ship-owner, you think that
these three measures connected together, if they should become the
policy of the government, could not be justly objected to by either the
ship-building interest on the one hand or the commercial interest on the
other 1

Mr. O. HOUSE. My impression is that they would be well received ; I
should think so.

Mr. FREDERICK NICKERSON, ship-owner, said that he concurred gen
erally in the expression of opinion by the ship-owners and ship-builders
as to the necessity of relief in the shape of drawbacks. The only point
that he would like to draw the attention of the committee to was to the
relief to steam navigation in the matter of coal. He suggested whether,
if the duty on coal were not to be repealed, an arrangement might not
be made by which coal should be allowed to be brought from abroad,
entered in bond, and exported for consumption on the high seas. He
said that coal could be bought in Pictou at $2 05 a ton in gold. The
duty here was $1 25 in gold. If that coal could be brought here and
landed in bond, and could be shipped for consumption on steamers and
consumed at sea, with a proper guard against its being relanded, it would
be a very great relief to the steam commerce of the country.

Mr. MORRELL. I think that that would be entirely satisfactory to the
coal-producing interest of the country.

Mr. F. NICKERSON remarked that it seemed to him that that relief
to the steam commerce of the country was as much needed as any other
matter. It was a matter of very great importance. The high price of
coal was very much against the encouragement of steam commerce.
That system would naturally follow, on the same principle as allowing
ships to take their stores for consumption at sea, as is done in England.
In fact, there had been some little correspondence with the Secretary of the
Treasury 011 that very point. It had been thought first that it was a
point that might be decided by himself 5 but; there had been afterward
nothing done about it, as it had been considered that it might lead to
opening the door to some other matters, such as taking ships stores out
of bond. This privilege seemed to him a very reasonable thing to be
asked for and granted.

Mr. NATHANIEL McKAY submitted a written statement of the cost
of building iron steamships both in this country and abroad.

The letter is as follows :

BOSTON, October 18, 1869.

GENTLEMEN : * * * The cost to build an iron ship in England ready for
sea is (14) fourteen pounds per ton ; in this country it would be (22) twenty-two
pounds per ton. Ho says that there are now building on the Clyde one hundred ves
sels, all of iron, upward of one hundred thousand tony, twelve thousand horse-power;
last year (18G8) they built 171,126 tons of steam and sailing vessels, 15,940 horse-power,
and still the business is on the increase, and several new ship-yards are starting up. A
steamship arrived in London in the month of September with three thousand tons of
tea. sixty-five days from China, and still another with a freight valued at thirty thou
sand pounds, or one hundred and iifty thousand dollars. He says the steamships will
use up the tea sailing clippers in the China trade, and owners of iron sailing ships are
jnneh alarmed at the progress of steam over sailing vessels in the China as well as
other trades. A new ship in Scotland, built of iron, 387 feet long, 43 feet beam, 30 feet
deep, speed ten knots, cost seventy-eight thousand pounds. This ship has made six
teen and one-quarter voyages to New York in twenty-lour months, an average of forty-
four and one-fourth days to the round voyage. Carries of crew, all told, one hundred
and ten persons. This same company are now building .another vessel to run to New
York from Liverpool. She is to be 415 feet long on deck, 43 feet beam, :!0 feet deep,
speed twelve knots, costing complete, ready for sea, without provisions, eighty-iivo
thousand pounds. The engine for this ship cost eighteen thousand pounds. We could

120 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

not &quot;build the same ship hero for twice that amount of money. A steamer, with a com
pound engine, has just arrived from China, with two thousand four hundred tons of tea,
in sixty-two days. She is a ship 309 feet long, 28 feet deep, 39 feet wide, register 2,280
tons gross, net 1,550 tons 2,400 tons of fifty feet to the ton ; sails nine knots ; bark-
rigged; main yard sixty-two feet ; burns twenty-four tons of coal per day ; cost fifty-
two thousand pounds. The same company are building four others for the China trade.
The Chinese tea clippers are used up on account of the steamers doing such wonders.
The cost of the angle iron for the frames of ships, in England, cut to lengths, seven
pounds ten shillings; the cost of plates, cut to shape for an entire ship, is eight pounds
five shillings ; wire rigging twenty-one pounds per ton ; chain cables ten pounds pel
ton. Cost of American angle iron for a ship $134 40 per ton, a difference in favor of
England of $89 40, or four cents per pound. Cost of plates in America $112 per ton ;
in England $49 50 ; difference in favor of England, $62 50, or three cents per pound.
Cost of chain cables in this country is $134 40 per ton ; difference in favor of England
$57 20. Cost of wire rigging in America. $291 20 per ton ; difference in favor of Eng
land, $89 60. * * * * *
I have many more figures that I could give you, but will not tax your patience.

I remain, cordially yours,

NATH L McKAY.
To JOHN LYNCH.

Chairman Committee on Commerce.

The CHAIRMAN asked Mr. McKay whether his firm had built any iron
sailing or steam vessels.

Mr. McKAY replied that his firm could not afford to build them.

Mr. CALKIN inquired who had built the Merrimac.

Mr. McKAY replied that it had been built by Mr. Loring, who had
been before the committee to-day.

The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion, if the duties were taken off from the
materials entering into the construction of iron and wooden vessels, could
the American ship-builder compete successfully with foreign builders in
the construction of both those classes of vessels ?

Mr. McKAY. I think he could ; but if we go to work to have a bill
passed repealing the duty on iron alone it will kill the whole thing, for
we will have all Pennsylvania in Washington. And if we try to have
the tax withdrawn on cotton duck, we will have the mills of Lawrence
and Baltimore represented at Washington.

Mr. BTJFFINTON. And if you say hemp, you will have my constituents
acting against you ?

Mr. McKAY. Yes, sir. We cannot specify any one thing. But we
must have the duty remitted on everything that goes into the construc
tion of a ship and into its repairs, whether it be a sailing ship or a steam
ship.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know any ship-owner who has gone entirely
out of the business I

Mr. McKAY. Yes, sir ; I know one gentleman who was appointed on
the committee of the Board of Trade, but who would not attend, he was
so much disgusted with the business. He was a very large ship-owner ;
but his money is invested to-day in railroads.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Do you think that railroads pay him a better per
centage than ships would ?

Mr. McKAY. I think they do. The government has aided them more
tl&m it has aided the ship-yards. I asked one member of Congress from
Boston, the other day, who used to be one of the largest ship-owners in
the country, in reference to this* drawback on ship-building materials.
Well, he did not know. He thought it might be done. The committee
was very much in favor of it, but for himself he had very much doubt
ebout it. If we do not have this relief we are going to be wiped from
the ocean. We do not want American ships that went under the Eng
lish flag taken back to this country $ nor do we want foreign ships en-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 121

rolled in this country. If we adopt that policy, the honest men who
learned the ship-building trade will have to pack np, go west, and buy
farms, or get the government or some of the railways to give them farms.
To-day you cannot hire a joiner in Boston to work on a ship at less than
four dollars. The mechanics who have worked side by side with me are
to-day driving potato carts through the city.

Mr. CALKIN. If the government does not protect the shipping interest
all the mechanics will be driven out of it, and in five or ten years there
will be none left ?

Mr. McKAY. There will be still some left to keep up the coastwise
trade.

Mr. CALKIN. Various opinions have been expressed in regard to the
capability of American mechanics competing with foreigners in the con
struction of iron ships. Do you not think that they are ready to go to
work and to build iron ships without waiting one or two years to learn
how ?

Mr. McKAY. I do not think that any man on the other side of the
water can beat a Yankee any way. That is my idea. I am a good deal
of the opinion of John Bright, who said in a speech that every other
Yankee you find has got a patent of some kind. I do not think that
any class of mechanics can beat the American mechanics. Of course,
we have got to have some experience in building iron steamers. We
have built but few iron ships, and most of them have been failures.
The government spent one hundred millions during the war and got no
navy. All that New York is doing in the way of merchant marine is in
the coastwise trade. The New Yorkers pride themselves on the number
of steamers in their port ; but John Bull owns them. As to the Pacific
Mail Steamship Company, the English have got ships on the same line
that are burning only thirty tons of coal a day, when these New York
side-wheelers are burning sixty-five tons, and the English will eat them
all up.

Mr. CALKIN. Allow me to say that the Pacific Mail Steamship Com
pany is running large steamers on a consumption of forty tons a day.

Mr. McKAY. Well, they run very slowly. But you will find that when
they come to run last they burn from fifty to sixty tons a day. If the
government will only go to work and relieve the ship-builders and give
us some subsidy for mail lines of steamers, you will see the hammers and
axes at work in every ship-yard. The government gives millions of sub
sidies to railroads, and for want of a subsidy to steamships it allows all
our trade across the ocean to be carried on in foreign bottoms.

Mr. WELLS. In your communication to the committee have you stated
the comparative cost of an iron ship here and in England ?

Mr. McKAY. Yes, sir ; I say that it costs nearly as much again here.

Mr. WELLS. Are you now engaged in the building of ships ?

Mr. McKAY. No, sir ; there are no ships to be built now ; and I think
I shall spend the rest of my days in the city of New York, where all
business goes.

Mr. E. S. TOBEY, of the Boston Board of Trade, said that it had been
remarked by a distinguished member of Congress, and not without appa
rent truth, that every interest in the United States had its friends, but
that the American shipping had none. He did not wonder at that re
mark, judging from the standpoint at Washington, where the represent
atives of the American shipping interest had seldom or never appeared.
It had been stated before the committee that that interest had never
needed relief. Up to 1801, when the w r ar commenced, that was true, so
farjis related to sailing vessels, but not so far as related to steamers

122 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

because the Collins line of steamers did ask and did receive aid from the
government. He submitted that it was specially the interest of the
United States government, for its own sake, to restore the American flag
to the ocean. It was pre-eminently a national question. Capital could
very well take care of itself. The only thing on the part of Congress
was to see that it did not take too good care of itself. It was a rare and
exceptional thing to find a large capitalist who could be called a ship
owner ; ships were generally owned by several persons. Capitalists who
had money in ships could sell their ships to England and put their cap
ital in western railroads and mortgages. Thus capital would take care
of itself. But that was not for the interest of the government, which
should encourage, maintain, and develop the mechanical industry of the
country, as the cheapest way in which to maintain its navy power. If
the ship-building interest were not encouraged, the mechanics engaged
in it would be dispersed ; and once dispersed, how could they ever be got
back again ? The trade of a ship-builder was not learned in a day. Naval
architecture was perhaps one of the finest sciences that could be named ;
and the time might come when the country would need another Erics-
sou. If the business were to be transferred to the rival of the United
States on the other side of the Atlantic, by admitting foreign-built ves
sels to American registry, it was not to be expected that the few ship
builders now attempting to carry on their business would continue that
fruitless attempt. It was, therefore, a matter of the highest importance
for the government itself, that the ship-building mechanics should be
sustained, not for the sake of capital, but for the sake of the nation.
Every American ship-owner could better afford to transfer his ship to
Great Britain and invest his capital how he chose, than the United
States government could afford to allow that to be done.

As to the decline of the shipping interest of the United States, he
would merely refer to Mr. Wells s report, in which it is stated that whereas,
in 1853, American commerce on the high seas was fifteen per cent, greater
than that of Great Britain, and maintained a close competition until
1SG1, it had fallen in 18G4 to less than one-half as much, and was now prob
ably not more than one-third. The causes of this decline he attributed,
first, to the operation of confederate cruisers, by which many vessels
were destroyed and many more transferred to the Engh sh flag, to the
natural termination of ship s lives, and to the fact that American currency
had become inflated to such an extent that it was impossible, during the
war, to replace those ships. American commerce had thus declined, not
through any want of enterprise on the part of American citizens, but
from natural causes which the government itself could not control, and
for which it was in no degree responsible up to this time. He regarded
the appointment of this committee as one of the most encouraging feat
ures that he had seen for a long time, because it showed that Congress
meant to obtain information on the subject, and to address itself to the
remedies by which the shipping interests of the country could be brought
up to a point in competition with other maritime nations.

The simple question was, how it could be done. He submitted, as a
logical proposition, that if the United States would do just as England
and other nations had done to promote their commerce, the same results
would follow, and American shipping would again come to the front
and claim its share in the carrying trade of the world both by steam
and sailing vessels. This country was to-day paying from twenty to
thirty million dollars a year to foreign nations for the mere transporta
tion of merchandise in foreign bottoms.

If the government adopted the policy of permitting foreign-built ves-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 123

sels to be purchased and registered in the United States, what, he asked,
would be the effect on the finances of the country to say nothing of its
effect on mechanical industry? It would take from the country another
vast sum of gold, and hand it over to the commercial rival of the United
States to build up its mammoth steamboat interest and utterly to crush
put that of the United States. It seemed to him entirely suicidal to the
interests of the United States to think for a moment of transferring to
the American flag vessels of foreign construction. A ship was a sort
of national institution ; and the men to build ships must be kept at home.
Steamers and ships amounting to three hundred sail had been put in
requisition to blockade the southern coast during the rebellion ; and if
there had not been American artisans to draw upon, where would these
ships have been built and repaired ?

Secretary Stan ton had said to him, in the early part of the war, &quot; I
want you to go home and, by private enterprise, push our iron-clad s for
ward. Bring everything into requisition, and give us something to con
tend with this Merrimac, or we are gone. Even the southern women
are selling their trinkets to build up a navy, and here we are relying on
the navy yards, and no results.&quot; Fortunately the ship-yards and the
skill were to be obtained. This country was liable to be at war again.
If that war were to be with Great Britain, and if Americans had gone
to work and built up her navy at the expense of the iron ship-building
interest, what would be the result ?

He found that there was a very prevalent notion abroad that Ameri
cans did not know how to build iron steamships. There was no greater
fallacy than that. The Collins line had proved the ability of American
steamers to compete with English steamers in point of speed. Mr. Col
lins had made a mistake, however, in undertaking to surpass the English
in that respect. It cost too much, and that cost was not counterbal
anced by the subsidy. He (Mr. Tobey) was chairman of the committee
which had the Mississippi and Merrimac steamships built recently at
South Boston, and he had been informed by the man who made the
model that he was paid six hundred dollars to duplicate the model and
send it to Liverpool. These ships proved the ability of American
mechanics to model a ship equal to anything that floated. Why should
that ability not be cherished and encouraged ?

American seamen should also be kept up and encouraged. During
the late war the government had drawn from the merchant marine thirty
or forty thousand men to blockade the southern ports. Without that
blockade the war would have terminated speedily in the success of the
rebellion ; and, without the merchant marine, the blockade could not
have been maintained. The government could not afford to see the
American merchant marine crushed out. That merchant marine was
indispensable for the maintenance of the national maritime power, and
it must be constructed by American mechanics, conducted by American
citizens, and owned by American capitalists.

The English government had increased its subsidies to steamship
lines. It had increased that of the Peninsular and Oriental line from
about two hundred thousand pounds sterling originally to five hundred
thousand pounds. England claimed to be a free- trade country ; but
what did she do with her foreign commerce her steamship interest?
She protected it to a degree that no other interest there ever was pro
tected. And why ? Because it was the most potent means of developing
every other commercial interest, and because it was the cheapest way
of sustaining her navy. Earl Gray had said that one of the reasons
why he was in favor of subsidizing steamships to all parts of the world

124 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

was, that swift ships bring back swift orders for manufactured goods.
And, as illustrating the force of that remark, in less than five years
after subsidizing the line to Brazil, the exports from England to Brazil
increased three hundred per cent.

While England possessed the natural advantage of cheap coal, cheap
iron, cheap labor, cheap capital, she was not content with them as a
means of competing with other nations; but she very wisely took a
still further step, and, for the purpose of drawing capital to the&quot; develop
ment of her steam commerce, she had commenced in 1838 to pay four
steamers, running from Liverpool to Boston, eight hundred thousand
dollars a year for carrying the mails. She had commenced, the same
year, the subsidies to the Peninsular and Oriental line, and increased
them till they now reached five hundred thousand pounds sterling per
annum. The course which England pursued in subsidizing her foreign
commerce he regarded as wise.

Just as soon as the policy of the United States government would
allow American ship-builders to construct vessels as cheaply as they are
constructed in England, by remitting the duties on materials, and would
then compensate steamship lines for carrying the mails to the same extent
and for as long a period as England did, and would then remit the
duties on all ships stores as England did, and would then omit to tax
American ships internally as England omitted to do when the United
States government accepted those ideas and acted on them, it would be
found that the enterprise and skill of the people of the United States
would enable them to compete with any other people.

The policy of subsidizing had not been pursued by England alone.
The Emperor of the French had seen the results achieved, and had said
that he was not going to have such a powerful neighbor without
competing with her, and he had commenced to subsidize a line to New
York, which to-day received twenty-six thousand dollars in gold for
every round trip. And the result was that the last New York enterprise,
the line of the Arago and Fulton, had had to surrender. Although the
United States government had given them the postal service, they were
compelled to withdraw and to give up the whole route to the French.
The Pereire and Ville de Paris had been built in Scotland, but it was
because the Emperor knew very well that France had not the experience
in naval construction to compete with England or with the United States
in the merchant marine. It was just the same with Germany and with
Holland. They were subordinate naval powers, and therefore had no
objection to allowing foreign-built vessels to their registration. They
saw their advantage in transportation interests. They had acted wisely
and well in the matter. But the tlnited States, occupying a great central
position, holding to the continents of Asia and Europe, claiming even to
be the rival of England and France as a naval power, could not afford
to do so. The navy and the mercantile marine of the country had done,
prior to the late war, more than anything else to raise the reputation of
the nation before the maritime nations of the earth, and to make the
American flag respected ; and every American citizen wanted to see
that flag flying again in every foreign port. In tbe war of 1812, New
England owned seven-eighths if not a larger proportion of the tonnage
of the United States. The merchants of Salein had contributed out of
their own pockets to build the Essex frigate, which chased hundreds of
British ships from the seas, which went into the mouth of the English
Channel, and which so pestered and restrained the commerce of England
that the rates of insurance went so high as practically to exclude their
ships from the sea ; and this had been one of the most potent means of

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 125

bringing England to terms. He had adverted to these facts to show
the intimate relations that existed between the naval power and the
mercantile marine, and to show that the one cannot be maintained
without the other. The men who constructed ships were needed as well
as the men who navigated them; and he believed that everything
possible should be done to cherish the ship-building interest. He felt
encouraged and hopeful that when the facts were fully investigated and
understood it would be found tha.t the interests of the country, irre
spective of section, demanded the restoration of the American flag not
only on sailing-vessels but on steamships on the ocean.

It had been assumed, erroneously, that the people of the. West had no
particular interest in the matter of shipping. But he proposed to show
that they had absolutely more interest in it than the people of the East
had. The latter could better afford to dispose of all their ships and to
invest the proceeds in western railroads, where they could get a better
return to their capital, than the people of the West could afford to
dispense with the facilities for getting their produce to foreign markets
at a low rate of transportation. If the United States government should
pay a subsidy for carrying the mails across the Atlantic as large as
England pays so large as to compensate entirely the ship-owner for
the whole voyage, and so large that he could say to the producer or
shipper, &quot;We can afford to carry your goods for nothing, we are so liberally
compensated by the government 7 who would be deriving the most
advantage from it I The producer in the West. He could have his
goods transported at a very low rate, because the ship-owner could afford
to do it, and competition would induce him to do it. Therefore the
subsidy paid out of the treasury of the United States and assessed on
the general interests of the country would be one of the best means of
developing the agricultural interests of the country, by aiding to cheapen
transportation from the place of production to the place of consumption on
the other side of the Atlantic. Hence, as a mere practical question, the
people of the West had as much interest in promoting lines of steamships
and sailing vessels as the people of the East. He had never met the
first man in his intercourse in Washington, or in a convention of two
hundred and forty members held in Boston two years ago, who dissented
from the general proposition that it was of the greatest national import
ance to restore American commerce under the American ilag. That
convention had unanimously voted a resolution to that effect, which had
been transmitted to Congress.

In conclusion, Mr. Tobey stated, in reply to a remark by Mr. Calkin,
that American ship-owners must be put on the same footing as for
eigners. They must have all the encouragement that foreign govern
ments give to their commerce ; and even then the American ship-owners
would be placed under the disadvantage arising from the condition of
the currency.

Mr. FRANKLIN W. SMITH, treasurer of the Atlantic Iron Works, made
some additional remarks. He said that the revenue was now receiving
nothing from the taxation of ship- iron, because none was imported.
Therefore the government would be no loser by allowing a drawback
on iron used in ship- building. The iron men of Pennsylvania were
making no sales of ship-iron to-day, and therefore they would not be the
losers. It would be remembered that the subsidies to the British lines
were at first looked upon with great jealousy in the United States because
that navigation would be making the entire coasts of the United States
familiar to British pilots. He remembered that when the Cuuard steamer
Unicorn came into the port of Boston there was great alarm, because

126 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

the pilotage of the port was being made known to British pilots.
But to-day there was scarcely a port of the American coast that was not
as familiar to British ship-masters and British pilots as to any American
pilots. The object of the Britisli subsidies had not been simply to keep
up a mercantile marine, but had been also to keep afloat in the cheapest
possible way a naval force; and England had done it. She could throw
fifty thousand men upon any point of the globe to-day earlier than any
other nation. It seemed to him that there was no interest to be injured
by a change in the present condition of affairs. The iron men of Penn
sylvania should join instantly with the shipping and commercial interests,
and let the ports be open to English iron, but let the ship-builders have
the choice to use American iron. And if they used American iron, let
them have a drawback equal to the duty on English iron.

Mr. MORRELL. That is all that the iron men have asked.

Mr. SMITH. That is all we want. We certainly would use American
iron, and the incidental demand for American iron would be very great.
The government would certainly lose nothing by it ; for it is getting no
revenue to-day from ship-building iron. The western interest would be
benefited by it, because the ship is the continuation of the western lines
of railroad around the globe.

The committee adjourned to meet in Portland on the 21st of October.

PORTLAND, October 21, 1869.

The committee met in the collector s room in the custom-house.

Present: The chairman and Messrs. Morrell, Buffinton, Wells, and
Calkin.

Captain WASHINGTON RYAN submitted his views to the committee.
He said that he had noticed newspaper reports of the statements made
before the committee, and he agreed with most of them. There was another
thing, however, which he thought tended to the depression of our com
merce, and which he had not seen touched upon. That was the deterio
ration of the men who sail American ships. He thought that they had
been in the down-hill road for some years from one end of the ship to
the other masters, officers, and crew. He thought that that was owing
in a great measure to the apathy of the ship-owning interests, or perhaps
to the want of public spirit. He had never known any ship-owner who
seemed to him to take any interest in improving the condition of the
men who sailed his ships. He thought that the American merchant
marine law, if there was such a law, needed a thorough and complete
revision. In fact, he might say that there was no mercantile marine
law in this country. Masters and officers of ships came up like Topsies.
There was no board of examination, and nobody knew whether an officer,
when he came on board a ship, could determine the latitude and longi
tude of a ship by meridian observation. There was what is called a
Ship-masters 7 Association in New York, which gave certificates to officers,
but did so without making any examination. He considered an associ
ation like that an absolute and positive injury to the shipping interest,
because it encouraged a bad state of things. And it was astonishing to
hitn that the underwriters of New York would take a risk at one-half
per cent, less on the strength of a certificate from such an association.
He favored such a revision of the mercantile marine law as had been
proposed in the Senate of the United States by Mr. Fish, of New York,
in 1853. He thought that, had that bill become a law, it would have
produced a very different state of thin gs. As it was, respectably brought
up young men, who might have imbibed a passion for the sea, went now
for a voyage or two, and became so disgusted with the business that

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 127

ttiey invariably quitted it. He thought that the navigation laws of
England and of the southern European nations was such as to keep
their best men in their own navies, leaving only the refuse to American
ships. The consequence was that the sailors on board American ships
were, in a great measure, the refuse of the maritime nations of Europe.
He approved of the government shipping offices that were to be found
in every seaport in England. Sailors were shipped arid paid off in those
offices. The names of the sailors shipped there were kept upon the reg
istry with memoranda of their characters; so that unless a sailor had a
good character he could not get employment at one of those offices.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand you to say that the character of
American seamen is below that of the seamen of Great Britain?

Mr. EYAN. No, sir ; I do not mean to say that ; but we were so far
above them years ago, that we had some room to fall and still to be fully
equal to them.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean to say that American seamen have dete
riorated, and are not as good as they were formerly ?

Mr. EYAN. Yes j and the causes of the deterioration are going on every
year.

The CHAIRMAN. How is it with the English sailors ? Are they im
proving ?

Mr. EYAN. I should judge so. I should judge that the inevitable
consequences of the shipping act, which has not been long in operation,
must be to keep their best men for their own ships, and to send off the
refuse.

The CHAIRMAN. How is it with the officers? How do they compare
with our officers ?

Mr. EYAN. Our officers compare favorably with them, and perhaps
they always will j but I do not think they are what they were some
years ago.

Mr. CALKIN. I understood you to say that it is no great credit to a
captain to procure a certificate from the Ship-masters Association of
New York.

Mr. EYAN. No, sir. The last application that we had from a captain,
lie was told by the chartering party that he was required to have a
certificate from the Ship-masters Association of New York, and his ex
clamation was, li Humbug ! I have been a master for ten or a dozen years,
and I have gone along safely. What is the use of one of those things?&quot;

Mr. WELLS. Are not these certificates given under oath ?

Mr. EYAN. No. sir.

Mr. WELLS. Well, what harm can it be to have a certificate ?

Mr. EYAN. The harm lies in this: that that board is presumed to be
a duly constituted and properly qualified board of examiners, and so
long as it is in existence it tends to prevent the formation of a proper
board, which should be under the authority of the government.

Mr. WELLS. How long have you been a ship-owner ?

Mr. EYAN. I was a sailor for twenty-eight years, and twenty years of
that time I was a master. I have been on shore for the last fifteen years;
but I have been interested more or less in vessels since 1853.

Mr. WELLS. Are you familiar with commerce ?

Mr. EYAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. WELLS. I understood you to say that, in your opinion, the grade
of officers and men employed at present is not up to the same standard
as it was some years ago.

Mr. EYAN. I do not think it is.

128 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. WELLS. Is it your opinion that that is one of the causes of the
depression in our commerce ?

Mr. EYAN. Yes, sir ; my opinion is that that is one of the causes of the
depression in our commerce. Take the matter of insurance. The pre
mium of insurance has increased thirty per cent, within twenty years
back, and I think it is mainly due to that cause.

Mr. MORRELL. Are not vessels that are running with American crews
insured as cheaply as other vessels 1

Mr. EYAN. I think so.

Mr. MORRELL. Were American vessels formerly insured at less rates
at corresponding times?

Mr. KYAN. Yes.

Mr. MORRELL. What legislation would you recommend to encourage
the building up of a better class of seamen?

Mr. EYAN. I would recommend a thorough revision of the mercantile
marine law by practical men. I would have sailors shipped in every
considerable port in the country by a government shipping officer. J
would have the men mustered under the eye of that government officer
on board the ship, before she proceeds to sea. These details are carried
out fully in the bill introduced by Mr. Fish, to which I have already
referred. On every vessel bound on a foreign voyage I would require
that there should be an examining surgeon, and that every one of those
men shoulcl be examined, as men are examined in the navy before they
go to sea. Our ships go to sea with the least possible number of men,
and if one of the men becomes sick or disabled it affects all the rest. I
would have the men paid off at the government office when the ship
returns, as is the custom in England. I think that that is the only way
to break up the sailor landlord system, which is the curse of our mer
cantile marine. I would have this board of examiners appointed by the
government, and every application for the position of master or first or
second officer examined by that board, and then, when the vessel returned
from sea, I would have the ship paid off at that government shipping
office, and every man s character recorded whether there was any
trouble on board the vessel, any fighting, quarreling, &c.

Mr. CALKIN. In other words, you would have a government espionage
on the mercantile marine of the country f

Mr. EYAN. Call it espionage or what not, I would have the same kind
of a court as they have in England, before which cases of collisions, &c.,
are tried such a court as that of Dr. Lushington in London, assisted
by two experienced naval officers.

Mr. CALKIN. Would you have that only for the foreign trade, or to
cover our coastwise trade also ?

Mr. EYAN. I would have it for every case occurring on board a vessel,
and for this reason, that discipline is necessary, and that it cannot be
maintained by bringing those cases before the civil courts.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think that our whaling business of former
times contributed to build up a better class of seamen by the co-operative
system of paying the seamen and officers a percentage on the profits of
the voyage?

Mr. EYAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BUFFINTON. That system is carried on to-day in the whale-oil
trade?

Mr. EYAN. Yes; but there are not so many whalemen as there used to
be, and consequently there are not so many seamen drawn to the ocean
by that business. I think the principle is a correct one, and the tend
ency would be certainly to improve the class of seamen.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 129

,Mr. CALKIN. Are not many of the captains now in our foreign trade
and in our immense coasting trade interested in their vessels ?

Mr. KYAN. A great many of them are probably more than half o
them.

Mr. CALKIN. Does not that have a tendency to make them more dih
gent and vigilant in their business?

Mr. EYAN. Certainly. That is the only reason why the owners of ves
sels require masters to have an interest. But at the same time there is
a disposition, especially in certain ports of Massachusetts, not to permit
masters to have an interest in their vessels, but to manage the vessels
by merchants and agents at each end of the route, the master being
merely the navigator. I am told that that is becoming more and more
common, except down on the Cape.

Mr. CALKIN. When you spoke of the depression of our commerce
being the foult of the sailor, did you intend to apply that to the coasting
trade?

Mr. KYAN. It has its effect upon all branches of trade.

Mr. CALKIN. But our coasting trade has increased ?

Mr. EYAN. Yes; but the same men who maybe on an East Indiaman
one voyage may be in the coasting trade the next voyage.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think that the building up of these exten
sive lines of foreign steamers, principally owned by foreigners, having
their agencies at both ends of the route, was calculated to interfere very
much with the ordinary American commerce, and that the tendency is
to force the business into these channels, and to deprive the individual
ship-owner of getting his ordinary share of business?

Mr. EYAN. Freight will go where it can be carried cheapest. If these
great lines can carry freight more expeditiously and more cheaply than
single ships, whether propelled by steam or sail, I suppose that freight
will go there, and thus co-operation thoroughly organized and well
managed may, I suppose, monopolize the greater part of the trade.

Mr. CALKIN. What is the sentiment in Portland in reference to the
navigation laws ? Are you in favor of repealing the navigation laws?

Mr. EYAN. No, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. Are you in favor of Congress passing a law allowing a
drawback or bounty to the ship-building interest?

Mr. EYAN. I am.

Mr. WELLS. Are you in favor of repealing the navigation law, of allow
ing a drawback on the materials used in ship-building, and at the same
time of retaining the coast wise trade exclusively for American-built ves
sels? What effect would those three measures, taken together, have
upon the commercial and ship-building interests of the country?

Mr. EYAN. I do not know whether one of those measures would offset
the other. The benefit that would be derived from the remission of
duties on the materials entering into the construction of ships would
be offset by the privilege given to our merchants to buy foreign-built
ships.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Suppose that there were nothing done excepting to
allow a drawback upon the materials going into the manufacture of a
ship, do you believe then that there would be an increase of ship-build
ing, or that the American ship-builders would be able to compete with
foreign ship-builders, taking into view the whole state of the country at
present, the capital invested in other business, and the interest that is
received from that capital ?

Mr. EYAN. I am satisfied that the ship-building and commerce of the
country would be increased.

9NI

130 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. BUFFINTON. But if the navigation laws were repealed you think
that that would offset the drawback?

Mr. RYAN. So it seems to me, so far as I have given the subject
thought.

The CHAIRMAN. You gave it as your opinion that our sailors and offi
cers have deteriorated, and that the character of foreign officers and sea
men has improved. Do you believe that that is the cause or the effect
of the decline in our ship-building interest?

Mr. EYAN. I think it is probably the cause. I think that the advance
in the rates of insurance may be traced more directly to that than to any
other cause. James Brown, a well-known Liverpool merchant, a man
to whom I used to apply for advice when I was in the Liverpool trade,
remarked to Captain Schofield of Brunswick six years ago, u You Amer
ican masters are not what you were in years past. You are going down
every year ; I can see that plainly.&quot; I think that one reason of it is
owing to ship-owners crowding down the rates of wages to masters.

Mr. CALKIN. You are not an old resident of Portland?

Mr. EYAN. I have been here fifteen years.

Mr. CALKIN. In case Congress passed a law allowing a drawback on
the materials used in the construction of ships, so that iron steamships
might be built in this country for the European trade, and also allowing
them a fair subsidy, somewhat in keeping with the subsidies allowed by
the English government, do you think that you could support an Amer
ican line of steamers from this port, running, say, monthly at first, and
getting down to weekly?

Mr. EYAN. I do not think we could ; but when we come to get our
railroad completed, connecting us with the West byway of Ogdensburg,
I think we can do it.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you think that a line of steamers across the ocean
could be supported depending chiefly upon passengers and mail service
for its business?

Mr. EYAN. I have no knowledge of the management of steam lines,
and I have not sufficient information to answer your question.

Mr. JOSEPH W. DYER, ship-builder, submitted his views to the committee.
He said he had no doubt but that the ship-building interest would be
revived by the exemption from duty of the articles entering into the
construction of ships. He thought that then ships could be built in
this country as cheaply as they are built in Europe.

The CHAIRMAN. What rates of wages do you pay now to ship-carpen
ters ?

Mr. DYER. From two dollars and fifty cents to three dollars a day.

The CHAIRMAN. What were the average rates of wages from 1852 to
1860?

Mr. DYER. From one dollar and fifty cents to one dollar and seventy-
five cents and two dollars a day.

The CHAIRMAN. Were your wages as low as that in 1854, 1855 ?

Mr. DYER. Yes, sir ; they were two dollars a day. We now pay three
dollars for first-class carpenters.

The CHAIRMAN. The advance is about fifty per cent.

Mr. DYER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the difference in the cost of labor
between here and Europe would not prevent your building ships here as
cheaply as they are built in Europe ?

Mr. DYER. No, sir ; we should not ask any odds there. I think that
our mechanics are sufficiently better than theirs to make up that
difference.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 131

The CHAIRMAN. You tliink that you get as much work for the money
you pay as they get ?

Mr. DYER. That is my opinion. That has been my experience all
through life.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you built ships recently?

Mr. DYER. Not very recently. I have built some small vessels within
the year. In the course of the war 1 built two. Previous to that 1
built one or two ships a year.

The CHAIRMAN, Do you know what the difference would be in the
cost of a thousand-ton ship between the present time and what it was
from 1852 to 1860 1

Mr. DYER. Previous to the war we could build a thousand-ton ship,
first-class, at from fifty-five to sixty dollars a ton, and since then from
seventy-five to eighty dollars.

Mr. MORRELL. Does that increase consist chiefly in the enhanced cost
of labor or of materials ?

Mr. DYER. There is something of it in the labor, of course. The cost
of labor on a ship will probably reach from seven thousand to eight
thousand dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that vessels which cost sixty
dollars a ton before the war cost seventy-five dollars now ?

Mr. DYER. Yes, sir ; from seventy -five to eighty dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. So that, making an allowance for the difference be
tween gold and currency, vessels can be built as cheaply now as before
the war f

Mr. DYER. About the same.

The CHAIRMAN. A vessel all fitted out for sea costs no more at present
than seventy-five dollars a ton ?

Mr. DYER. From seventy-five to eighty dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. What effect do you think it would have upon the
ship-building interest of the country to exempt from duty the materials
entering into the construction of ships and at the same time to admit
foreign-built ships to American registration &quot;?

Mr. DYER. I do not think the effect would be very good.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the ship-building interest could
be revived under that system ?

Mr. DYER. I think that if you allow foreign ships to come in here and
obtain American registration you cannot revive our ship-building interest.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the ship-building interest could be
revived if these two measures were passed at the same time ?

Mr. DYER. I do not.

Mr. WELLS. I understood you to say that by a remission of the duty
on the materials you can build a ship now as cheaply as you could
before the war ?

Mr. DYER. No, sir ; there is an increase in the price of labor.

Mr. MORRELL. You are speaking of wooden ships now ?

Mr. DYER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WELLS. What would be the amount of saving per ton in the
building of a ship by the remission of duty on the materials I

Mr. DYER. I never went into any calculation of that kind. I know
what it costs us to build a vessel and what it cost us before the war.

Mr. WELLS. What would be the advantage of the remission of the
duty?

Mr. DYER. We could build so much the cheaper.

Mr. WELLS. But you could not build as cheaply as they do in
England $

132 NAVIGATION INTERESTS. .

Mr. DYER. Probably not. We never could. Still we competed with
them successfully. We considered our vessels much better than theirs.

Mr. WELLS. If you cannot build as cheaply as they, do you not think
that American merchants will buy their ships abroad f

Mr. DYER. Perhaps some will if they can buy them at five dollars a
ton less.

Mr. WELLS. Then what would be the advantage to the ship-b.uilding
interest to have a remission of the duty if they cannot then compete
with ships built in other countries f

Mr. DYER! We can compete with them if the navigation laws are not
repealed. So far as my knowledge goes our laboring men are many
times better than theirs. We make better ships here and have better
materials. The quality of materials that enter into ships here and in
the provinces is very different.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that you thought you did
not pay any higher for the amount of service you obtained than is paid
abroad ?

Mr. DYER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So that there really is no difference in the cost of
labor ?

Mr. DYER. I do not think there is.

Mr. CALKIN. In case there is nothing done to relieve the shipping
interest what effect is it going to have within the next five or ten years
upon the mechanical labor connected with ship-building ?

Mr. DYER. There is no other course for the mechanics except to go
out of the country or leave the business.

Mr. CALKIN. Are there as many ship-carpenters to-day in Maine as
there were previous to the war ?

Mr. DYER. No, sir ; there are not.

Mr. CALKIN. How many hours a day do your mechanics work here ?

Mr. DYER. Ten hours a day.

Mr. CALKIN. Is there any difficulty in getting them to work ten
hoars ?

Mr. DYER. None at all.

Mr. CALKIN. Can you easily make a ship-carpenter out of a house-
carpenter, or out of a wood- worker of any kind?

Mr. DYER. I should prefer to get a green hand and make a ship-car
penter out of him.

Mr. BUFFINTON. I think you did not fully understand a question put
to you by the chairman. I understood the chairman to ask you whether,
if our currency was equal to gold, you could build a ship as cheaply now
as you could before the war, and I think you answered, yes.

Mr. DYER. I did not mean to.

The CHAIRMAN. The difference that you give between the present cost
of a ship in currency and the cost of a ship before the war, which was in
gold, is only about the percentage of the difference between gold and
currency ?

Mr. DYER. From fifty-five to sixty dollars before the war, and from
seventy-five to eighty dollars now.

The CHAIRMAN. That would be in the neighborhood of thirty per
cent, advance.

Mr. DYER. Yes, sir.

The On AIRMAN. Well, as there is now a difference of thirty per cent,
betweeen gold and currency, that would be the only difference in the
cost of a ship between now and before the war. In point of fact, the

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 133

answer you gave would have that result; so that you build a ship to-day,
according to that statement, as cheaply in gold as you did then f

Mr. DYER. Yes, provided we have the drawback. What I mean to
say is that if this drawback were allowed us we could build a vessel as
cheap as we ever did.

Mr. WELLS. If you have the drawback and the gold currency as you
had previous to the war, do you think you would have any market for
your ships, after you had them built ?

Mr. DYER. I think we would have the same market that we always
had.

Mr. WELLS. Previous to the war you had no steamers to compete
with you in the domestic trade, and our foreign commerce was more
extensive ; the products of this country were carried to foreign countries^
which is not the case now.

Mr. DYER. Not now ; but I trust they will be.

The CHAIRMAN. What has been the practice usually in reference te
the coppering of vessels built in the United States &quot;2 Has it been done
in this country or in Europe ?

Mr. DYER. Of late years vessels go to the other side to copper.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the common practice in building a vessel
here ? Is the coppering done here 1

Mr. DYER. No, sir. With a iiew vessel it is generally preferred that
she should make a voyage first, except she is going a long vogage, such
as to the Pacific. In that case they copper her here ; but if a vessel is
going into the southern trade and then to Liverpool or France, they
do not copper her until they get on the other side, where it is cheaper.

The CHAIRMAN. When you speak of the cost of a vessel you mean
her cost fitted out for sea without coppering ?

Mr. DYER. Yes, sir.

Captain CHARLES M. DAVIS submitted his views to the committee. He
said that he disagreed somewhat with his friend Captain Ryan about
the trouble in the depression of American commerce. He thought that
it was necessary to go further back than Captain Kyan did to get at the
bottom of the trouble. They had got no ships now, comparatively
speaking, with which to make sailors. American ships had almost
disappeared from the ocean, and for very obvious reasons. During the
late war the pirates destroyed many American ships, and many were
transferred to foreign flags. Shipping would have to be brought back
and then discipline would follow. If the United States had shipping
equal to that of England or France, he would guarantee that American
ship-masters could compete with the French or the English in discipline
and in the sailing of their ships. He had yet to learn that American
ship-masters did not take as good care of their ships and did not make
as good passages as any foreign ship-masters. American ships used to
be preferred to foreign ships in the carrying trade. American shipping
must be built up, and in order to do that the ship-builders must have
something to help them or else they could not compete with foreign
ship-builders. He had letters in his pocket, which he had received
lately from Quebec and from St. John, showing that he could buy ships
there first-class ships of a thousand tons at from thirty-seven thou
sand to thirty-eight thousand dollars in gold, all fitted out for sea. Add
ing thirty per cent, to that price for the difference between gold and
currency, would make their cost in the neighborhood of fifty dollars per
ton in currency. They built pretty good ships in Quebec rather better
than in St. John. They had oak and hackmatack there and they built
good ships. Ship-builders on this side could not compete with them in

134 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

price. Mr. (Dyer had said that a thousand-ton ship at present woulc
cost seventy-five dollars a ton. He could buy such a ship to-day in
Quebec for fifty dollars a ton. That was a great difference; but ho
thought that if American ship-builders could have the advantage of a
remission of duty on the materials used in the construction of ships, and
if ship-owners could get their outfits out of bond free of duty, as they
did in England and France, American ship-builders and ship-owners
could compete with the world, provided that there was business for them.
There was a change in the freighting business. Steamers were taking
the place of sailing-vessels. These latter only got heavy cargoes to
carry, such as tobacco, coal, salt, &c. Only let American ships be built
as cheaply as the ships of other nations, and American ship-owners
would ask no odds.

The CHAIRMAN. Would we labor under any greater disadvantages
now than we did prior to the war, provided the materials entering
into the construction of ships were admitted free of duty ? Could we
then as successfully compete with foreigners on a gold basis as we did
before the war ?

Mr. DAVIS. I do not know why we should not, if business was the
same.

The CHAIRMAN. Were there not always these periods of depression
in the shipping business prior to the war, some years prosperous and
some unprosperous J ?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir ; some years we could not run our ships except
at a loss, and then again the business would revive, and we would make
money.

The CHAIRMAN. That business is not so regular and steady as other
branches of business ?

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir ; it is dependent upon the crops and upon a great
many other things, on which other branches of business are not depend
ent. I take it that if you will give us a fair chance, we will build our
commerce up again, and I think that when it is built up discipline will
follow. I do not think that we can undertake to have discipline when
we have no ships. As for our ship-masters, there is a change in them
as there is in every profession, and in all classes, ministers, lawyers, doc
tors, &c.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Are you acquainted with Cape Cod ?

Mr. DAVIS. Not on shore.

Mr. BUFFINTON. The tonnage of Cape Cod is far greater than it was
formerly, and I want to ask you if you think that the seamen of Cape
Cod have deteriorated at all, and if ship-owners have not seen that
while the interest has kept up, the seamen have kept up ?

Mr. DAVIS. I think so.

Mr. BUFFINTON. I think that if you go to Cape Cod you will find as
good captains and seamen there as ever were there.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir ; that is true. When the interest is kept up you
will find no deterioration in the officers and men.

The CHAIRMAN. You are considerably acquainted with the business
on the other side of the water ?

Mr. DAVIS. I am conversant with it.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you know about the business of building
ships upon the Clyde and Tyiie ? what is the condition of the ship-build
ing business there ?

Mr. DAVIS. I can give you the price of first-class iron ships at Glas
gow. First-class iron ships of a thousand tons fitted for sea, and rated
for twenty years, can be had at fourteen pounds ten shillings per ton. I

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 135

present to the committee the specifications and some letters on the sub
ject. [The letters are attached to Mr. Davis s statement.] There is no
use in talking of a demand for ships this year j there is no demand for
ships. It is pretty hard to charter a ship for a long* voyage ; but that
does not stop the building of ships on the other side, because there will
be a tlemand for ships. Give us a fair chance to build ships and to run
them by allowing a drawback of duty, and by allowing outfits free of
duty, and we cannot be driven off the water.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you think would be the effect of such modi
fication of the navigation laws as to admit foreign-built ships to Amer
ican registry ?

Mr. DAVIS. My own opinion is that it would be better for our com
merce. Some interests would not be benefited by it; but I think that,
on the whole, it would be generally benefited. I do not see why, if I
can buy a ship at St. John for fifteen thousand dollars less than I can
buy her here, I* should not be allowed to do so. What difference does
it make to the government when I am going to sail her under the Amer
ican flag ?

The CHAIRMAN. Wliat effect would that have on the ship-building in
terest of the country ?

Mr. DAVIS. I think it would rather head them off a little.

Mr. W T ELLS. I infer that you would be in favor of repealing the navi
gation laws and letting our merchants buy ships wherever they can buy
them, cheapest J ?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir ; that is my opinion.

Mr. WELLS. You are a ship-owner ?

Mr. DAVIS. I have been a ship-owner. I have been retired from the
business for some time. I built some ships and owned some. I have
not owned any ships since the war.

Mr. WELLS. What did you have to pay for ships of a thousand tons
previous to the Avar I

Mr. DAVIS. They cost us about fifty to fifty-five dollars a ton. Before
the war I could get a good ship fitted out with a single suit of sails for
a European voyage (not for the East Indian voyage) at fifty-five dollars
a ton.

Mr. WELLS. The same class of ship as yon can get at Quebec now for
thirty-eight dollars a ton ?

Mr. DAVIS. I think rather a little better.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that if the duties were taken off the
materials entering into the construction of ships, our ship-builders could
compete with those in Europe J ?

Mr. DAVIS. I think so.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that ships could be built here as fast
as the demands of business required them 2 -

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir ; no doubt of it.

The CHAIRMAN. Then why are you in favor of the admission of foreign-
built ships to American registry if we can build them here as fast and
as cheaply I

Mr. DAVIS. You would be opening a larger market to competition. If
you do not the ship-builders will put their prices up.

The CHAIRMAN. Will not competition on this side settle that as well
as it settles other business &quot;?

Mr. DAVIS. Perhaps it may. We have always lived under our home
competition and done very well by it ; but I would rather have a larger
field if I could have it.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that if we should do that, it

136 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

would be rather bard upon ship-builders here. That means, I suppose,
that they could not build ships if the navigation laws were repealed.

Mr. DAVIS. I do not think it would go to that extent. I think the
case would rather level itself. I do not see why, if we had the s? me
chances to build a ship here with the duties off all the materials, we
would not do so as well and as cheaply as they do on the other side. If
we can, so be it ; then we will buy our ships at home; but it we can buy
them cheaper abroad, I would prefer to be at liberty to do so.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be the effect upon the general interest
of the country of allowing that ?

Mr. DAVIS. I think it would be better for the whole of the country.

Mr. CALKIN. If Congress should repeal the navigation law and allow
American merchants to go abroad and buy their ships, and at the same
time allow a drawback to the builders here, do you think that the build
ers here could live and compete with the foreign market at once, and
that our ship-building interest would grow up side by side with the ship
building interest of England ?

Mr. DAVIS. In regard to wooden ships I think so ; I do not know why
it should not be so. As to iron ships we cannot compete with the Eng
lish in ten or twenty years. We cannot learn tolmild ships here as they
do on the Clyde. I do not think that we can compete with the iron ship
building interest of England for the present; I think we can compete
with them in wooden ships.

Mr. CALKIN. What effect would it have to repeal the navigation law
and to allow a drawback what effect on the whole general interest of
the country, on the wealth and labor of the country ? Would it advance
or deteriorate it ?

Mr. DAVIS. I think it would advance it. It would give us a stimulus
and a life which we have not seen for some time.

The CHAIRMAN. I believe you have stated that it was a very common
practice for masters of vessels to be interested in their vessels. Is it
also a very common practice for the builders of vessels to be interested
as owners f

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir ; here in our State it has been always so.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be the tendency of building ships abroad
and bringing them here ? Would it be to create a foreign interest in the
vessels and to build up a really foreign interest in our navigation? While
our ships were nominally American, would they not be really foreign ?

Mr. DAVIS. I do not know why it should be so. If I want to buy a ship
I buy her and run her for my own purpose and under my own flag ; I do
not know why there should be any foreign interest in her.

The CHAIRMAN. If you build a vessel here the builder has generally
an interest in her. Now suppose you bought your ship abroad, would
not that be the operation of the thing that the foreign ship-builder
would retain an interest in her ?

Mr. DAVIS. I should not think so. I should not want to have foreign
ers owning with me. My experience and observation here are that our
folks do not like very much to own ships with foreigners.

The CHAIRMAN. That is because we cannot own them with foreigners.
But suppose that condition of things should cease t

Mr. DAVIS. I do not know why it should be more so here than in
France or Germany or other places. They have always had the privilege
of buying their ships abroad, and they never have filled up their com
merce with American ship-owners or British ship-owners.

The CHAIRMAN. Have they ever really been in the condition that we
are in ?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 137

Mr. DAVIS. They have been in a condition that they can buy our ships
and put them under their own flag.

The CHAIRMAN. Have we ever had 4hat advantage over them that
they have over us now f

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir ; I do not think so. They have got us where they
can handle us just as they have a mind to.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you believe that it is the policy of the government to
encourage iron ship-building 1 ?

Mr. DAVIS. Kb, sir ; I do not. think so. I should think it would be
costing the country too much to undertake now to build iron ships so as
to compete with other nations. I should rather husband our own re
sources and wait until we get stronger.

Mr. MORRELL. You believe that a large proportion of American com
merce across the ocean is done in iron ships ?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORRELL. Then are you prepared to surrender that ocean com
merce entirely to foreign-built vessels ?

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir ; I would buy them and put them under our flag.
The ships are yours when you buy them.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you not think that it is the policy of the govern
ment to encourage that interest, and to have mechanics to build iron
ships as well as wooden ones f

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir ; I do not think it public policy to build iron ships
here and to protect them by a protective tariff. If we can build iron
ships here as cheaply as they do in England, let us build them. I go a
good deal for free trade, and to let the smartest take the lead. I believe
that this young country will do better in that way than in the other way.
I do not like so much red tape, so much tied-up business. I think we
should do better if we had more liberty.

Mr. MORRELL. Then you believe it better to sacrifice that interest, at
present, as you know we cannot immediately compete with iron ship
builders abroad ?

Mr. DAVIS. There is no sacrifice if we cannot do it.

Mr. MORRELL. Iron ships have been built in this country, and can be
built now to some extent.

Mr. DAVIS. Time will bring it along, no doubt. We cannot build iron
ships here now at anything like the price that we can buy them for across
the water. If we undertake to build iron ships who is going to pay the
bills?

Mr. CALKIN. Are you in favor of admitting back vessels that were
once under the American flag, and that were put under a foreign flag
during the war ?

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. Let them die off; they will soon die off, the gen
eral age of a ship is from six to eight years.

Mr. Davis submitted to the committee the following business letters :

ST. Jotix, N. B., September 27, 1869.

DEAR SIRS : I have your note of 23d instant. In reply, beg to say that the hist sale
of a seven year veritas classed ship was, hull and spars, twenty-five dollars, gold, per ton,
and outfits, with wire rigging, would cost not over ten dollars per ton, gold. This sale
was made under peculiar circumstances, and was rather under the market; but no
doubt a ship of similar class could bo contracted for at twenty-six dollars per ton,
anything from one thousand tons and upwards. Six years class at voritas can bo pro
duced at twenty-four dollars per ton, outfits at the same rate as dearer vessels.
I am yours, truly,

WM. THOMSON.
Messrs. C. M. DAVIS, Portland.

English measurement about the same as American new measurement.

C. M. D. & CO.

138 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

QUEBEC, September 30, 1869.

DEAR SIRS : In reply to your favor of September 23, we have ascertained that the
cost of building ships in this place is as follows : A 1, seven years, 1,000 tons, not cop
pered, but copper fastened up to the lower deck stringers, and the usual Quebec outlit,
38 gold per registered ton ; for a 1,500-toii ship as above, the cost would not exceed
$37 per ton.

The highest price any of our first-class builders have named is $39 per ton, and we
are satisfied that, at these figures, you could contract to build a really first-class ship.
Yours, truly,

For R. R. DOBELL & CO.,
T. BECKETT.

Messrs. C. M. DAVIS & Co.,

Portland, Maine.

English measurement about the same as American new measurement.

C. M. D. & CO.

Mr. CYRUS F. SARGENT said that lie had been building ships for some
fifteen years, but had never sailed any himself. He had been no ship
owner.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that if the duties were taken off ship
building materials the ship-building interest of this country would
revive f

Mr. SARGENT. Undoubtedly it would.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that we can compete with Great Britain
in building wooden ships ?

Mr. SARGENT. I think we could if we had a drawback upon all the
materials that enter into the construction of ships. As it is, after a ship
is built here we cannot copper her here, on account of the expense. We
take a lower rate of freight than we would otherwise take, for the pur
pose of sending her to Europe to have her coppered.

The CHAIRMAN. Do they copper a ship on the other side as well as
they do here ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir, I think they do.

Mr. WELLS. What is the cost per ton of coppering a first-class ship ?

Mr. SARGENT. To copper a thousand-ton ship would cost, I think,
about six thousand dollars. That includes the docking of the ship, the
cost of the copper, and putting it on.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe, if the materials entering into the con
struction of vessels were exempt from duty, that ships could be built as
fast as the demands of business required them ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir, wooden ships could be. I have talked with
ship-builders from Quebec and St. John, and the information I received
from them is somewhat different from that which Captain Davis has
stated. My understanding is that ships there cost more than Captain
Davis has stated, and I think we can build better ships than they can ;
we have better materials. Our southern pine is one of the best articles
that goes into the construction of a ship, and we can get it cheaper than
any people in the world. .

Mr. WELLS. Can you get it any cheaper than they can get it in the
provinces ? Have they not the right to go to North Carolina for it, and
take it into the provinces free of duty I

Mr. SARGENT. I do not know whether there is any duty on it or not.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that we sail our ships as cheaply as the
English sail their ships ? Do you think that an American ship-owner
could afford to run a ship in competition with foreign ship-owners, pro
vided he can obtain her as cheaply ?

Mr. SARGENT. It is my opinion that the English sail their ships for
less than we do. They have a larger number of men, and they pay them

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 139

higher wages than we do. But we ship our men in Liverpool or Lon
don, and they get the best men. The American ship only gets the re
jected men that the English ships will not take.

Mr. WELLS. What is the policy of shipping the poorest men they can
find ?

Mr. SARGENT. Before a sailor in Liverpool can go on board an English
ship, he must have a certificate from the last master that he was under ;
he must have a certificate of good moral character and efficiency. The
consequence is that the English ships take all the good men, and leave
the American ships only the &quot; runaways &quot; and desperate men, whom it is
hard to manage. They come right on board, and no questions are
asked, and the American ships take them.

Mr. MORRELL. What is your opinion in reference to the repeal of the
navigation laws ? Do you believe it best for American commerce ?

Mr. SARGENT. I should not think it would be, except all the tariff
laws are repealed together, and let us have free trade in everything.

Mr. CALKIN. What do you mean by that &quot;?

Mr. SARGENT. I mean, to have general free trade all over the country
in everything.

Mr. CALKIN. What effect would the repeal of the navigation laws have
upon the general interest of the country ?

Mr. SARGENT. That alone, I should think, would operate against the
ship-building business of the country.

Mr. CALKIN. Would it not eventually transfer our ship-yards to for
eign countries ?

Mr. SARGENT. As Mr. Dyer remarked, it would shut up the ship-yards
here; but if you make it free trade in all things, I think we can compete
with foreigners.

Mr. CALKIN. I suppose it is simply a question whether our laboring
men shall be reduced to the level of the laboring men of other nations.
Would not that be the effect ?

Mr. SARGENT. I should not think it would.

Mr. CALKIN. Are you well acquainted with most of the ship-owners of
Portland ?

Mr. SARGENT. I know quite a number of them perhaps the majority.

Mr. CALKIN. Can you tell what their sentiment is in regard to the re
peal of the navigation laws f

Mr. SARGENT. I have never exchanged views on the subject with the
ship-owners of Portland. I built, during the war, a ship of about eleven
hundred and fifty tons, ready for sea, and I believe she only cost me
$41,000 in gold. That was in 1864 or 18G5, I believe.

The CHAIRMAN. The premium on gold was very high at that time ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes. I am of opinion that a ship can be built for
gold now cheaper than she could be before the war. It seems to me
that the great difficulty is the depreciation in the currency.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean to say that you can build a ship. cheaper
now than you could then, paying the duty on the materials?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir ; other gentlemen may differ with me, but that
is my opinion. The last ship I built was fifteen hundred odd tons. She
was ready for sea, (not coppered,) had eighteen months provisions on
board, and she only cost about sixty dollars a ton. She went to sea two
years ago.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, according to your present statement; we really
do build our ships as cheap as we ever did ?

Mr. SARGENT. I think so ; there is the trouble about this depreciated
currency. It is a speculating matter. W r hen one wins another loses.

140 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

That was the reason why the ship we built during the war cost such a
small amount in gold ; for exchange was then at two hundred and fifty.

Mr. WELLS. Did you build her on English account ?

Mr. SARGENT. No, sir; but I made a contract with some of the own
ers that the account should be made up in gold.

The CHAIRMAN. What, then, do you consider to be the difficulty under
which we labor at present in reviving our commerce 1 Why do w r e not
build ships ?

Mr. SARGENT. The great trouble is in the depreciated currency. Peo
ple say, &quot; I can get a better interest for my money than I can by putting
it in a ship.&quot; They do not wait to consider that they are really paying
only seventy cents on the dollar. They deceive themselves in the mat
ter of the currency, and you cannot get them to build a ship that would
cost eighty or ninety dollars a ton in currency.

The CHAIRMAN. Then there is only an imaginary difference in the
price ; it is not a real difference ?

Mr. SARGENT. Only an imaginary difference.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you live in Portland ?

Mr. SARGENT. No, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. Where do you reside ?

Mr. SARGENT. In Yarmouth.

Mr. CALKIN. That is a ship-building place ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. What is the sentiment of the ship-owners of Yarmouth
in reference to the repeal of the navigation laws ?

Mr. SARGENT. I do not know that I have ever talked with them about
that ; but we have talked a good deal in reference to free trade for every
thing and for everybody. And as to our ship-building interest, we feel
satisfied that we could compete with any other people, so far as we are
concerned, if we had free trade.

The CHAIRMAN. Then you do not want the principle of free trade ap
plied to ships alone ?

Mr. SARGENT. No, sir.

Mr. WELLS. Do you not find from experience that gentlemen who
have heretofore had their money invested in ship property make more
interest now by putting their money in the national banks and railroads,
and other speculations, and that that is a reason for the depression of
the ship-building interest!

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir. The English ship-owner will be satisfied with
four or five per cent, interest on his money ; but here in America nothing
will satisfy people less than eight per cent., and many of them put
their money in bonds and securities. The English are easier satisfied.

Mr. WELLS. Prior to the war were not ship-owners making more than
eight or ten per cent. ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. What is the average life of American ships ?

Mr. SARGENT. 1 believe underwriters state it at about eight years.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the life of ships built in the Provinces I

Mr. SARGENT. I do not kno\y.

Mr. CALKIN. Have we not had the reputation always of building bet
ter ships here than they do in the Provinces ?

Mr. SARGENT. We always had.

Mr. CALKIN. Does not the English capitalist calculate more closely on
his percentage on the loss being a total loss than an American does on
his investment in an American-built ship ?

Mr. SARGENT. In the north of Europe and in England, and many

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 141

European countries, they only insure against a total loss. If a ship
touches bottom they pay a partial loss ; but if any other damage results,
that is unless she touches bottom, the underwriter does not pay any
loss.

Mr. BUFFINTON. How much more do you pay for the materials that
go into a ship now than you had to pay for them before the war ?

Mr. SARGENT. I have never made a calculation about that.

Mr. CALKIN. Bo you not pay more for iron and more for duck than
you did before the war ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Do you not really pay from ten to thirty per cent,
more for every article that goes into the construction of a ship than you
paid before the war ?

Mr. SARGENT. Taking all the materials, I should say that they would
not cost thirty per cent, more than they did before the war.

Mr. BUFFINTON. I say from ten to thirty per cent.

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, they would.

Mr. BUFFINTON. I ask you, then, this question, because it is thought
that there must have been an error in a remark you made, and that you
could not have intended to say what you did. You said that you could
build a ship to-day just as cheap with gold as you could before the war.
How could you do it with labor higher, and materials higher ?

Mr. SARGENT. The difference in labor and the difference in the cost
of materials do not amount to the difference in value between gold and
paper.

Mr. BUFFINTON. But before the war, iron and all the materials that
went into the construction of ships were from ten to thirty percent, less
than they are now. Do you mean to say that after paying the increased
cost of these articles you can still build a ship as cheaply as you could
before the war ?

Mr. SARGENT. Either you or I do not understand it. The increased
price of the materials that go into the construction of a ship does not
amount to the premium that there is on gold ; say thirty-five per cent.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Iron costs a great deal more ; sail-cloth costs a great
deal more ; and in fact every article costs more.

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, more in paper money.

Mr. BUFFINTON. Do they not cost more in gold ?

Mr. SARGENT. No, sir ; southern pine costs less in gold. -

Mr. BUFFINTON. How about iron &quot;I

Mr. SARGENT. All the difference is just the duty.

Mr. BUFFINTON. If you are correct I do ftot see that the country needs
any legislation on the subject.

The CHAIRMAN. How much do the duties on the materials in a thou
sand-ton wooden ship amount to ?

Mr. SARGENT. I have never seen the figures made. I have talked
with a number of ship-owners on the subject, and they have put the
amountfrom $10,000 to $15,000 ; perhaps $12,000 might come nearer to it.

The CHAIRMAN. The cost of labor is somewhat higher here than in
England.

Mr. SARGENT. I suppose so.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that we can really build a
ship now as cheap in gold as a ship can be built for in Great Britain in
gold.

Mr. SARGENT. That I do not know. I did not make that statement.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that the difference was only
about the difference in currency.

142 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. SARGENT. I made the statement that we could build a ship here
in gold as cheaply as we did before the war.

The CHAIRMAN. The tariff has been increased very largely. Do I un-
understand you to say that ships can be built, paying the duty on the
materials, as cheaply now as when there were no duties paid?

Mr. SARGENT. That is the question you all want to know. I answer
as I did at first, that if you let the duties go just as they are, we can
build a ship now as cheaply in gold as we could before the war.

The CHAIRMAN. Then how do you overcome the disadvantage result
ing from the increase in the tariff?

Mr. SARGENT. A good deal of it comes out of the labor. We paid for
good men before the war from one dollar and seventy-five cents to two
dollars a day. Two dollars would be the average price. Now we pay
only two dollars and fifty cents.

The CHAIRMAN. Then you pay quite as high in gold now as you did
before the war ?

Mr. SARGENT. No, sir ; we do not. If you add thirty-five per cent, to
what we paid before the war, you will find we do not pay so much now.

Mr. WELL-S. T understood you to say that in 1864- Go you built a ten-
hundred-and-fifty-ton ship at a cost of forty-one thousand dollars ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir. That was in the time of the war, when gold
was very high. Exchange was selling for about *two hundred and fifty.

Mr. WELLS. Can you tell me what the duty on iron and the duties on
the materials that go into ship-building are now, compared Avith what
they were in 1860 ?

Mr. SARGENT. I do not think I can.

Mr. W ELLS. The difference is not over ten per cent., is it ?

Mr. SARGENT. I do not recollect. Before the war I recollect buying
iron for about forty -two dollars per ton.

The CHAIRMAN. What effect would it have on our navigation interest
if Congress were to admit foreign-built ships free ? Would it have a
tendency to carry the ownership partly abroad?

Mr. SARGENT. I do not know. I should hardly think it would ; for
all owners like to have the other owners as near home as they can get
them. If you are connected in business with men, you want them where
you can see them occasionally j and that would be the case with ship
owners.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean to say that, as a general rule, we pay
less to our sailors than the English do I

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir ; the wages of sailors are lower in an Ameri
can ship than in an English ship.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that the duty is from ten to
fifteen dollars a ton in gold on all the materials that enter into the con
struction of a ship, and yet you say that notwithstanding that, you can
build ships as cheaply as they can build them on the other side ?

Mr. SARGENT. Not on the other side ; you confound that thing but
I say that we can build them as cheaply as we built them before the
war.

The CHAIRMAN. Did we build our ships as cheaply before the war as
they built them on the other side 2

Mr. SARGENT. We built them cheaper.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, of course, we still build them cheaper than
they do on the other side. That is a very remarkable statement ; and
what I want to get at is, how you account for that condition of things,
that we can pay an increased duty of ten to fifteen dollars a ton in gold,

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 143

and still build not only cheaper here, but cheaper than where all the
materials are free of duty.

Mr. SARGENT. It is because our greenbacks are worth only seventy
cents on the dollar.

The CHAIRMAN. Put the two in gold. Suppose that you build for
gold, and that your foreign competitor builds for gold ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, but we do not build for gold; we build for paper,
and then w r e reduce the cost to gold.

The CHAIRMAN. And you build for less on this paper basis I

Mr. SARGENT. When it is reduced to gold, the ship does not cost any
more than it did before the war.

The CHAIRMAN. Then there is great advantage to ship-builders to
build for paper ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, instead of the currency being a disadvantage,
it is an advantage ?

Mr. SARGENT. It operates against the laborer ; it conies out of him.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that you paid about two
dollars a day on the average in 1860, and that you now pay two dollars
and a half. Is not that an increase of twenty-five per cent. ?

Mr. SARGENT. Yes, reckoning gold and paper equal.

The CHAIRMAN. He can take his paper and sell it, and still get two
dollars in gold J ?

Mr. SARGENT. O no ; you must take off thirty-five per cent., which
will leave him less than two dollars in gold. If he got two dollars in
gold before the war ? that gold would cost now two dollars and sixty
cents, and w r e only give him two dollars and a half.

The CHAIRMAN. That makes ten cents a day difference, and that cer
tainly cannot account for all the other differences.

Mr. SARGENT. There is other labor connected with ship-building be
sides the carpenter labor. I do not think that ship-carpenters are in as
good a condition now as they were before the war.

The CHAIRMAN. Does not that result from the fact that they are not
employed fully I

Mr. SARGENT. I don t know about that. They are employed about
the same. In Yarmouth they are.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean to say that ship-building is as pros
perous now in Yarmouth as it was before the war. and that there is as
much doing there now as there was before the war ?

Mr. SARGENT. More. There has been more doing for the last year
than there had been before the war.

Mr. WELLS. What class of ships do they build there!

Mr. SARGENT. Ships for the coastwise trade, and for the European
trade, both.

Mr. WELLS. What did ships cost before the war ?

Mr. SARGENT. A thousand-ton ship would be built for from fifty-five
thousand to sixty thousand dollars.

Mr. WELLS. What would you build the same class of ship for to-day,
in paper money f

Mr. SARGENT. I should think it could be built for eighty thousand
dollars. I was told the other day that one w r as built in Kennebunk of
a thousand tons, and was sold to a party in Boston for seventy-six
thousand dollars. There are some materials which would be worth
more in gold than they were before the war.

Mr. GILES LORING, of Yarmouth, stated that he was a practical ship
builder. That had been his business for quite a number of years. He

1 44 NAVIGATION * INTERESTS.

had acted as a boss carpenter and contractor. He had built ships 4 be
fore the war, and had built some during the war, and some since the
war. He could hardly agree with his friend, Mr. Sargent, and he could
not exactly agree with his friend Mr. Davis, in his answer to one ques
tion about foreign capitalists. He (Mr. Loring) thought that if
Americans bought their ships abroad, foreign capitalists would cer
tainly have an interest in them. The lumber which he used to get be
fore the war from Canada, for the floor and frame of the ship, at from
ten to thirteen dollars a ton, delivered in the cars at Portland, he had
now to pay eighteen and twenty dollars a ton for. He had got one floor
and top from there at ten dollars, and this year he had to pay nineteen
dollars for the same. Therefore, Mr. Sargent s idea that ships could be
built just as cheap now as before the war, on a gold basis, he certainly
could not agree with.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the difference in the cost of a thousand- ton
ship now and before the war ?

Mr. LORING. I should give it as my idea, that the difference amounts
to about twenty per cent, more now than before the war.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean in gold ?

Mr. LORING. Yes, sir, in gold. But still I may be mistaken. Gold
and paper were one and the same thing before the war. He disagreed
with his friend Mr. Sargent in stating that as many ships were built
now as before the war. The money which used to be invested in ships
was now invested in government bonds,, because the owners could do
better in that way. All that worked against the ship-building business.
It seemed to him that if there were not drawbacks allowed, (although
he was not able to say what they should be ? ) it would be but a few
years before all the ship -builders would have to leave Maine and go out
West.

The CHAIRMAN. State your opinion as to what ought to be done.

Mr. LORING. I should rather leave that to my friend, the chairman of
the committee, because he is a more practical man in that business than
I am.

The CHAIRMAN. What relief would enable you to build ships in com
petition with foreign ship-builders ?

Mr. LORING. If you take the duties off everything that we have to
use in ships, we can compete with any other nation.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that that would revive the ship-build
ing interest ?

Mr. LORING. I think it would. The great trouble now is that ships
cost so much, and that people are not willing to put their money into
them.

The CHAIRMAN. You then give it as your opinion, that if the duties
were taken off all the materials that enter into the construction of ships,
the ship-builders of this country would be able to build ships as cheaply
as they are built abroad. And you think that if ships could be built as
cheaply here as abroad men would invest their money in them, and
that that would tend to revive the business ?

Mr. LORING. That is my idea ; and if something is not done, it will be
the ruin of Maine ; for when our ship-building interest is gone, Maine
is gone.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be the effect upon the ship-building in
terest if foreign ships were allowed to come in and be nationalized, pro
vided at the same time that you were allowed drawbacks on the materials
entering into the construction of ships ? Could you then compete with
foreign ship-builders ?

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 145

Mr. LORING. I should hardly think we could.

The CHAIRMAN. If you were protected from that competition for a
number of years, do you think that then you could do it ?

Mr. LORING. I think we could, it we had protection until we got a
start.

The CHAIRMAN. Could you have stood such competition prior to the
war ? %

Mr. LORINO. I should hardly know how to answer that question. My
opinion is that we could at that time, but that we cannot now.

The CHAIRMAN. But you think that after a few years you could?

Mr. LORING. I think that, after getting once started again, we could.

The CHAIRMAN. What rate of wages do you pay now?

Mr. LORING. I paid this year all the way from two dollars and a half
to three dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. What did you pay to the same class of mechanics be
fore the war ?

Mr. LORING. All the way from one dollar and seventy-five cents up to
two dollars. I built one vessel on which I paid only one dollar and sev
enty-five cents. That was eight years ago. At that time I paid a cent
and a half a pound for iron.

The CHAIRMAN. How was it from 1852 to 1834 ?

Mr. LORING. I worked as a carpenter then, and at that time wages
were all the way from one dollar and a half to two dollars. Wages at
that time were pretty high.

The CHAIRMAN. What wages were you paid as a carpenter at that
time f

Mr. LORING. Two dollars and a half.

The CHAIRMAN. Were you a master carpenter ?

Mr. LORING. No, sir; I was a common carpenter at that time.

Mr. CALKIN. When did you commence as a master builder ?

Mr. LORING. In 1855.

Mr. CALKIN. How many vessels have you built since that time ?

Mr. LORING. Speaking of the cost of coppering vessels, a few years
ago I had a ship of seven hundred tons coppered abroad. The cost of
the coppering of that vessel was just about equal to the cost of copper
ing one of four hundred tons here. I know that, because I had at that
time one coppered abroad and one coppered in New York. A great
many of our New York ship-owners prefer to have their ships coppered
at home.

Mr. CALKIN. Do they think that the work is done better here ?

Mr. LORING. I do not know that it is done better; but I believe they
would get it done just as cheap, notwithstanding that they pay higher
wages here than are paid abroad.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you a ship-owner now?

Mr. LORING. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. As a general thing, do those who build ships in your
section retain an interest in the vessel?

Mr. LORING. As a general thing they do. That is the way I have
worked. A captain comes to ine sometimes with one-fourth and some
times with one half the cost of a vessel, and I have to look out to. make
up the difference. Sometimes 1 have one-fourth of it entered in my
name ; sometimes more, and sometimes not so much.

The CHAIRMAN. How^ many vessels are you interested in*

Mr. LORING. Only four.

The CHAIRMAN. How large a class of vessels are you owning in ?

ION I

146 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. LORING. The vessels I have built have been from four hundred to
nine hundred tons.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it the practice of ship-masters also to own parts of
the vessel ?

Mr. LORING. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Then the- ownership is divided between the ship
builder, the ship-master, and the merchant who does the business?

Mr. LORING. Yes, sir ; and as they say with us, &quot; all the parish.&quot;
Sometimes the joiner has an interest; sometimes the calker, the black
smith, the former, and the trader. In fact, everything of that kind with
us is brought into the shipping interest.

The CHAIRMAN. So far as you know throughout the State, is that the
manner in which ships are built and owned ?

Mr. LORING. I should suppose it was, but I do not pretend to say that
it is. There is one thing which works a little against the ship-builder ;
m the first place, the government established eight hours for a day s
labor. Now, for a ship-builder to employ men in that way is rather out
of the question. Perhaps it is right for the government to do so; but
the consequence is that Mr. A, Mr. B, Mr. C, and Mr. D, ship-carpenters,
will say, &quot; I must get into the government employment, because I have
only to w r ork eight hours, and I can get a little more pay than by work
ing ten hours in private employ merit.&quot; I should say that this year from
four to six of our best carpenters have gone to the Kittery navy yard.
We thus lose from this class some of our best men.

The CHAIRMAN. I supposed that the navy yard being so far off would
not have had much effect on you ?

Mr. LORING. I think the effect is considerable. The distance does
not make any difference ; they will go sometimes to Boston and some
times to New York to get into the navy yards. People do not like to
work ten hours a day if they can get the same w r ages by working only
eight hours.

Mr. MORRELL. As a ship-builder, ship-carpenter, and master-builder,
what is your opinion as to the eight-hour law? Do you think it calcu
lated to benefit ship-carpenters or not ?

Mr. LORING. I should give it as my opinion that it was of no benefit
at all to them, unless it was so arranged that the ship-carpenter could
work after hours and get pay for extra time. Then it would be a ben
efit.

Mr. MORRELL. Do you believe that any United States law^ regulating
the price of labor, or the hours of labor, is of any benefit to the laboring
man?

Mr. LORING. I do not think it is.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you mean to say that it is no benefit to him physi
cally, mentally, or financially ?

Mr. LORING. I do not think it is in any way. When I began to work,
we used to work, I may say, from sun to sun. I was opposed to that,
after a while, and then we got the ten-hour system. I was in favor of
that and am now. I believe ten hours long enough for a man to work j
but when you reduce the hours of labor below that, I think you are cut
ting them down too much.

Mr. CALKIN. Do you not believe that the government gets the pick of
the mechanics in the ship-yards ship-builders, calkers, iron workers,
&c. by adopting the eight-hours system ?

Mr. LORING. Without doubt the government gets many of the best
men by adopting that system, but still, if you take these best men, put
them into the government service, and let them work awhile there,

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 147

they will soon get so that they do not do much work. I am not saying
that for the purpose of coming down on iny friends the carpenters, but it
is perfectly natural for men, when they get into the government service, to
do so. The tonnage dues have been rather severe upon ship-owners. II
there could be something done to help the ship-owners and ship-builders
in Maine, I think that Maine would actually come up again. But if
things go on as they have been going for some years back, Maine will
certainly be depreciated, and it must necessarily be so.

Mr. JAMES E. SIMPSON said that he was a ship-builder, and had been
engaged in the repairing of ships up to 18G3. He then went to Boston
to construct a dock for the South Point Dry Dock Company of Boston.
He had gone into the business of building and repairing in 1848, and
from that time he had more or less to do with ships, both in repairing
and constructing, and in the construction of docks and the docking of
ships.

The CHAIRMAN. What disadvantages do we labor under in the re
pairing of ships in comparison with other countries ?

Mr. SIMPSON. In 1853- 54- 55- 56 we could get yellow material for
about eighteen to twenty cents a pound. Now it is from twenty-seven
to thirty cents a pound. It is so with all the materials that enter into
the construction of ships. We could then have bolts, spikes, &c., at
from three and a quarter to three and a half cents a pound. Now we
cannot buy the raw material short of five or six cents a pound. Ships
will not be coppered on this side when they can be coppered much
cheaper on the other side. In 1859- 6() and l8Gl the docks of New
York were employed all the time, and ships were entered three, four,
five, and six weeks ahead for their turns to get on the dock. Now, the
reverse is the case, the docks lie five and six weeks without a ship.
What is the cause of it? The natural depression in the shipping busi
ness which is caused by the tariff. The commerce of the country is con
veyed in foreign bottoms. There are to-day some eighty or .ninety
steamers running to New York, all foreign vessels. Do they ever dock
in New York ? No, unless it is for mere temporary repairs. A state
ment had been made by an Englishman that there were no mechanics
in this country who understood their business. He (Mr. Simpson) con
sidered that that was a slur. An English vessel had been recently taken
into the Erie basin and repaired in just half the time it would have oc
cupied to repair her in England. Where six men were employed in this
country the English required to use sixteen. As to the difference in
labor, he (Mr. Simpson) thought that, although the nominal price of
labor was cheaper here than abroad, there was more work got out of
mechanics in this country in proportion to the wages paid.

The CHAIRMAN. What rates of wages are paid in New York ?

Mr. SIMPSON. Wages there now are four dollars a day.

The CHAIRMAN. What are the rates here in Portland ?

Mi. SIMPSON. I think the prices are from $3 50 to $4. I have, while
constructing a dock here, paid from $2 25 to $3 25. The average is
about $2 50 per day, and four dollars in New York. That is on old
work. On new work I should judge that it is somewhat in the neigh
borhood of $3 50 a day in New York. They work one hour more on new
work than they do on old. In Boston they work ten hours on new work,
and eight hours on old. In New York they work nine hours on old and
ten hours on new work. I helped to dock the first ship that was ever
docked in the Charlestown navy yard the Constitution.

The CHAIRMAN, You have become a contractor and a patentee of
docks?

148 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. SIMPSON. I started and constructed a dock on my own idea, and
on rny own patent ; and I have now superintended the construction of
six of them.

The CHAIRMAN. You are one of the owners of the new dock here?

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes.

Mr. CALKIN. How do you account for the difference in labor between
New York and Maine ? Is there the same supply of mechanics in New
York as there is in other places ?

Mr. SIMPSON. It is a point of strike. At the time they struck in Bos
ton the merchants undertook to hold out the same as they did in New
York. They held out for some time ; but finally they made a compro
mise to give the men four dollars a day if they would go to work, and
they allowed them to work only eight hours. There had been a half
hour allowed for lunch time, which they did away with. The ship
Archer went to Boston to be repaired from New York, and when she
got there the men in Boston struck because they were helping to sup
port the New York society. I think that ship-builders, repairers, &c.,
are suffering a great deal to-day by the eight-hour system in the navy
yards. I have had men leave me in New York, and men have also left
Mr. Poillon and other master-builders to go to the navy yards, because
they have to work less time, and thus the best class of men are taken
away from the outside business.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any knowledge of the building of iron
ships ?

Mr. SIMPSON. I was connected with the building of the first iron ship
in this country. She was built by Holden & Gallagher, at East Boston,
for the Egyptian government. She was contracted for by George H.
Stone. I have seen the construction of her. She was about as thoroughly
well constructed a ship as I have ever seen. Since that I have watched
more or less the construction of iron vessels. I built in 1867 two iron
gates for the last dock I constructed, which were equal to about a two
hundred and fifty or a three hundred ton iron vessel, and I am satisfied
in my own mind that iron vessels can be constructed in this country, with
proper facilities, and we having the materials at the same price that
they have them abroad. I think we can compete with any nation upon
any kind of ship, either wooden or iron. Let the government protect
us as the English government protects its ship-builders, and in less than
five years this country can compete with the world in building ships.

The CHAIRMAN. Iron ships ?

Mr. SIMPSON. Any ships. Iron ships have been built at Delaware
and at Chester, and at the Atlantic Works, in East Boston. They are
built to-day as cheaply for gold as they can be got for gold in Europe,
taking the duty off.

The CHAIRMAN. You overcome the difference in the rates of wages
paid by the greater efficiency of the workmen on this side?

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes ; we pay more wages, but I thiuk we get more work
for it. I think that, with the tariff off, we can build ships as cheaply as
they are built on the Clyde; but as the tariff is, we cannot do so. We
used to get yellow pine down South for $25 to $27 a thousand, and our
white oak for three and a half to four cents a foot, or $30 to $40 a
thousand. We have now to pay from $65 to $75 and $80 for white oak,
and from $35 to $50 for yellow pine.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there much American iron used either in building
or repairing a vessel ?

Mr. SIMPSON. Not a great deal, unless we want it for strength ; be-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 149

cause the English iron is of a poorer quality. The Ulster iron commands
the best price.

Mr. CALKIN. Are you in favor of repealing the navigation laws so as
to allow foreign -built vessels to be brought here ?
Mr. SIMPSON. No, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. If the navigation laws should be repealed, and at the
same time a drawback should be allowed, could the ship-builders in
this country compete successfully with the ship-builders of foreign
countries ?

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. I mean, if we repeal the navigation laws, and at the
same time take off all the duties on materials entering into the construc
tion of ships, can we commence right there and then to compete with
foreign builders&quot;?

Mr. SIMPSON. Not just to-day.

Mr. CALKIN. How long a time should the builders of this country be
protected if a law of that kind should be passed!

Mr. SIMPSON. I think that if they were protected for five years they
then could compete with any nation.

Mr. WELLS. I understood you to say that previous to the war the
docks in New York were overtaxed, and that ships had to wait for
weeks for their turns to come on the dock; but that now that is re
versed. Is not that because iron vessels are used instead of wooden
ones?

Mr. SIMPSON. That is somewhat the cause, but not entirely. It is not
that we cannot put an iron ship on. Our government has never pro
tected our iron ship-building, and the foreigners have taken that busi
ness from us ; and for that reason our docks are lying idle.

Mr. WELLS. Is it not a fact that one steamer will do the business of
four or live vessels in the European trade, and will at the same time last
two or three times as long without repairs J ?

Mr. SIMPSON. I do not think that one steamer will do the business of
four sailing vessels. A Liverpool packet ship generally makes the
round voyage in from seventy-five to ninety days, and the steamer
takes on an average about five weeks to make the round voyage. The
steamers take the place of a little over double the number of sailing
ships.

Mr. WELLS. Do you know, of your own knowledge, the cost of build
ing steam vessels in this country ?

Mr. SIMPSON. No, sir. Of course the cost varies somewhat. I think
that we spend more money on our merchant ships in finish and style
than is generally spent on merchant ships of other countries, and of
course they cost more on that account. But if foreigners were to build
ships of the same materials and finish that we do, we having a draw
back on the materials, I think we could build the vessel for less than
they can.

Captain J. B. COYLE, president of the Portland Steam Packet Company,
said that he was interested in coasting steamers, and that they now cost
nearly double what they did before the war, on account of the high
duties levied on everything. Then, again, if they got the steamers,
they were taxed to death to run them. Every little thing that could be
stuck on in the way of taxes was stuck on. The tonnage dues were in
creased. They had to pay for every passenger they carried, so that
after they paid all the government dues the owners had very little left,
and the consequence was that people were going out of that kind of
business.

150 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. CALKIN. You think that the coasting trade should be relieved by
the remission of duties and taxation ?

Mr. COYLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. CALKIN. The public generally would be relieved by it?

Mr. COYLE. Certainly. If we were relieved we could do better by the
traveling public ; we could take freights less and passengers less.

Mr. WELLS. Are you taxed more onerously than railroads are ?

Mr. COYLE. I think so. I think that the government discriminates
against floating property. On all our coasting steamers, if we take an
alien and carry him to Boston, we must pay two dollars a head upon
him ; but if he goes by railroad, he goes free. The English vessels carry
their paupers and emigrants into Canada, and they come down here on
the railroads free. But if one of our coasting steamers brings them
here, she has to be taxed so much a head for them. That is one thing
against us which presses pretty hard upon steamboats. The moment
we get into port a revenue officer comes on board of us, and every man
and woman who is an alien is marked and has to be paid for. Queen
Victoria, if she came in that way, would have to pay head money. But
if you take all the paupers that were ever raised in the old country
and send them here by railroad, there is no such tax levied.

Mr. WELLS. Would you be in favor of repealing the navigation laws ?

Mr. COYLE. If you took the duties off, I certainly would not be in fa
vor of having the navigation laws repealed.

Mr. WELLS. You are in favor of encouraging home industry ?

Mr. COYLE. By all means. I think that is our strength as a nation,
particularly in our seaports. Our best men are drifting to the West.
A great many of them are leaving our seaports, particularly our mechan
ics, who are the bone and muscle of the country.

Mr. WELLS. Do you not think that if that law were repealed, and if
American merchants were allowed to go abroad and buy their vessels,
it would have a tendency to drive all the mechanics of the country out
the business ?

Mr. COYLE. Certainly.

Captain CYRUS STURDIV ANT made some remarks in favor of removing
the duties from the materials entering into the construction of ships,
and thus encouraging ship-building. He trusted that Congress would
give the ship-building and ship-owning interest some relief, and thus
prevent the best men of Maine from going elsewhere for a living. As to
steamboats they were taxed to death. They had to get their license
renewed every year and to pay thirty cents on the ton for new measure
ment. Then the internal revenue collector exacted two and a half per
cent, on all the income they receive from passengers; and when the
season came round they had to pay exorbitant prices for coal. He hoped
that coal would be permitted to come in free, and said that unless the
ship-owning and ship-building interests had some relief in this direction
all engaged in them would have to emigrate elsewhere.

Mr. PUTNAM, mayor of the city, remarked that although Portland was
a leading ship-building port in the State, it was deeply interested in
navigation, and he thanked the committee for the patient labor with
which it was investigating this matter. He trusted that the report of
the committee would convince Congress of the necessity of granting the
relief so earn sstly needed by the great interest of the country, ship
building.

The committee adjourned to meet in Philadelphia on the 1st of Decem
ber next.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 151

PHILADELPHIA, PA., December 2, 1869.

The committee met at 10 a. m.

Present, Messrs. Buffinton, &quot;Waslibum, Morrcll, and Mr. Lynch, chair
man. Committees appointed by the Commercial Exchange, Board ol
Trade, and Ship-builders Associations, of Philadelphia, Wilmington, and
Baltimore, to represent those associations, were present.

FRANCIS K. COPE, of the Commercial Exchange, Philadelphia, stated
that there was no business coming so directly in competition with for
eign industry as the shipping interest. A foreign vessel will encoimtei
the same difficulties, and earn the same freight as aji American vessel in
the same trade, and the reason why we cannot compete with foreign
vessels must be either from the increased cost of building American
vessels or the expense of sailing them.

With regard to the cost of building, timber is cheaper and labor
cheaper in the provinces, and wooden vessels can be built cheaper there
than in the United States. It is also true that iron vessels can be built
at Liverpool and on the Clyde cheaper than Americans can build them.

After the first outfit of a vessel her expenses are very nearly the same,
whether American or foreign. If she has to undergo any repairs, it must
be at the next port, after the accident or disability occurs, whether it be
in a foreign country or our own ; and with regard to wages we find that
the rate is regulated to a great extent by the wages of other persons
employed in other branches of business ; and in that respect a great
increase has taken place in this country within the last few years. Some
twelve or fifteen years ago the rate of wages of seamen in this country
was about fifteen dollars a month, while that in England was about two
pounds ten shillings. At the present time we are paying sailors thirty
dollars per month, while they are paid in England about two pounds
fifteen shillings. We are now sailing about four vessels between this
port and Liverpool, and the difference between the cost of wages we
have to pay and the cost at the rate paid in England amounts to about
twenty thousand dollars a year for the four vessels.

Now, as to the cure for these evils, my opinion is that it must lie in
a reduction of the tariff, which will reduce the price of everything.

The CHAIRMAN inquired whether American vessels are manned with
as large crews as foreign vessels.

Mr. COPE replied there was not necessarily any difference. American
vessels are frequently better manned than British, but that is a mere
question of economy. Most American owners consider that it is better
economy to man vessels more fully and make quicker passages than the
British vessels make. As a rule, English vessels carry more appren
tices than American, but not larger regular crews. As a general rule
now, the crews of American sailing-vessels are perhaps more efficient
than those of English vessels, but the crews of British steam-vessels are
generally much more efficient than in former years.

In regard to the wages of sailors, the rate is determined by the port
from which the sailor ships. A man who goes out in an Ainerican ves
sel at thirty dollars per month, and leaves his vessel at Liverpool or
London, and again ships on another American vessel, must do vso at
a much lower rate. While professedly from one-half to two-thirds of
our American crews are Ainerican in point of fact, there is no more than
one American to five or six foreigners. If you oould discharge your
crew as soon as you reached a foreign port and reship a crew from an
English port, the difference in the cost of wages would amount practi
cally to very little; but the law requires you to carry your crew for vho
round trip, unless they leave voluntarily.

152 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The CHAIRMAN inquired whether, if we could build our ships as cheaply
as foreign ships are built, we could compete for the carrying trade of the
world.

Mr. COPE replied that that was his opinion ; certainly if the tariff were
reduced so as to reduce the rate of wages.

Mr. MORRELL asked whether that remedy would not be worse than
the evil.

Mr. COPE responded that that was for the committee to judge. We
have lost our commerce to a great extent, and are losing more every
year. No doubt a part of it would be regained by a return to specie
payment, and he did not know of any remedy short of that and a reduc
tion of the tariff. He wished, however, in this matter to be understood
as speaking for himself alone, and not. for the committee which he repre
sented. It seemed to him that if you are to protect one interest and
then to protect another to counteract that, there would be no end to it,
It was the high price of wages, the high price of food, and the high price
of everything else which was in the way of our regaining our old pros
perity in respect to the shipping interest.

Mr. WASHBURN inquired whether woolen goods and breadstuff s were
not now as cheap as before our departure from a specie basis.

Mr. COPE replied that food was as cheap, but that woolen goods were
not as cheap in this country as in England and France.

The CHAIRMAN asked whether the labor employed in the old country
was as efficient as that employed in this, and whether the greater skill
of our mechanics did not, to a certain extent, overcome the difference oi
price.

Mr. COPE replied that it furnished a certain amount of compensation
without doubt, but there was not the same difference there used to be,
nor was there the same difference in the vessels produced in the two
countries, British steam vessels being now much superior to what they
used to be, and our officers of steam vessels probably not quite as good
as in former years. Business having declined in this regard, the best
class of men had, to a great extent, sought other occupations.

The CHAIRMAN inquired whether the masters of American vessels
were not, as a general rule, in part owners of the vessels.

Mr. COPE said that those employed in the coasting trade probably
were.

Mr. WASHBURN asked whether it would be possible so to construct
lines of steamers for mercantile purposes as to be readily converted into
vessels of war when needed for that purpose.

Mr. COPE said he could not give any opinion upon that subject, as he
had paid no attention to the building of iron vessels.

Mr. HENRY WINDSOR, of the Philadelphia Board of Trade, remarked
that he had no doubt steamers could be built suitably for both purposes ;
it being true of modern war steamers that only a few guns were required,
and those of long range, and that it might be practicable to devote a
portion of the very large amount now expencfed on ships of war for the
purpose of building mercantile vessels capable of being converted into
naval vessels in time of Avar.

HENRY K. EDMUNDS, chairman of committee of ship-owners for Penn
sylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, said he intended to have prepared
statistics and statements affecting the shipping interest of the country,
but having failed to receive the notice sent him, he had been unable to
do so. The association with which he was connected was more directly
interested in the coasting trade than in the foreign ocean mercantile
service, and he knew comparatively little in regard to building ships for

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 153

foreign commerce. It was found in building vessels for the coasting
trade that an onerous tax was encountered on all materials from the
commencement of construction until the vessel was ready to go to sea.
Everything entering into the construction of a vessel was taxed. If the
tax was taken off vessels could be built profitably in this country, although
they might not be built quite as cheaply as in Europe; yet American
shippers would prefer to employ vessels sailing under an American reg
ister. Another difficulty to be met with was, however, in the fact that
all important British foreign lines of steamers were subsidized by that
government; in fact, Great Britain had subsidized almost every line of
ocean steamers which had asked for it, and this country had avowed
her mails to be carried in foreign bottoms simply because the govern
ment is not willing to lend a helping hand.

It seemed to him very feasible to construct mercantile vessels which
should be capable of being converted into war vessels in time of war,
although until the suggestion was made by Mr. Washburn to-day it
never had occurred to him. Labor in Europe was much cheaper than
in this country, but the men employed do not work nearly so intelligently;
they are merely men driven around by masters like machines, while in
our country a majority of our workmen employed on every grade of
work were men of more or less intelligence.

The association with which Mr. Edmunds was connected has applied
itself more particularly to get rid of such taxation as in their judgment
was not only onerous but unlawful, such as half pilotage and harbor
masters fees, and charges of that kind, where no service is rendered.
They had already succeeded in procuring a decision of the courts that
harbor-masters fees were illegal, and they were now testing the question
in regard to half pilotage, which was required to be paid by every vessel
hailed by a pilot, although the services of a pilot were not required.
This tax was considered especially onerous to parties engaged in the
coasting trade.

The CHAIRMAN inquired whether the matter of the cost of repairing
vessels had been brought to the attention of this association.

Mr. EDMUNDS said there was great difference in the cost of repairs.
A vessel in the neighborhood of Galvestonor New Orleans might almost
as well be given away as to undertake to pay the cost of repairs in those
ports. It was generally found cheaper to float her back to Philadelphia.

PHILIP FiTZPATRick, also a member of the committee of ship-own
ers, stated that since 1853 he had been connected with a house for which
a great many vessels had been built. In his opinion if the cost of build
ing could be reduced twenty or twenty -five per cent., this branch of in
dustry would again revive. He had been connected with foreign trade,
but had been compelled to discontinue it and engage altogether in the
coasting trade. He had conversed with builders of foreign vessels, and
was of the opinion that the difference in the cost of construction in this
country and Great Britain was about thirty per cent. But if twenty or
twenty -five per cent, could be taken off, the superiority of American
vessels would enable our ship-builders again to commence the construc
tion of ships.

The CHAIRMAN inquired what effect the employment of a large number
of men in the navy yard in Philadelphia had upon the mechanics of the
city not so employe!.

Mr. FITZPATRICK replied that when there was plenty of work in the
navy yard the best mechanics went there, and only scrubs, or the poor
est class of workmen, could be obtained by private parties.

154 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The CHAIRMAN asked what effect the adoption of the eight-hour la\v
had upon the men employed outside of the navy yard.

Mr. FITZPATRICK replied that the effect was very injurious 5 that men
outside were exceedingly anxious to get employment in the navy yard
for the purpose of obtaining the benefit of two hours a day less labor,
and they would go hunting around for the influence of every person
who was supposed to be able to give any assistance in getting employ
ment in the navy yard.

Mr. LYNCH asked whether the rates paid in the navy yard were not
regulated by rates outside.

Mr. FITZPATRICK said that was the law, but the practice was exactly
the reverse,, and that it operated very much to the prejudice of private
parties employing this class of labor outside.

The CHAIRMAN inquired what the effect would be of allowing ship-
stores being taken in bond, as they are in Great Britain and some others
of the European nations.

Mr. FITZPATRICK replied that it would be an assistance, and in his
opinion commerce ought to be assisted in some way by the government.
We might not, if our vessels were built as cheaply, be able to compete
with foreigners in sailing them ; but as a general thing our vessels made
quicker voyages and were preferred over foreign vessels. In time of
war preference was given to English vessels in consequence of less rates
of insurance. Whenever the cost of living was cheaper the price of
wages would come down. Men could not work cheap while the cost of
living was so high.

Mr. WASHBURN asked how much it would reduce the cost of ship
building if the duties were remitted upon all articles entering into their
construction.

Mr. EDMUNDS thought it would probably work a reduction of twenty
per cent. Wood was much cheaper in the Provinces, although the tim
ber here is better ; and we could afford to pay a little more than the cost
of building there in consequence of the preference given to American
vessels.

Mr. COPE remarked that, to give some idea of the difference in the
cost of repairs in this country and Europe, he would state that a short time
ago his house had a vessel repaired in Liverpool. On the return of the
vessel his carpenter made an estimate of the amount the same repairs
would have cost in Philadelphia, and reported that the work had been
done for one-third less than it ought to have cost in this country,
although the timber used had to be carried from this country to England.

The CHAIRMAN asked whether on account of this increased expense
of repairs it was customary to repair vessels engaged in a foreign trade
in a European country as far as possible.

Mr. COPE replied that such was the custom ; that in the instance just
referred to his house had saved five thousand dollars by having the
repairs made in Liverpool.

HENRY WINDSOR, of the Philadelphia Board of Trade, said he would
only refer to one of the causes for the decline of the American shipping
interest, which was the great change that had taken place within the
last few years in the increased number of steam ocean-going vessels.
Formerly the preference was given to American sailing vessels, in con
sequence of their greater speed and the superior energy of their mas
ters and crews. Now, for the same reasons, preference was given to
steamers, which secured nearly all the better class of freights, while our
American sailing vessels were compelled to take freights formerly re
jected by them and carried in English vessels. In fact, nothing is left

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 155

to us except the lowest class of freights formerly carried by foreign
ships; and that is a difficulty that cannot be removed by any legislation
in regard to sailing vessels ; it must be done by lines of ocean steam
ships.

It is also true that the ^English have of late years constructed their
steamships from much better models than, formerly, and that they have
evinced greater energy and brought themselves more upon an equality
with our masters and crews than formerly, and the result has been that
almost all the foreign trade worth having has gone into the hands oi
foreigners ; and it is not only a matter of importance with us in regard
to the carrying trade, but it is also true that the commerce of the world
follows to a great extent the carrying trade, and foreigners will soon
have control of the commerce of the world on land as well as on the
ocean, unless something is done to revive our shipping interest.

A remission of the duties on imported articles entering into the con
struction of ships, and a subsidy upon those of American production
used, would to a certain extent remedy the difficulty. Unfortunately,
the manufacturers of the country think their interest is directly opposed
to that of the ship-owners of the country. Such is not, in fact, the case.
The difficulty is that the nature of the shipping interest is exceptional.
We can protect our domestic industry on our own soil by a tariff; by
the prohibition of imports if they think proper ; but we can give no
such protection to the American shipping interest, because the ocean is
the great common field for all nations ; and if we assist our ship-owners
to compete with foreign nations it must be by reducing the cost of
building ships and the cost of running them. If we cannot do it in that
way it cannot be done at all. Give us the same privileges given by
the British government to their ship-owners, and if we cannot get our
share of the carrying trade we do not deserve to have it ; but the same
principle applied for the protection of American industry can be applied
to the shipping interest, which is a branch of American industry as
much as any other. It is very plain that it must be applied in a differ
ent way, but there is no reason why the advocates of protection to
American industry should not be in favor of giving protection to this
branch of industry because it must be reached through a different
process. There is no departure from the principle ; it is merely a differ
ence of application.

Mr. LYNCH remarked that at the commencement of the war we were
increasing our foreign tonnage more rapidly than Great Britain was hers,
and. asked whether the increase of steam vessels from 1850 to 18CO was
not about as great as since that time.

Mr. WINDSOR said, perhaps so, but during the war the British and
other foreign nations got possession of our foreign trade, and it is now
very difficult to oust parties who have possession.

It is also true in regard to the increased efficiency, relatively, of the
crews of British vessels that, during the war, our foreign commerce hav
ing been almost destroyed and our sailors diverted to other branches of
industry, our capitalists now find more profitable avenues of invest
ment.

It may also be worth stating that the capitalists of this country are
not willing to engage in the carrying trade for the same profits as will
satisfy those of other nations. The rate of interest is higher here and
our people demand larger profits. English ship-owners are satisfied,
after making due allowance for the deterioration and wear and tear of
their vessels, with a net profit of six per cent, upon their profit, while

156 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

American ship-owners are not satisfied with that rate, because they can
do better in their investments.

Mr. WASHBURN inquired if the attention of the witness had been
drawn to the effect of opening the Suez Canal upon the shipping inter
est of this country or of the world.

Mr. WINDSOR said that his attention had not been drawn much to that
subject, the success of that enterprise being problematical. If in the
event it proves successful, it will have an important influence upon the
carrying trade of the world ; much fewer vessels, certainly for the Euro
pean trade, will be required. Whether it will also affect our trade with
the East Indies is uncertain. The navigation of the seas beyond the
termination of the canal is very difficult.

HENRY TATUM, also of the committee of the Philadelphia Board oi
Trade, remarked that in 18GO William S. Lindsey, of London, was in
this country and appeared before the different boards of trade on our
seaboard, bringing to their attention a good many things, and among
others he placed in the hands of the Philadelphia board a volume con
taining a large mass of information bearing upon this subject. This
volume, Mr. Tatum said, he would place in the hands of the committee,
it being a report made by Mr. Lindsey to Parliament upon the subject
of shipping in 18GO. Mr. Tatum had been, during the war, very active
in urging upon be government the acceptance of League Island, for the
purpose of having one large ship-yard in this country. He was satis
fied that the idea of constructing merchant ships of such models as to
be available as ships of war was a pure fallacy. Vessels so constructed
as to be serviceable in the merchant marine could only be made availa
ble in war as privateers.

Mr. TATUM also stated that there was no port on our coast which is
not to-day at the mercy of the British navy. Neither New York, Bos
ton, nor any other port has any adequate means of defense against such
war vessels as the British government may send. The whole policy of
the British government during the war was to destroy our commerce,
and in that enterprise they were very successful, and Mr. Lindsey, prob
ably, as much as any other man, was instrumental in bringing about
that result. For instance, what motive could the rebels have in send
ing out one of their best vessels at a very large expense when they had
no money to spare, for the purpose of destroying our northwestern whale
trade? Mr. Tatum believed it was done with the secret service money
of Great Britain. The number of vessels and the number of the crews
which on the average were at Honolulu was well known in Great
Britain, and it was known that sailors belonging to these ships were the
best seamen in the world, and if hostilities had occurred, as there was at
one time imminent danger, between the United States and Great Britain,
one of the first acts done by Great Britain would have been to have
destroyed that fleet of vessels.

Mr. TATUM believed that if the American ship-builders were placed
upon the same basis as those of Great Britain, ships could be profitably
constructed in this country. With a drawback on all material entering
into the construction of ships our ship-builders could profitably con
struct ocean-going vessels, as may be seen from the fact that the builders
at Wilmington, Delaware, and at Chester, Pennsylvania, now compete
very closely with foreign ship-builders.

CHARLES H. CRAMP, engaged in ship-building, said that Great Britain
now had the advantage of this country in the carrying trade of the
world, not because the vessels constructed were superior to ours in
model, but because of the great superiority of their marine engines.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 157

The English have built the finest and best marine engines in the world.
We have always been inferior to her in that respect. Our models are
the best, but our marine engines are poor copies of British engines.
The British government have developed their iron ship-building interest
by encouraging the skill of private ship-builders, notwithstanding her
enormous ship-yards. Ninety per cent, of her iron-clads have been con
structed at private establishments. It requires very little capital to
embark in the building of wooden ships. Since the commencement of
the war, the house with which Mr. Cramp was connected has been
engaged in building both iron and wooden vessels, but has built no
foreign iron steam-vessels since 1857, and none have been built in Phila
delphia, since that time. The same class of mechanics who in 1857
worked for a dollar and seventy-five cents a day, now receive three
dollars a day. With the materials entering into ship-building, our ship
builders can compete with those in foreign countries in building iron
ships $ and very few wooden vessels will hereafter be built, iron ships
being superior in every respect. Mr. Cramp s firm had built the largest
ships ever built in Philadelphia. The ship Chamberlain, which in 1855
was built for sixty dollars per ton, can now be built for eighty dollars,
and an iron ship of the same model for about one hundred and ten dol
lars. Timber is becoming higher and scarcer every day, and that is one
reason for stating that the time for building wooden ships has gone by.
It is impossible to state the length of time iron vessels will last. Some
of the first built in England are still in good condition. The character
of American wooden ships has been reduced every year in order to com
pete with the province-built vessels. There is a difference of about
thirty dollars a ton between the cost of iron and wooden vessels, but the
iron is really cheaper in the end. To enable the business of building
iron ships to become firmly established in this country, a very large
amount of very large machinery must be supplied, and some aid from
the government must be rendered. Great demoralization among the
mechanics in the government yards has been produced by the frequent
changes made for political reasons. At the beginning of the war nobody
but republicans could be employed. During the war they were turned
out and all democrats put in ; and since then still another change has
taken place, and the character of the workmen employed has been con
stantly running down. Large numbers of men at times are forced upon
the yards by politicians when there is no work for them to do. This
has become a great evil, and Mr. Cramp hoped the committee would
give it their attention. The eight-hour system has also done very much
to render the mechanics not in government employ dissatisfied, and it
has not improved the condition of anybody. Most of the best men were
opposed to it in the first place, and it was only supported by some
blathersk.vtes who were good talkers but bad mechanics. The repeal of
that law is required. Men do not work as hard now as they used to
so much more machinery is employed.

Mr. MORIIELL inquired what was the average rate of duty now paid
upon materials entering into the construction of ships.

Mr. CRAMP supposed the average rate would be about forty per cent.,
and if our ship-builders could be relieved from that they could compete
successfully with foreign builders. The difference in the cost of labor
would be overcome by the superiority of American mechanics. The
British workmen are a degraded set of beings, and the course pursued
by their employers toward them tends still further to degrade them.
Mr. Cramp had been informed that their men were frequently paid off
at taverns, and that it was distressing to see women and children wait-

158 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ing- to get wliat remained after a portion of the wages had been spent
at the tavern. It would not be desirable to bring the wages of our men
to as low a rate as those paid in England, if it could be done. American
iron in the construction of iron vessels would always be preferred at the
same price as foreign. It would be very inconvenient to send abroad for
the iron plates. It is necessary to get the form of every plate before it
is ordered, and if, after- doing that, we must send abroad to have them
made, very great inconvenience and delay would result. It was admitted,
too, that American iron is of much better quality for this purpose than
English. If the plates are of the same thickness and the same price,
you get a great deal more valuable article for the money in using Ameri
can, iron. The same thickness of plates which the English adopt is not
necessary if American iron is used, although the Lloyds will not insure
unless the vessel is built according to their standard. It is an advantage
in every way to use American materials in the construction of our ships.
The reason English marine engines are superior to ours is not because
our workmen are inefficient, but because they are more cloister engineers,
as we call them, or fancy men. The engines in which we excel are the
weak-beam engines, and if we are encouraged a little by the government
we will excel them in the construction of every description of marine
engines. The establishment of a large government ship-yard in any
city is a calamity to that city, as these yards are now managed.

LEWIS 0. MEDARA stated that his interest had been mostly in charter
ing vessels. He had always given the preference to American vessels,
because more care was taken of the cargoes and less time consumed on
the voyage. During the war he was obliged to charter foreign-built ves
sels, but found that great delay and long voyages was the result. He
knew nothing about the cost of constructing vessels except what he
could infer from the repairs made upon the vessels chartered. The
eight-hour law was a most unfortunate measure for the government to
adopt, and has affected the cost of repairing vessels very much. He was
not able to say whether American -built vessels, if they could be profit
ably constructed now, could be sailed as cheaply as foreign vessels.
That was a question belonging to the owner of the vessel, he chartering
the vessel, knowing nothing of the expenditures or disbursements. He
knew that American vessels made their return voyage in much shorter
time than English vessels. The vessels chartered by him were employed
principally in the Cuban and South American trade.

Captain J. S. CLARK, for many years the master of a vessel, remarked
that he could generally get work done cheaper in America than abroad.
The price of labor was less in England, but it took a great deal longer
time. The men would leave their work first to get their beer, then their
tobacco, and then their dinner, and accomplish very little in the course
of the day. One great difficulty was, in having to advance moneys to
the crews, which money was all absorbed by persons who harbored the
sailors on shore.

Another difficulty was in the cost of provisions. In Europe they are
allowed to take goods out of bond for use on ship-board. When in Ant
werp, two years ago, the rope-rigging of his vessel was taken out, and an
iron rigging put in, at a cost of nine hundred dollars in gold, while it
would have cost not less than two thousand dollars to have done the
same work in this country.

Mr. LYNCH inquired what proportion of foreigners were ordinarily in
t?ie crews of vessels.

Mr. CLARK replied that very often there would not be one native-born
American in the whole crew, although a large portion of the men would

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 159

ship as Americans. The officers are generally native-born men. We
are laboring in this country under a great disadvantage by being obliged
to ship the rubbish of Europe under the name of American seamen. In
Europe there is a black-list of seamen kept at every pert, on which any
seaman misbehaving during the voyage is entered, and the result i& they
get good men there, while the bad men come to this part of the world
and ship on our vessels as Americans. At one time, before the war, in
a crew of sixty, Captain Clark said, he had but two men who could steer.
Since the war he had been able to get a little better class of men. An
other great advantage possessed by English steamers was that they em
ployed their men at so much a week the men finding themselves. He
hoped something would be done to restore the prestige of American
shipping on the ocean to where it was previous to the war.

JOHN W. EVERMAN, engaged in shipping, remarked that among the
difficulties in the way of competing with other nations in our carrying
trade, was the great amount of expense imposed upon shippers, for which
no services were rendered. The port warden fees were not now collected,
but under the laws of Pennsylvania, vessels now are compelled to pay
half-pilotage if they do not take a pilot, and whole pilotage if they have
an assorted cargo. At this rate, a vessel of three hundred tons has to
pay thirty dollars for going past the breakwater, although she employs
no pilot. At Norfolk her expenses for pilotage would be about one
hundred and twenty dollars, whether a pilot is employed or not, and in
Mobile, one hundred and forty dollars, or one hundred and fifty dollars.
These charges are unjust.

He was not in favor of allowing vessels from the Provinces or foreign
ports to come in here and have their stores placed in bond in the cus
tom-house with the privilege of withdrawing them. For instance, a ves
sel coming from Italy will deposit at the rate of a quart of wine a day
for each man on board, and they will in this way bring in fifteen or
twenty thousand gallons of wine as a three-years supply, and then go
down the river and trade it off for anything they want.

Pilotage is one of the greatest evils our coasting trade has to contend
with, although it is less in Philadelphia than almost any other city, and
the owner of the vessel has no protection, as they have in going into a
port in Cuba, and any other foreign ports where, if the pilot sinks the
vessel, the government pays for it. Here, there is no such provision,
and a captain coining in from a long voyage, understanding the river
perfectly, will be much more likely to take a vessel safely, because he is
sober, than the pilot, who is lying by among the islands, very likely in
toxicated, and yet, if the captain does not hear the orders of the pilot
and the vessel is sunk, the insurance will not be paid. The general prac
tice for coasting vessels is to sail them on shares, the officers having a
proportion of the earnings of the vessel. No vessel owner wants to re
duce the wages of the men, unless the cost of living is also reduced. A
couple of years ago, Mr. Ever man wrote to Montreal to ascertain the cost
of building a vessel of the dimensions given by him, and ascertained that
it could be built for twelve thousand dollars. He found that it cost
about twenty to twenty-five per cent, more, taking gold at forty, than to
build it here ; but an American-built vessel would sell at public auction
for forty or fifty per cent, more, so that after all it is really more eco
nomical to build our own vessels.

Mr. MORRELL asked what would be the cost of building a schooner of
six hundred and fifty tons.

Mr. EVERMAN thought that without being copper-fastened she would
cost twenty-eight or twenty-nine thousand dollars. A large proportion

160 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

of the vessels now being built in this country are schooner-rigged, and
they are so built because they can be sailed with less men than a ship
can. A very large number of three-masted schooners are now being
built. Almost all schooners are iron-fastened, the duty on copper being
so heavy that the cost of copper-fastening is too great.

JOHN F. STUMP, formerly harbor-master at Philadelphia, and after
ward engaged in the custom-house, was under the impression that one
of the great difficulties in the way of competing with foreign ships was
the difference in the currency. He thought the difference in cost between
sailing an American vessel, or an English or German vessel, was about
fifty per cent.

AFTEENOON SESSION.

The committee again met at 3 o clock.

WILLIAM G. GIBBONS, ship-builder, in Wilmington, Delaware, stated
that for the past four years the business of the firm with which he was
connected had been largely engaged in building iron river steamers to
be used on the rivers in South America and Mexico; having constructed
boats for nearly ail the rivers in South America emptying into the
Caribbean Sea or Atlantic, and also several for those emptying into
the Pacific. The reason why they were able to build these boats in
competition with the English, was that their character was such as
to make them unfit to cross the Atlantic, the English builders being
required to take them to pieces, ship them over, and then put them
together again. The boats were shipped by St. Thomas, touching at
Demarara and various points on the coast, and had all passed safely to
their destination. His firm had never succeeded in getting an order to
build a ship lor ocean navigation purposes. They had recently built, for
a line of steamers to run from St. Thomas, two screw steamers adapted
to passengers and freight, of about seven hundred tons. The parties
very much preferred to put their steamers under the American flag, the
company being composed largely of citizens of New York; but the Eng
lish bids were about twenty thousand dollars lower on an estimate of
one hundred and twelve thousand dollars for each vessel, gold being
the basis in each case, and of course the English obtained the order.
In the construction of iron vessels about six-tenths of the entire cost is
labor, and four-tenths material, and the tax now required to be paid
upon every material entering into the construction of a ship, from the
laying of her keel until she is finished, is a matter of vital consequence
to American ship-builders. Our rates of labor are higher than those in
any other country in the world, and this has compelled our people to
exert their ingenuity for machinery and mechanic appliances to save labor
whenever it is practicable. We have always excelled both the English
and Scotch in this respect, and we have only been able to compete with
them by economizing labor as we have done in the larger use of machin
ery, but they buy their machinery for about one-half in gold what it
costs us in currency. For instance, forty -five dollars in gold will buy a
ton of plate or bar iron in England, which here costs eighty-eight or
ninety dollars for plates and eighty-five dollars for bars. When this is
worked up we find that they have the advantage of us of about two-
tenths in material. If the firm with which Mr. Gibbons was connected
could get iron put down in their yard at the prices paid by the English
ship-builders, they could furnish ships for anybody, and would give
them, their orders at as low rate as the English or Scotch could build
them. They have never received any drawback on materials used in
building vessels to be sent out of the country. In one or two instances

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 161

the excise tax had been remitted, but it caused more trouble to obtain
the remission than the saving- amounted to.

JOHN TUCKER, vice-president of the Reading railroad, said that last
winter the Reading 1 Railroad Company contracted for two iron colliers,
at a cost of fifty-nine thousand dollars and sixty thousand dollars,
respectively. He sent the specifications to a friend in London to
ascertain at what price they could be duplicated there. The first
reply was that they would not build a collier according to the speci
fications given, and returned their criticisms upon the specifications.
After my reply explaining the specifications they acknowledged that
the colliers would be quite as efficient as if built in accordance with
their usual specifications. They then sent a communication, which Mr.
Tucker said lie would furnish to the committee. Since that time the Read
ing works had contracted for eight more steam colliers, of larger dimen
sions, to be built at Chester, Pennsylvania, where the first two were con
structed. Taking gold at thirty -three and one-third per cent., the differ
ence between the cost of building these colliers at Chester and in England
would be about four thousand dollars each. The same specifications
were furnished to the American and English builders. American iron
is much stronger than English, and a less quantity may be safely used
in the construction of an iron vessel. One of the colliers built last sum
mer in passing Hell Gate, New York Harbor, struck a rock, cutting about
ten feet in her bottom. The vessel w r as raised and the injured piece of
iron was exhibited here, attracting some attention. In accordance with
their request, that strip of iron was sent to the Lloyds underwriters, in
France, as a specimen of the superiority of American iron, and since that
time we have been able to effect our insurance there at ten percent, per
annum lower than we were doing it before. Previous to that time the
cost of insurance was about eighteen per cent, per annum. The insurance
is now effected there at seven and one-half per cent. The first two vessels
were built as an experiment and for the purpose of taking coal all along
the coast. For this class of vessels the cost of building is not very much
more than on the other side. He was surprised to find so little difference.
In fact, taking into consideration the superiority of American iron, they
are really built cheaper in this country than they could be in England.
The cost of building those now ordered is one hundred and five thousand
dollars each for a Ihousand-tou collier. Mr. Gibbons remarked with
regard to the question of screw colliers just referred to, that it was the
opinion of his linn the prices at which they were being built were not
remunerative. His firm had bid for the same vessels ; but their bid was
very much higher. In regard to the legislation ship-builders would like
to have, there is a difference of opinion among different parties ; but one
thing is pretty clear, that if American builders can obtain their material
at the same rates paid by the English and Scotch builders they will be
able to compete with them in building ships. The cost of labor is of
course greater in this country, but the additional skill obtained more
than compensates for it. The English have old-fashioned ideas. The
law referred to by Mr. Tucker just now speaks of two engines, and they
frequently put four into one of their ships. Our ship-owners mostly
prefer only one engine. The parties of whom Mr. Gibbons had already
spoken, who desired to contract for building ships to run to St. Thomas,
said they were willing to give considerable more money to an American,
than to an English builder, for the reason that the American builders
provided greater comfort for passengers than the English, and passengers
would follow the route which w r as provided with the most comfort. The
boats built for the South American rivers are a sort of cross between the
11 N I

162 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Hudson River boat and the Mississippi Elver boat. They are side-wheel
and built to run in shoal water. The peculiarity of the climate in South
America is such as to require very different accommodations for passen
gers from anything required in this country. The boats built by the
English for those rivers are of a different model, and more analogous to
those used during the war for running the blockade. They do not carry
very much freight and are exceedingly expensive. The boats built in
Wilmington are equally as fast, draw a great deal less water, and have
made a great deal of money for their owners, which is, after all, the test
of success.

In regard to ocean steamers it is now universally considered that there
is a great advantage in screw steamers over side- wheel steamers, for the
reason that in rough weather it very often happens that one wheel is so
much submerged as U&amp;gt; waste almost all the power used, while the other
will be almost out of water. This difficulty is obviated to a certain
extent while the side- wheel steamers are immensely large, as in case of
the Pacific mail steamers running between San Francisco and Hong
Kong, but these ships are always very slow. The English seem to
understand the principle of building screw ships, building them very
narrow and very deep, so that unless the sea is very heavy they push
their way across the ocean, rolling very little and being disturbed very
little by an ordinary sea.

Another difficulty with side- wheel ships is that in a voyage from New
York to Southampton you must load the vessel with coal almost
beyond her proper capacity, sinking the wheels too deep in the water
on this side, and leaving them about four feet out on the other side as
the coal becomes expended. The only remedy that can be asked by
American ship-builders,is that such scheme may be devised by which
they may receive their materials at a lower rate than they do now. It
is impossible to state any ordinary rate per ton for building an iron ship.
The vessels are so different in their construction, and so many different
considerations come into the cost of constructing different models of,
vessels are built upon specifications, and taking given specifications, we
are able to calculate the cost by the number of pounds of iron required.
The tonnage is of course determined by the model of the ship itself as
much as by the size. A thousand-ton iron ship built according to the
requirements of the Lloyds, with reasonable passenger accommodation,
would probably cost one hundred and fifty or one hundred and sixty
thousand dollars. The colliers spoken of have very limited power, and
would be nowhere if employed in the merchant service. For instance,
between New York and New Orleans they have a cylinder of forty-four
inches of diameter, while a merchant ship of the same capacity would
have a cylinder of sixty inches. Their steam power is accessory only,
but they are strong, first-rate vessels in all that relates to their carrying
capacity. The English make their passenger ships cost just about as
much as our American ships. It is only on their coarse, common work
that they beat us. Where a great amount of labor is to be expended on
tine work we can beat them; because they have to import their lumber,
and because they use hand labor for a very large portion of their fine
work, for which we employ machinery. Take the Adriatic, for instance,
one of the Collins line of steamers now owned in Russia. Her inside
work was a complete mass of elegant carving, which could not be done
in England for anything like the amount it cost in New York. The
same may be said of the St. John s and Dean Richmond, on the Hudson
River, or of the Providence steamers. All this work is now woven out
by machinery and costs very little. Ship-builders would like to have

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 163

the tariff on iron taken completely off, although they know that, as a
general proposition, is impracticable at present, and they would like
to see it done by adopting a slid ing-scale which at some distant period
should reach zero, and be an end to the duty on iron. A good deal has
been said of pauper labor on the other side of the ocean; that it is not
applied to the mechanical pursuits; it is applied to the agricultural
pursuits, where the labor is in excess of the amount of available land to
cultivate; while in this country the supply of labor for that purpose is
not equal to the demand ; but tor skilled labor the relative rates paid in
England and France is not very largely below that paid in this countuy,
taking everything into consideration. In this country, in many instances,
our laborers are paid too much. In the stock and mining districts many
of them get ten dollars a day, and coal enters largely into the cost
of building ships. So in our foundries, puddlers, when they will work
a whole week, get about sixty dollars ; but the prices have so demoral
ized labor that they can scarcely ever be induced to work a whole week.
The last advance upon the tariff rates on iron did not go into the hands
of the manufacturers, but, to a great extent, into the hands of the
laborers, who were already paid too much.

Mr. MORRELL asked, where in this country puddlers were paid the sixty
dollars per week.

Mr. GIBBONS replied, in Wilmington.

Mr. MORRELL stated that in Pennsylvania puddlers were not earning
more than four dollars per day.

Mr. LYNCH inquired whether, if ship-builders were allowed drawback
upon the iron used by them, and also a subsidy to the same amount
upon American iron used, the effect would not be that American iron
would generally be used.

Mr. GIBBONS replied that it would be used for the reason that our ship
builders preferred to obtain their iron at home, both because of its supe
riority and because the work can be done promptly. It would be con
sidered a great nuisance if they were compelled to wait, before furnish
ing their patrons, to send them abroad for the plates to be made. As a
general rule, the party who wants a ship wants it now, and would not be
willing to wait for the two months that would be required to send abroad
to get the material. They could turn out a thousand-ton iron ship in
about nine months, or, commencing in the spring, so as to have the benefit
of the summer months, probably in less time than that.

Mr. MORRELL inquired the number of builders of iron ships in Wil
mington.

Mr. GIBBONS replied that there was one other firm. His firm had for
merly built large ships, and within the last two years, finding it more
profitable, had confined themselves to river steamers.

The CHAIR^IAN inquired the cost of building a thousand-ton sailing
ship.

Mr. GIBBONS said it would cost about ninety thousand dollars in cur
rency, built according to our American specifications. The cost would
be more than that if built on the Lloyd specifications, they crowding-
much more iron into a vessel than we do. The cost of building under
their specifications would probably be fifteen thousand dollars more a
vessel that under our specifications would be just as good for every
practical purpose but the Lloyds would not insure at the same rate.

The CHAIRMAN inquired whether, if our ship-builders were enabled to
build American ships as cheaply as foreign builders, there would be a
foreign demand for these vessels.

Mr. GIBBONS replied that it would not come immediately, because the-

164 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

channel of business in this respect is nearly all foreign, in the direction
of Scotland, and it would take two or three years, and possibly more, to
change it. Currents of trade, like currents of water, when they are or
have once set in a given direction are difficult to change. We could
control in a great degree the South American trade much sooner than
we could that of the Mediterranean or the China trade.

The CHAIRMAN asked what description of vessels the Spanish gunboats
were, of which we have heard so much recently in New York.

Mr. GIBBONS replied that they were constructed very much like our
tug-boats, only larger, and built to cross the ocean. He said that Mr.
Ericsson, who was intimate with the authorities at Madrid, obtained
the order and gave it to his next friend, Mr. Delamater. It was through
Mr. Ericsson that the order came to the United States.

The CHAIRMAN asked the witness if his firm did anything toward
building vessels for the government during the war.

Mr. GIBBONS answered that they did.

The CHAIRMAN asked whether a class of iron vessels suitable for the
merchant marine could be constructed so as to be converted into ves
sels useful to the government in time of war.

Mr. GIBBONS said they would require a great change, for the reason
that the requirements of the two branches of service are so different.
A merchant vessel would have to be turned inside out before she could
be converted into a man-of-war. For privateersmen they would be just
the thing.

Mr. WASHBURN asked whether, in case of a war with England, these
would not be just such vessels as we would need.

Mr. GIBBONS said they would, because they are fast. Heavy ships, as
a rule, are slow. The ships built in England during the war for block
ade-runners, and captured by us, which have been sold into the merchant
service, have one and all greatly disgusted their purchasers. They burn
a great deal of coal and carry but little freight. They were constructed
to run fast, but only the high freights they carried made them profitable,
and when freights came down they would not do at all.

Mr. WASHBURN inquired whether, if we build vessels as cheaply as
they can on the Clyde, there would be any difference afterward in the
cost of keeping them in repairs.

Mr. GIBBONS said there would not, because the ship would be repaired
wherever it was most convenient and it could be done the most cheaply;
that even now vessels in this country destined for the East Indies often
get freight from the United States to some European port, where they
are repaired at a very much less expense than in this country, and the
officers then get freight from that port to the East Indies and come home.
Our vessels managed mostly to get their repairs done out of the United
States, so as to economize, and that is the reason why we have but little
to do in the way of repairing. If our ship-builders could have a sub
sidy from the government they could build ships, but it would be a dan-
ferous precedent, because every other interest would want the same
ind of protection.

The CHAIRMAN inquired how many hands were employed in the ship
yards in Wilmington.

Mr. GIBBONS said his firm employed about two hundred and fifty.
The other firm built railroad cars as well as ships, and employed from
four hundred to seven hundred hands. The other firm used to build
boats for the American trade, but they are now building larger vessels.
They were the builders of the steamship Champion, running between
New York and Charleston ; of the two iron ships running to Savannah;

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 165

of the American line of steamers running from Tew Orleans to Galves-
ton, Texas. They built two very splendid vessels for the Panama com
pany, one of them on the larger specifications, taking them at very near
the quotations in Scotland. This was a vessel of two hundred and sixty
feet iu length, about thirty-three feet beam, and measuring two hundred
tons. She was finished about a year and a half ago.

The CHAIRMAN inquired at what other ship-yards in the country iron
steamships were built.

Mr. GIBBONS said there was one at Chester, and they were built at the
Atlantic Works, Boston. During the war there were establishments in
Kew York that built iron vessels, but they have since abandoned the
enterprise. The rates are greatly higher than at Wilmington. At Wil
mington mechanics are employed to work upon the hulls of vessels, and
a few of them are paid fifteen dollars a week, but the average of them
not more than nine and a half or ten dollars. The same class of work
men were paid about ten dollars a week before the war. A large grade
of mechanics are employed to work upon iron vessels for the reason
that a few skilled workmen can get along very well with a good many
other of the lower grade. There is more difference in the cost of build
ing marine engines between this country and Scotland than there is in
the cost of building ships. They had not gone into competition with
them in Wilmington in building engines. The only instance, Mr. .Gib
bons said, in which his firm had bid in competition was for the steel
works in Pennsylvania, and then they were beaten fifty per cent. It
might be, however, that their bids were too high and the bids in Scot
land too low.

Letter from Samuel Harlan, of the firm of Harlan $- HoUingsirorth, iron ship-builders.

WILMINGTON, DEL., December 1, 18C9.
Hon. D. J. MORRELL, of Congressional Committee, &amp;lt;$-c.

DEAR SIR: Wo are very much obliged for your invitation to be present at the meet
ing of your committee, in Philadelphia, but regret that absence from home will prevent
our attendance.

If agreeable to your committee, wo would be glad to present our views in writing in
subjoined paper. We trust this will bo acceptable to you, as the subject is one in
which we are most vitally interested, and feel that the only hope for relief lies in the
action of Congress.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

SAM L HABLAN, JR., President.

We would present our views under the following heads, viz :

1. As to the present condition of the iron ship-building interest.

2. The causes which have led to its depression.

3. Our views as to the remedy or relief desired.

On the first point we would state that at no time since 1857 has the iron ship-building
interest been so depressed as it has within the last twelve to eighteen months. During
the time named wo have scarcely been without contracts for iron boats and steamers
until within the past twelve months, when the business has fallen off greatly, in fact,
almost coming to a stand-still a good part of the timo ; yet, during this time, we have
had more inquiries for iron ships from parties wishing to build than ever before, but
owing to the cost of building being beyond what they could ailbrd to pay, and greater
than the same ships would cost in England, the negotiations have ended with mutual
regrets, and the parties resolving to wait for a more favorable condition of aii uirs.
What work we have taken to keep our men employed, has been at rates not remunera
tive, and in some instances, at positive loss.

Second. The causes which have led to its depression, &c. :

The principal one is the great advance which has taken place since I860 in the price
of labor and materials, ranging from forty to seventy-live per cent. In many instances
where parties were convinced of the superiority of iron ships, as compared with wood,
they were compelled to build of wood because the cost of the iron ship was so much

166 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

greater. This difference in cost is duo, in a groat measure, to the act that iron, more
than wood, is the production of skilled labor, and is affected more by the various causes
pro.hiciug the advance referred to, as well as suffering more from taxation.

Third. As to the relief desired, &c. :

We cannot hope for a reduction in the price of labor, as we find it is more difficult
for our workmen to support themselves and their families on the present rate of wages,
with the greatly enhanced cost of everything consumed by them, than it was when
their wages ruled the lowest, and, until the cost of living is greatly reduced, we cannot
hope that the wages of the mechanic and laboring man will rule much below what it
is at present; in fact, it cannot be, without being oppressive upon them. It remains,
therefore, to reduce the cost of the materials entering into the construction and equip
ment of iron ships, as the only remedy left. Can this be done to an extent equal to the
reduction in cost desired? We think not, without throwing off all the protection now
given to the manufacturers of the various materials referred to. While this might re
lieve the ship-building interest it would be ruinous to other interests, and would meet
with great opposition.

We cannot recommend a more simple and effectual remedy than the one already con
curred in by a majority of ship-builders and ship-owners who have been before your
board, viz: to remit the duties on all imported articles entering into the construction
and equipment of both wood and iron, steam and sailing ships, or a drawback be
allowed on all articles of domestic manufacture equivalent to the duties named above
on the imported article.

This latter clause is especially desirable, that ship-builders may not be obliged to use
the foreign article exclusively, and thus break down the American manufacturers.

The English and Scotch iron ship-builders have the advantage over the American
ship-builders only in their enlarged experience from the greater number of large sea
going steamships which they have built ; but in the quality of iron, and energy and
skill of our workmen, wo feel that we have decidedly the advantage, while our facili
ties in tools and machinery adapted to the purpose are quite equal to t heirs. The for
eign builders have no advantages over us except in the cheapness of their iron and
other materials, and the greatly reduced rates of \vages paid their workmen, but not
in the superiority of their workmen, nor quality of their iron, nor their ability to build
better ships.

What was done by American ship-builders at the commencement, and during the war,
in building up our American marine, is a sure guarantee of what they can do in build
ing up a mercantile marine, if they can be relieved from the causes producing the
present great depression.

Timely relief will not only allow the ship-owners to procure vessels as cheaply as
they can be built in foreign countries, but the stimulus thus given to the ship-building
interest will produce ships equal to any in the world in our judgment.

The repeal of the navigation laws would enable the ship-owner to procure cheap
ships, the refuse of every foreign country, and even good ships at a low figure, as the
ship-building interest in England and Scotland is in a depressed state since the opening
of the Suez canal has become an established fact. Yet it would effectually close up
our ship-yards except to the building of small vessels which could not safely cross the
Atlantic, and give to England the building of our mercantile marine as she now has
our carrying trade.

The statement has been freely circulated in the papers that we could build iron ships
as cheaply at our works, with the payments made in gold, as they could be built on the
Clyde; but such is not the case with the difference in cost of labor and materials so
greatly against us.

The advantages we have from long experience in building iron steamers, favorable
location, experienced workmen, every facility in the way of machinery, &c., Avill not
enable us to compete with foreign builders, at the present cost of labor and materials,
but let Congress give relief in the shape asked for above, and the ship-owner wiL not
have cause to complain that he cannot have ships built equal to those of any nation,
aud at as reasonable prices.

WASHINGTON, D. C., December 15, 18G9.

Committee met. Present, all the members.

T. F. Eowland, ship-builder, of New York, appeared, and stated that he
was present, with others, representing the ship-yard working-men carpen
ters, sail-makers, spar-makers, iron-workers, and other representatives of
the labor required to produce a finished ship ; that they came to Washing
ton to see if something could not be done to relieve their interests; that
they had reduced their views to writing, and the statement would now
be made by Mr. Westervelt, the chairman of the committee.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 167

Mr. D. D. Westervelt, ship-builder, of New YOIK, thereupon read
aud presented to the committee the following written statement:

NEW -YORK, December 14, 1869.
To the Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Cliairman of the Special Congressional Committee on Navigation Interests.

SIR: The undersigned, a committee appointed by the &quot; New York Association for the
restoration of American shipping interests,&quot; respectfully beg leave to call your atten
tion to the following facts, with the view of setting forth the past and present condi
tion of American commerce, and for the purpose of impressing upon Congress, through
the action of your committee, the absolute necessity of some action being immediately
taken to prevent the total destruction of American international commerce ; and alsc
to set, forth the principle that the true policy of our government is to foster and
encourage American ship-builders, as we believe that a nation s prosperity is reflected
in the prosperity of its commercial marine.

As evidence of the condition of our commerce during the last thirty-two years, we
respectfully call your attention to the accompanying exhibit A, which is a true copy of
the record at the New York custom-house. It will be observed that during the ycai
1830 there entered the port of New York 407,096 tons of shipping, the handiwork oi
American craftsmen, and only one-third of that amount of tonnage entered under the
head of foreign. The American builders sustained their prestige for twenty years
thereafter, and specimens of their workmanship were seen and respected in every port,
and carried our emblem on every sea.

In 1858 the English commenced the substitution of iron for wood in the art of ship
building, and since, by a chain of circumstances fortunate to them but disastrous to us.
the record shows for 1868 that nearly two tons of foreign tonnage to one of American
was recorded at the port of New York. Many of these vessels, notwithstanding they
appear under a foreign flag, are productions of our American ship-yards, having changed
their record for protection during our late internal struggle.

Previous to the year 1868, the port of New York sustained not less than twenty
prominent ship-yards, employing with the collateral trades, such as joiners, spar-mak
ers, sail-niakers, &c., not less than twenty thousand skilled mechanics, in addition to
one thousand young men as apprentices learning the various trades. To-day these
yards have either ceased to exist, or are lying dormant, not one thousand skilled
mechanics finding employment, and so small are the inducements for young men to
learn the profession that apprentices are no longer to be found.

It is in the interest of the country at large, who in time of war must have ships to
sustain its dignity, and mechanics to build them, that wo appeal to your honorable
committee to recommend to Congress some potent measure for the relief of our pro
fession.

We would respectfully and most earnestly recommend that some action bo immedi
ately taken by our government to foster and encourage the art of ship-building ; and,
in consideration of the fact that all governments gain power and respect by the pro
ficiency of their seamen and mechanics, we believe it would be eminently fit and proper
that Congress should legislate to allow to the American ship-builder an equivalent on
all American materials used by him in the construction of the finished ship, equal to
the amount of duty which the government would receive should such raw material bo
of foreign production.

Regarding the proposition to modify or abrogate the United States registry laws,
and allow foreign-built ships to register on equal footing with American productions,
we most respectfully desire to protest. Nearly every native American, and, we be
lieve, the great majority of our adopted citizens, are possessed of a certain amount of
pride, and rejoice in the growth and success of our naval and mercantile marine; and,
though at the present time the people at large may appear to be indifferent and luke
warm upon the subject, it is our united opinion that could a full expression be ob
tained, it would be found to bo their unanimous desire that the principles inaugurated
by the founders of our institutions in regard to our registry laws should bo undis
turbed, and that all vessels partaking of its benefits should be constructed on Ameri
can territory.

D. D. WESTERVELT.
T. F. ROWLAND,
L. H. BOOLE,
WILLIAM FOULKE,

JOSHUA Yorx&amp;lt;;s.

THOMAS STARK,
JOHN E. HOFFMIRE,
WILLIAM ROWLAND,
DAVID J. TAFF,
ROBERTA. RUSSELL,
Committee of the New York Association for tlic restoration of American shipping interests.

168 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

A. Tonnage entered at New York from foreign ports during the year 18G8.

No. of

vessels.

Tonnage.

Seamen.

American vessels

2 084

1 033 396

31 551

Forei (r n vessels

2 734

1 867 591

68 201

Total entered in 1868 . . ...

4 818

2 900 987

99 752

Total entered in 1862

5 400

2 55 4*1

81 817

Total entered in 1852

3 847

1,709,988

58 867

Number of arrivals, amount of American and foreign tonnage, and the
total tonnage entered at the port of New York, during the years below
specified.

Year.

No. of
arrivals.

American
tonnage.

Foreign
tonnage.

Total ton
nage.

1836

2 285

407 996

149 634

556 730

1846

2, 292

496 761

185 404

682 165

1856

3 861

1 684 596

386 263

2 070 859

1866

4 827

990 116

1 776 318

2 766 434

1868

4,818

1, 033, 396

1, 867, 591

2 900,987

DOMESTIC TONNAGE.

The returns for the past nine mouths show that the arrivals and clearances in the
domestic trade amounted to upwards of fifty million tons, or about three times that of
the foreign trade. It lias been only moderately prosperous during the present years,
barely paying insurance and depreciation.

Statement of the foreign trade of the city of New York, including the
value of imports and exports, and showing the proportion under the
United States and foreign flags, for the periods named.

Year.

In American
vessels.

Iii foreign

vessels.

1857

$239, 565, 610

$104, 354, 631

1867

123,687 012

367, 508, 647

1868....

113, 313, 303

371, 849, 274

From the foregoing statement, it will be seen that the rapid increase of foreign tan
nage is most startling, as wo discover that in the year 1868 nearly two-thirds of the
whole tonnage entered in the port of New York was foreign, whereas during the year
1856 it was scarce twenty per cent, of the total.

If we look at the cargo values respectively carried in American and foreign vessels,
we find that during the year 1888 seventy-live per cent, ^were carried in foreign ves
sels; and it may be safely asserted that more than eighty per cent, of all tho value
of goods imported and exported from the port of New York during the present year
has been carried in foreign vessels.

In the year 1857, out of a value of $53-3.000,000, carried to and from all our domestic
ports, only $131,000.000 went under a foreign Hag. In 1867, out of 864,000,000 at all
the ports, $577,600,000 were carried in foreign vessels.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 169

Mr. WM. FOULKE, of the same committee, made the following state
ment :

As will be seen by this document, we feel as if our business had gone
from us, and that we were left desolate. In our ship-yards we have
nothing to do; and we shall have nothing to do unless the government
does something to protect us. I would like to see a return of the same
prosperity in our ship-yards which we enjoyed years ago. I think we
are capable of regaining our former prestige if we have a chance. We
do not think we have lost our ability or our skill; and we will show that
we have not, if an opportunity is given us to compete with foreign
builders.

By Mr. WASIIBURNE :

Q. Do you think that if you can obtain the materials that enter into
the construction of a ship as cheaply as tbey do abroad, -you can compete
successfully with foreign builders, notwithstanding the high cost of
labor ?

Mr. D. D. WESTERVELT, (ship-builder.) That is the opinion of the gen
tlemen composing this committee. Labor is higher here, but we think
American labor is sufficiently superior to foreign labor to compensate for
the additional price it costs. We believe our workmen are superior to
those of any country in the world. In former years we came into com
petition in this industry with Great Britain, and we almost swept her
ships from the China Seas, by our superiority of model; our clipper ships
were the best in the world, and to this day Great Britain has never
known how to build the model of a ship except as she has been taught
it by us. With all her superior and powerful engines, her ships were
almost always slow, because the models were bad. At present we recog
nize the fact that the days of Avooden ship-building are over. We may
in this country, as they have in Great Britain, enter upon the construc
tion of composite vessels, i. e., iron vessels, the bottoms of which are
covered with plank, and again covered with copper. But we know that
the great bulk of ships being built for the ocean are iron ships; and we
believe that if the opportunity is afforded us, we can begin almost imme
diately to compete with Great Britain in building iron ships. All that
we ask is, that we may have the materials as low as they are furnished
to her ship-builders.

Q. What I understand you want, then, is this : That the government
shall give you a bounty upon American materials used, equal to a draw
back of duties on foreign materials, if they were used $

Mr. WESTERVELT. Yes, sir ; that is about it. We prefer to use our
own iron, and that* the government will pay to us, on the American iron
we use, an amount equal to the duty we should receive if a drawback
were allowed on an equal quantity of foreign iron.

Q. Is there not this difference between giving a bounty and giving a
drawback : That the drawback applies to money which has never gone
into the treasury, never been in the possession of the government, and,
therefore, is not an actual loss of revenue, while the bounties you ask
require money to be paid directly from the treasury ?

Mr. WESTERVELT. That is true ; but our idea is to promote the inter
ests of our own people, by building American ships of American mate
rials.

WM. EOWLAND, (ship-builder,) of the same committee, made the fol
lowing statement :

I would like to take exception to the expression used by Mr. Wester-
vclt, that we were asking a bounty. It is a well understood principle

J70 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

that when money paid out brings back an equivalent consideration, the
money so paid is not a bounty. Now, we propose to give a considera
tion in return for the money we ask the government to pay us. A great
many people think that the best thing to be done to revive the ship
building interest is to take the duty off from iron. But that would not
give us present relief at all in this country; it might ten years hence,
but that would not answer our purpose. Our relief must come within
the next twelve months, or the ship-building interests are gone. The
consideration which we shall give the government in return for the
money we ask is, the education of her seamen and mechanics for the
ships required in time of war. Certainly if the government ever gets
into trouble with a foreign nation, she will need us. To-day the govern
ment has not a ship of war that would not be a laughing-stock if sent
abroad as a first-class naval vessel. During the last war, I had the
honor of building the first monitor and the first iron-clad for the gov
ernment; and I should very much dislike to think that those vessels
were to be taken to England as an exhibition of what American skill
can produce. And we cannot build vessels unless we have workmen ;
and I think government can well afford to educate the workmen of this
country, as well as States can afford to build public school-houses and
support schools for the education of the children. If the school-house
is locked up, and the schoolmaster abroad, education will deteriorate.
And so will ship-building, if shipyards are closed and the workmen dis
missed.

Mr. MORRELL inquired whether the government would not receive a
greater benefit than the money now asked to be paid, by the additional
employment this protection would give to our people.

Mr. ROWLAND. The compensation which we furnish is direct. It is
just as directly for the benefit of the government as to cast cannon at
your arsenals in time of peace, and wait for war to break out before
using them. These ships, and men who know how to build the ships,
are absolutely necessary for the safety of the government. They are of
as much consequence to the iiavy of the country in time of war as the
men you employ in the army. I do not like the word &quot;bounty&quot; to be
used in this connection.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would not the simple allowance of a drawback upon
the foreign material used furnish sufficient encouragement to revive
the ship-building interests of the country?

Mr. KOWLAND. I cannot see how a drawback upon iron would be of
any value to us at present. The iron that goes into the construction of
an American ship must be rolled in this country. The raw material
might come from England, but it must be rolled within five hundred
miles of where the ship is to be built, or else the material will never go
into the ship. Every vessel is built on its own model ; and plates could
not be rolled in England for one vessel which could be made available
for other vessels here. Notwithstanding our great facilities of com
munication with England, I do not believe it would be possible to
obtain the plates for a thousand-ton iron ship from England within
three months after they were ordered.

Mr. LYNCH inquired whether the business of ship-building was not so
perfected that a vessel could be built here of the same class of those to be
built in England, and the iron received for them within a reasonably
short time.

Mr. EOWLAND. No, sir ; I think not. Plates are rolled to fit, without
being cut at all, though I always allow for an inch. The iron scrap, or
waste, 01 a three-thousand-ton ship amounts to about two per cent.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 171

of the whole weight. This consists of the trimmings of the plates and
what is punched out of the rivet holes. This should be reduced to one
per cent., and undoubtedly will be, when we have had sufficient experi
ence. The frames are also all rolled, and cut to a particular length.

Mr. WASIIBURNE inquired what would be the cost of the raw mate
rial upon which a duty is paid for building a three-thousand-ton *hip.

Mr. ROWLAND. I am not prepared to state to you what the cost would
be. There would be about twelve hundred tons of materials of all de
scriptions in the ship, mostly of iron ; very little copper is used. Even
in the construction of engines much less copper is used than formerly.
We find that iron is better. The loss of material caused by galvanic
currents formed by the combination of iron and copper is prevented
when only iron is used.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether the duty on copper affected the cost of
ship-building very much.

Mr. ROWLAND. It affects the cost of building wooden ships materi
ally, and let me say that I think Mr. Westervelt is very much mistaken
when he thinks the days of building wooden ships are over. I doubt
very much whether that day has arrived.

Mr. WESTERVELT. I make that statement from data which I think
will convince any one. For instance, the average lifetime of a wooden
ship is not more than twelve years, and there is always an uncertainty
as to the time the vessel will live. During the war, gunboats were
built which are already unfit for service; whereas a first-class iron ship
will last for twenty-one years, without any difficulty. And although I
am a wooden ship-builder, and never built an iron ship in my life, 1 am
still of the opinion that the days of wooden ships are at an end. I
never expect to build another. I believe that composite ships will be
introduced into this country, as they have been into Great Britain.
During the war we built for the government the Brooklyn, and some of
the first batch of double-enders.

Mr. LYNCH inquired what were the advantages of composite ships.

Mr. WESTERVELT. The trouble with iron ships is, the bottoms soon
become foul, covered with barnacles and sea-grass, so as greatly to im
pede their progress through the water; while ships the bottoms of which
are covered with wood and coated with copper will remain in the water
a long time without becoming foul. These composite ships will last as
long as iron. The frames are iron ; the planks being attached to the
iron frames. The ventilation is so complete that there is no danger of
the planks rotting. Wooden ships rot where the planks come in con
tact with the wooden frames. Inside the planking, five or six inches
distant, slats are fastened, to prevent the cargo from coming in contact
with the planking. The cost of composite ships, too, is considerably
less than that of iron ships ; and our ship-builders in this country would
have this advantage in their construction, that wood is cheaper here.
They are exceedingly useful in long voyages, particularly the tea trade.
I have seen one of these vessels, after returning to Liverpool from
China, with her bottom so clean that you would scarcely suppose she
had been out more then ten or fifteen days.

Mr. LYNCH inquired as to the cost of insurance upon this class of
ships.

Mr. WESTERVELT. I cannot answer that question accurately. I
should suppose they would not rate quite as low as an iron vessel,
although they are really as safe in every respect. They are no more
liable to burn up, and the chance of the crew escaping in case of fire
would really be greater. There is not very much difference in the

172 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

strength 5 for the frame is iron, and the thickness of the planking is suf
ficient to give it the proper amount of strength.

Mr. WASHBURNE inquired what percentage of the whole cost of ves
sels it would be necessary for the government to pay to enable builders
in this country to compete with those abroad?

Mr. WESTERVELT. I am not able to answer accurately. I should say,
in sailing ships, thirty-three and a third per cent, would probably be
sufficient. Sailing ships are now constructed in Great Britain for about
fourteen pounds sterling per ton, and steamships for about twenty-three
or twenty-four pounds sterling per ton. Ship-builders in this country,
I think, would be able to construct better ships, because the materials
here are better, in respect to both wood and iron. Iron steamships, in
Great Britain, are constructed according to what is called Lloyd s speci
fications, aiid are required to conform to those specifications in order to
enable the owners to effect their insurance. A certain thickness of the
plates is required for a vessel of a certain tonnage; and, indeed, the
specifications enter into so great a variety of details that anybody who
can read can build a ship according to Lloyd s specifications. They are
based upon the supposition that all iron is of the same strength;
although the iron in this country is very much stronger than theirs, so
that a considerably less thickness of plate would give the same strength
as required by their specifications, when made of English iron. In fact,
a less thickness of iron of our superior quality makes a better ship.
Many parts of a ship are subject to a tension strain rather than a press
ing strain. If only the latter were to be guarded against, cast iron
would be very much better than wrought iron ; for you can subject it to
a great pressing strain without injury. Nor is it necessary that the iron
should be of such thickness as not to yield, to a certain extent, under
pressure. In fact, a ship which will yield a little, under a heavy sea,
may be stronger and safer than one perfectly unyielding, as all of us
know is true in the case of a bridge.

Mr. LYNCH inquired whether these composite ships usually have iron
masts and rigging!

Mr. WESTERVELT. Most of them have iron masts, and some have
Iron yards also. Iron masts are made hollow, like a stove-pipe, with a
hole at the top extending through to the bottom.

Mr. IIOL3IAN asked whether American ship-builders had not protec
tion and encouragement in the fact that a very large percentage of the
tonnage of the whole country was in the coasting trade, which, by law,
is exclusively in the hands of American builders?

Mr. WESTERVELT. Yes, sir ; and that is the only encouragement and
safety we have. But for that the entire ship-building interests in the
United States would inevitably be lost ; but even that is changing very
rapidly. Steam, is monopolizing the coastwise trade, just as it has the
foreign trade; and if we allow foreigners to compete with us in the
coastwise trade, it will not be five years before we shall not have an
American ship upon our waters. We are already losing rapidly in this
respect, under our present laws; and if foreign-built ocean ships are
permitted to have an American register, it will not be long before, hav
ing American crews, and being in fact then American ships, we shall
find them transferred to our coastwise trade. I do not think there is
any safety whatever to the commercial interests of this country in
allowing foreigners to compete with us in building ships which are to
have an American register, either for the foreign or the coastwise
trade. We must keep them off. The most of our ship-builders are
already quitting the business, and it will not be long before none will

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 173

be left, unless something is done to encourage ship-building in this
country. We are doing nothing in our own yard; we have employed
hardly five men a week during the last six months.

Mr. LYNCH inquired whether the tendency now was not to crowd our
vessels out of the foreign trade altogether, and force them into the
coastwise trade, in which there was no competition f

Mr. WESTERVELT. Yes, sir; very greatly so. The only ocean trade
left us, which is at all profitable, is the California business ; and that
only pays a few favorite ships, which have the reputation of great
speed ; and the competition has been so great among them for the past
year that freights have been taken out at ruinously low rates, at which,
of course, the vessels made ruinous voyages. I do not think a single
dollar has been made by any American ship-owner, in any voyage to
Liverpool, within the last five years. Still, we have ships that are con
tinually running in the hope of occasionally making a paying voyage,
and in the hope that something will occur to encourage them in this
trade. Our ships are being worn out, and very few are being built.
Some few are .built to the eastward, but there is very little sale for
them. They are often brought to New York and sold greatly below
cost.

Mr. WASHBURN inquired whether the ship-builders of this country
could construct steamers able to compete with the Cuuard and Inman
lines, and which at the same time would be useful as war vessels in
time of war?

Mr. WESTERVELT. I think not. I think that great speed is rather
antagonistic to the elements required for an efficient fighting vessel.

Mr. WASHBURN. Would not a great many ships, in case of a war
with Great Britain, for instance be employed to prey upon the enemy s
commerce, and would not great speed be required for this ?

Mr. WESTERVELT. Yes, sir; and also for transportation, as was the
case in the Crimean war. We built ships years ago capable of greater
speed than any other nation could build ; and we can do it now, if we
have the proper encouragement. There are plans and drawings now in
existence of a ship that will cross the Atlantic within seven days. I
think, without doubt. We are ahead of all other nations with respect
to models, and have always been. Wherever we have come into com
petition with the English in this respect we have always beaten.

Mr. W T ASHBURN asked whether war vessels could be built as well in
private ship yards as at the government yards I

Mr. WESTERVELT. I think the private yards can build better ships.
If the United States government desired to get war vessels that should
exceed in excellence those of any other country, it should call upon the
ship-builders of the country for models, plans, and drawings. When
we made our contract for the ship of war Brooklyn, almost all the naval
men said she would be a failure. But Admiral Farragut told me, in the
presence of a number of gentlemen, that he considered her the most
efficient vessel in the United States Navy. There are very few vessels
now in the navy which can properly be called good vessels. I do not
know of a single one built during the war that it would be desirable to
duplicate for our navy. There are still good vessels in the navy r how
ever, built before the war.

Mr. LYNCH inquired whether the plans and drawings to which the
witness referred as being those of fast steamers were for screw propel
lers or side-wheel boats.

Mr. WESTERVELT. Side-wheelers. The great hindrance in crossing the
Atlantic has been the great draught of water. Here our English friends

174 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

have made their great mistake in increasing their draught in propor
tion to the size of their vessels. A ship, to sail rapidly, must draw as
little water as possible. We now recognize the fact that the Atlantic
Ocean is simply a ferry, and that ships of one class are to be built
simply to take passengers and their baggage, while ships of an entirely
different class are to take the freight.

Mr. L. H. BOOLE, of the same committee, made the following statement :

There are one or two things I would like to say. In the first place, a great
deal has been said, and written, and sent to this committee in the shape of
letters and reports, by men who ought to have known and done better,
letters of condemnation of our ship-builders, holding them up to ridicule.
Now, it is true we cannot compete with the Clyde builders. Our mate
rials are high, our labor very high. But these very men to *viiom I have
referred the ship-owners, who say in their report that there has
been no improvement in ship-building in this country for the last ten
years are thus condemning the very men who in years past have fur
nished them the finest models of ships that ever floated on the ocean.
One of the difficulties we have had to contend with is that the most of
the ships we build are built by contract. The parties for whom we build
furnish a superintendent, who is constantly present to see that the ship
is built to suit their notions. This necessarily involves an increased
cost of building. If the builders were allowed to exercise their own
judgment, and their own ingenuity, they could build as good or better
ships for fifteen or twenty per cent, less money.

The ships built upon the Clyde are not to be compared with our ships
in either joinery or finish, in any respect. And yet these ship-owners,
who require us to finish our ships in the best style of joinery, and to
expend a great amount of labor upon the finish, tire ready to go abroad
and buy those cheap Clyde-built ships. I call your attention to a letter,
which is already in your possession, stating that the working men of
the Clyde have their minds so thoroughly made up upon running this
business out of this country that they are willing to submit to any re
duction of wages, and to any amount of sacrifice necessary to prevent
our competing with them. Not more than four or five shillings a day is
now paid there for skilled workmen ; and yet these men are working-
day after day, and are willing to submit to greater sacrifices in order to
compete with us in this country. It has often been remarked that, when
you go on board these English&quot; steamers, you do not find any such finish,
nor any such joinery, as you will find on our ships.

I would like to say just one word in regard to the coasting business.
Our American builders not only want to compete for the coastwise trade,
but they want to compete with the world in the building of ships. The
people abroad could not build wooden ships equal to our models, and
were, therefore, driven, from necessity, to build ships of iron. They
have not the wood they have the iron, and they can now turn out very
good iron ships from our models. The commerce upon our lakes is just
about the same as the coasting trade, and the extent of that commerce
may not be known. In the years of 1856, 1857, and 1858, it is stated
that the lake commerce amounted to about six hundred millions of dol
lars per annum. In the year 1856, the commerce which passed the St.
Clair flats, exclusive of the coasting trade of the lake, amounted to up
wards of four hundred millions of dollars. It was then something of a
novelty for a Canadian vessel to come into one of our ports. Now, you
see, a majority of the vessels in our lake ports are from Canada $ and
many of our ship-builders, formerly in Boston, have gone to Montreal
and Quebec. It has been said very often of late by the British, that

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 175

our weak spot was in the dwindling of our shipping. Only a little while
ago a committee was endeavoring to make arrangements for carrying
the freight from the Paciiic railroad over the Grand Trunk railroad to
Portland; and, in their way, they seemed to be working with success to
draw our trade away from us.

I do not think the day for wooden ships is past, by any means. Our
forests in Florida, Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Maine, contain too
large an amount of excellent ship-timber for that. The wooden clipper
ships of this country can still go abroad with good profit. The idea was
some years ago conceived by western men of building ships in the woods,
loading them with grain, and sending them abroad to be sold. We
found that the plan was feasible; and the only thing that prevented its
being carried out was, that the Wellaud Canal was not sufficient to
enable sea-going vessels to go through. Then parties from Boston and
Chicago undertook to see if something could not be done for the enlarge
ment of that canal. But they met with no encouragement from the
Canadian authorities. Now, when the success of the enterprise would
be for their benefit, they propose to enlarge the Welland Canal so as to
enable them to build wooden ships, and send them abroad, as ice formerly
proposed to do.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether the ship-building interests of Canada
were more prosperous than on this side of the line.

Mr. BOOLE. Yes, sir. Within the last three years that business has
been very prosperous in Canada. I was not long since in a Canadian
ship yard, in which six or seven vessels for the upper lakes were being
built j and the price paid to the workmen was from sixty to seventy
cents a day, in silver. This industry has been rapidly progressing,
within the last two or three years, at Quebec, Montreal, and Three Ittvers;
and many of the men now employed there were formerly employed in
Boston and other points in the United States. A few years ago you
could tell a &quot; Kanuck&quot; vessel as far as you could see it ; now, they have
so improved in their construction that you cannot tell one until you get
on board though our vessels are still superior to theirs, wiien you ex
amine them closely.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether an allowance equal to a drawback on
the materials used, in spite of our higher rates of wages, would enable
American ship-builders to compete with foreigners.

Mr. BOOLE. I think it would, if the law was so positive that ship
builders could be assured it would not soon be repealed. My judgment,
after a very close calculation, is, that there is about thirty per cent, dif
ference in the cost of building here and abroad. I think that if the
government would pay to the ship-builders one-third the costs, in the
shape of bounty, or whatever you choose to call it, it would enable thein
to compete with foreign ship-builders.

Another difficulty is, the higher rate of interest upon capital in this
country than abroad. But if the business were rendered permanent,
1 think our ship-builders would be ready to enter vigorously into the
competition. Formerly, ship carpenters commanded a higher rate of
wages than those employed in building houses, &c. We then paid them
five dollars a day, while they now command but three, or three and a half.
House carpenters have the advantage, that houses cannot be built abroad
and brought here, as railroads cannot be built abroad and brought here ;
while ships can be built abroad and brought here. Formerly, appren
tices were glad to work for nothing, or at very low wages, in order to
learn the art of ship-building, knowing that as a journeyman he could
make good wages at that business ; now there are no apprentices em-

176 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ployed in our yards. I have four boys, and I would rather they would
go into almost anything else than into a ship-yard although I would
be proud to bring them up in that business, if it could be established
upon a basis such that ship-builders could live.

An English gentleman, who came to this country some years ago,
could uot undorstand how it was that we could send our lake and river
steamers through the water at the rate of twenty miles an hour. He
traveled up the Hudson, and from Buffalo to Cleveland, at that rate ;
but such boats are not now in existence. The tonnage of American
vessels on the lakes is decreasing rapidly, while that of Canadian vessels
is increasing as rapidly.

Iron vessels, so far, have not succeeded on the lakes as grain carriers.

Mr. HOLMAN inquired whether wooden vessels could not be built in
this country as cheaply as in Canada.

Mr. BOOLE. No, sir; at the breaking out of the war we were getting
the finest quality of timber at twelve or fifteen dollars a thousand, in
the West. So large a quantity was then called for to be taken down the
river to repair forts, and for other purposes connected with the war,
that the price went up to twenty-eight or thirty dollars a thousand; and
uow it is about twenty or twenty-two dollars a thousand. We of course
can get all the lumber we want in this country; but in Canada labor is
so lo\v that they make it into ships cheaper. There is a difference in
the amount of labor a Canadian and an American will do ; still, two Cana
dians will do more work than one American, although they together
receive about the same pay as the American . In Canada no duty is
paid on any article entering into the construction of a vessel, if the
builder imports it himself. Very little copper is used in Canadian-built
vessels, and in other respects they are built different from ours ; they
are built almost altogether of straight timber. Again, there are under
writers, who have gotten up specifications for ship-building, as the
Lloyds have in England; and the builders are required to conform to
these specifications in order to effect insurance.

I think it has been estimated in this country that the duties paid on
a thousand-ton iron ship amount to about eleven or twelve thousand
dollars ; that is, about eleven or twelve dollars a ton. Vessels can now
be built in Canada at a cost about forty per cent, less than in this coun
try. We used to estimate an A No. 1 vessel at about a dollar a bushel ;
that is, a vessel carrying sixteen thousand bushels of grain would cost
about sixteen thousand dollars ; but now, I think the cost in this coun
try is about one dollar and seventy-five cents per bushel ; while Canada
builders are able to construct their vessels lower than ever before.

Mr. W^ELLS inquired what proportion of the war vessels were built at
private yards during the war.

Mr. WESTERVELT. I cannot answer that question with accuracy.
The double-enders were built at private yards ; and the first batch of
gunboats, and several monitors ; also a number of cutters ; but what
proportion of the whole I am unable to say.

WASHINGTON, December 1C, 18G9.

Committee met. Present: The chairman, and Messrs. Calkin and
Holman.

Mr. JOHN EOACH proprietor of the Morgan Iron Works, New York,
appeared, and made a statement to the committee. He said that he had
been connected with the iron business for thirty-five years ; and had
also been engaged in building all parts of ships of every kind, from the
smallest to the largest.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 177

Immediately after the late civil war, he gave the matter a great deal
of consideration.

He had made up his mind, from the prospects which he saw ahead,
and from the cost of building ships in America, that something must bo
done; and had therefore sent some of the most competent persons con
nected with ship-building in New York, and some competent engineers,
to Europe, procuring for them letters of introduction from the Secretary
of State, which gained for them admission into all the dock-yards of
England and France, and other countries where ship-building was carried
on to any extent. He sent them at his own expense, in order that they
might furnish him with information in regard to ship-building, and as
to the superiority of iron ships over wooden ones. By this means he
had probably acquired more information in detail upon this subject than
was possessed by any one man in England or this country.

The instructions which he had given those persons were to obtain, not
newspaper information, but practical information.

He had made up his mind that, sooner or later, Congress would dis
cover, and would act upon the discovery, that no nation could be truly
and permanently great which had to depend upon another nation for
its ships, particularly when itself possessed abundant resources for build
ing ships.

But aware that no man would have any right to come to Congress
and ask for protective legislation unless he had first adopted every means
in his power to protect himself, he had determined to spend a quarter
of a million of dollars in perfecting machinery.

The consequence was that his alone, out of ten large marine-engine
shops which had been in operation in the city of New York before the
war, had been able to survive the present state of affairs. He had thus
far been able to keep his shops open without sinking capital.

By a personal investigation of the matter, going around to different
establishments, he had ascertained that the number of men engaged in
the construction of ships, and in the various trades connected therewith,
before the war, was about twenty thousand, besides about two thousand
young men then engaged in learning the business.

To-day, out of the ten marine-engine shops that were in existence
in New York at the commencement of the war, his was the only one
remaining in existence. Some of them had been turned into small mills,
some of them into stables. The ship-yards had all been closed except
one, which was engaged in building a coasting vessel. He had no doubt
that a similar state of things existed in other parts of the country.

The question was asked, whether all this had been brought about
because the carrying trade was diminished ?

He thought not ; on the contrary, he believed that the carrying trade
had increased. He had found out, by personal examination within the
last year, that there were one hundred and nineteen iron steamships
plying between the ports of America and of Great Britain. Of that num
ber, one hundred and ten were running to the port of New York, with
an aggregate tonnage of 311,600 tons. But of all these, with the excep
tion of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company s steamers, of which two a
month ran from New York, there was not a single steamship in the great
commercial city of America, engaged in the foreign trade, carrying the
American flag.

The lust one that had crossed the ocean was the steamship Fulton,
and he had token her, last week, for a debt, for the purpose of breaking
her up.

And this was the present condition of American commerce.
12,N I

178 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

He had no doubt tliat a great pressure would be brought to bear upon
Congress in regard to the introduction of foreign ships. But he was
prepared to meet that question, and to show that such a policy was not
consistent with the welfare of the United States.

In the one hundred and nineteen ships to which he had alluded, there
was a capital of eighty millions of dollars invested. The greater portion
of the earnings of these ships came from the carrying of American mails,
American passengers, and American commerce.

Upon a close calculation, the repairs of all these ships, embracing
their huUs, furniture and machinery, would amount to about nine millions
of dollars per annum. Of that sum there was not one hundred thousand
dollars per annum spent in this country, although the greater portion
of the earnings of these ships was collected from citizens of the United
States. They bring with them their own boats, their own putty, their
own red lead, and everything connected with the repairing of a ship,
and have those repairs done by their own crews ; and it is only in case
that general repairs are needed that they call upon the New York engine
shops for a little aid. Here is an item of eight millions of dollars, for
repairs alone, turned away from this country and sent abroad.

America had lost her commerce ; and what had she obtained in ex
change for it ?

Simply the right for* a few men to charge nine dollars per ton, in gold,
on the importation of pig iron !

Pig iron was the basis of all other metals connected with the making
and repairing of ships. There had been a revolution in ship-building,
and iron was the material from which they were now built. The high
cost of iron, produced by the tariff upon it, was one of the principal dif
ficulties that our commerce had to contend with.

It might be said that Americans had protection in the coasting trade ;
but he could show the committee that that amounted to nothing.

There was probably no man in America who had more at stake in this
matter than himself. He had a million of dollars in property dependent
upon the building of ships, and, so far as he was concerned, he did not
care how soon the coasting trade was thrown open to foreigners.

The men engaged in the coasting trade can now scarcely live and pay
their bills. On account of the high duty on the materials used, it now
costs fifty per cent, more to repair ships in America than in other
countries, and on this account, and from the fact that this country is
now so intersected and cut up by railroads, the coasting trade by sea is,
to a large extent, done away with. Even the New Orleans trade is
disappearing, because vessels are sent down there from England to carry
the cotton to Europe. The Mobile trade is also passing away; so is the
Baltimore trade. Foreign steamers frequent these ports, and thus this
coasting trade of which so much has been said, after all, does not
amount to anything.

There had been three propositions before the committee in regard to
the mode of relief of American commerce. The first of these, as he under
stood it, was to permit Americans to go abroad and buy ships. The men
who had suggested this idea were mostly men who had come to this
country since American commerce had been transferred to England;
who had opened shops in New York and were doing a foreign trade.
He thought there were enough ships now to carry the trade. The trouble
was, they belong in the wrong direction they are owned by men over
the water. If this privilege were granted, he regarded it as being nothing
more nor less than permitting the one hundred and nineteen steamers
now plying in the port of New York to do so under the American flag.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 179

They would be owned abroad, in order to avoid American taxation, but
their business would be transacted on this side.

A gentleman from the New York Chamber of Commerce called upon
him a few weeks since and inquired what objection there could be to
having ships built on the other side of the water. In reply, he asked
the gentleman the simple question what he wanted to accomplish by
buying ships abroad? The gentleman answered, &quot;Nothing more than
to bring commerce back to where it was before the war.&quot; He, Mr. Eoach,
flien asked the gentleman, &quot;Do you know where it was before the war .*
With what portion of commerce would you be satisfied?&quot; The gentle
man replied, &quot; Nothing less than we then had, which was nearly one- third
the entire commerce o? the world.&quot; If this were to be undertaken, and
if it were attempted to be brought about by buying ships to replace those
which carried the American commerce before the war, it would require
an expenditure of one hundred and fifty millions of dollars; and this
money would be paid to England, the only great ship-building country
in the world; and the effect would be to increase the pric.e of ships at
least twenty per cent. Besides, by so doing, all the American ship-yards
and founderies would be closed, and the materials of American mines
would remain unused. Again, everybody will recollect the difficulties
experienced during the war from the want of ships ; and American ship
yards and engine-shops were in a much better condition at the breaking
out of the war than they are now. Yet it was found that when the
government called upon private establishments, and gave them contracts
for building ships and engines, the work that should have been done in
one year was not done in four years. The ship-yards and founderies were
not prepared to do the work. Had the American founderies and ship
yards and machine-shops been in the efficient condition in which such
establishments then were and now are in Great Britain, lie actually
believed that the rebellion could have been put down at half the expense,
if not in half the time, it really was.

Congress was much excited regarding the depredations committed by
the Alabama. The Alabama was only one ship let loose upon American
commerce ; but here were to-day, coming into the harbor of New York,
a hundred and twenty ships, each one of them more formidable and of
greater speed than the Alabama, built by English builders, owned by
English merchants, and to some extent under the supervision of Eng
lish naval officers ; so that, while now engaged in the peaceful pursuits
of commerce, in forty-eight hours they could be converted into most
effective ships of war.

If any one should inquire what American ship-builders were to give
in return for the favors they asked, he would reply that one of these
days the Navy Department would be asking Congress for an appropria
tion of fifty or sixty millions of dollars for the purpose of making a
more efficient navy ; and a very large proportion of that amount might
be saved by encouraging American merchants in time of peace to build
say a hundred steamers. The hundred and twenty English steamers
noV carrying our commerce were double the tonnage of the whole Ameri
can navy. This fact he stated from authentic information ; it was no
loose and careless statement. And they were ready to be set at work at
any time and for any purpose for which Great Britain might want to use
them.

Again, if America were to close up her ship-yards and marine engine
shops, and depend upon Great Britain to build her ships, she would be
in the most helpless condition conceivable. The day is not far distant
when it will concern the men who have capital invested in the prairies of

180 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

the West, and the cotton plantations of the South, as much as the mer
chants of New York, to take an interest in and to protect the commerce
of America. The people of the United States should be in a position
to take that advantage of English commerce, in case of a war between
England and France, that England took of American commerce when
the United States were at war. The island of Great Britain is of no
greater extent than the State of New York or Pennsylvania $ and if her
commerce were taken from her, what would be left of her ? She would
become one of the most helpless nations on the face of the earth. He,
Mr. Eoach, could not understand why nine dollars a ton duty should be
paid on pig-iron, or why there should be any duty at all upon it. Ameri
can iron and American engine-shops are as much American manufactures
and were as essential to the prosperity of the nation as American rolling
mills or other property ; and yet American ship-yards and American
engine-shops have no protection at all. The iron ore can be taken from
the mines, and with ordinary, uneducated labor can be converted into
pig-iron in forty-eight hours ; but no nation would ever know the value
of her ship-builders and mechanics of that class until she needed skilled
workmen. The material is easily obtained; but it is of very little use
without skilled workmen to work it. With the ship-yards and marine
engine shops closed, and with these men, who had spent their lifetime
in learning and becoming skillful in these trades, gone into other pur
suits, it would be impossible to educate workmen in their stead. There
would be as much possibility of educating children in the sciences with
the school-houses locked up and the school-teachers gone away.

The CHAIRMAN. What remedies do you propose?

Mr. EOACH. In view of these one hundred and twenty steamers now
engaged in carrying our commerce, I have looked at the matter in this
light : What would be considered a healthy growth of American com
merce ? I think that the annual production of twenty such ships would
be a healthy growth. They would cost from twelve to fifteen millions
of dollars. In five years that would cause an outlay of, say one hundred
million of dollars, which would seem to me to be a very simple and easy
burden for this country to carry. My idea is that Congress should settle
upon a percentage to be given the ship-builders, by way of bounty ; not
letting it go into the hands of speculators or mail contractors, but pro
viding that, on every vessel built for the foreign trade, a certain amount
should be allowed to the party building the ship. I think that at present
twenty per cent, would be about a fair allowance. That percentage of
twenty million dollars, which is my estimate of what would be a healthy
growth of American commerce, annually, would be four million dollars.
Can no way be found to distribute that four million dollars per annum
over other interests that will not feel it, and thus help revive a most
important interest that is utterly crushed? By helping to build ships,
instead of sending one hundred and fifty millions of dollars abroad to
buy ships, you develope your own iron mines, you give employment to
your own workmen, you stimulate your own manufacturing interests.

The question may be asked, what is the country going to get back for
this outlay ? I answer, we would save you almost that much in the
service which these vessels would be to your navy.

The CHAIRMAN. How would you apply your idea more in detail ? In
what shape should the money be given?

Mr. EOACH. In the shape of a percentage to every merchant, or other
person, who should build a ship for the foreign trade ; so much per ton
upon the tonnage of the vessel as registered in the custom-house.

The CHAIRMAN. If a certain amount, equal to the duties paid on the

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 181

materials entering into the construction of the vessel, were remitted,
would there then be a demand for vessels to be built here f

Mr. KOACH. I think so. I make this statement upon accurate infor
mation as to the comparative cost of ship-building here and abroad.
Whenever you resume specie payments, and as the tariff is gradually
reduced, the amount necessary to be paid by government to put Ameri
can ship-builders on an equal footing with foreign ones will gradually
decrease, until the building of ships will cost the government nothing.

I saw a statement recently that our government was scarcely able to
procure sailors 5 and that reminded me of what a gentleman remarked
to me the other day. Said he, &quot; Mr. Roach, if I wanted to destroy New York
by a fleet of ships, I do not know but that I would have to get English
men to do it; they know our channel now much better than we do our
selves. 7

Mr. HOLMAN. During the last twenty years has not the tonnage
employed in domestic commerce been equal to at least fifty per cent, of
the entire tonnage of the country, and is not at this time the tonnage
engaged in the domestic trade equal to seventy per cent, of the whole?

Mr. ROACH. Our domestic tonnage has increased, but you will find
that it will largely decrease. Previous to the completion of the Pacific
railroad, the Pacific Mail Steamship Company sent out four ships per
month from New York, and the North American Steamship Company
three ships; in all seven ships a month. Now there are but two ships
engaged in that trade, instead of seven; and it would hardly be fair to
expect that our coasting tonnage would keep on increasing in the future
as it has increased in the past, because our railroads, intersecting the
country everywhere, have cut into that trade to a very great extent.
The New Orleans trade is not more than half what it formerly was.
There used to be three or four large lines of steamers plying between
New York and New Orleans. Now there are five English lines between
New Orleans and England, and four English lines to Baltimore.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you think that allowing the American ship-builder
a drawback, or rebate of the duties and taxes, external and internal, on
the materials entering into the construction of ships, would be sufficient
to revive ship-building?

Mr. ROACH. I think there is no possible doubt of it. I am speaking
from accurate information, when I tell you that things are not represent
ed to you by the other side in their true light, because in every move
that we make in Congress, we are striking at the seventy or eighty mil
lions of capital invested in those one hundred and twenty steamships
plying to New York; and it is a death-struggle whether the one hundred
and fifty millions of dollars that are to be invested in American steam
ships, shall be expended in this country, or on the Clyde. I have been
trying to get this very information, which I have placed before you, pub
lished in the New York press , but I could not do it. There is now on
the one side, the interests of the broken down ship-builders, and broken
down merchants of America, applying to Congress for relief; and there is
on the other side, this capital of seventy or eighty millions of dollars con
centrated in opposition. We have the facilities for ship-building in
America. Our sliip builders and our engine-builders, amid all their dis
couragements, have not been idle. Tney have been closely watching the
movement and the progress of the trade on the other side. And we can
go to work to-day and build a faster ship than England can, and that
will carry one-third more cargo, while it consumes no more fuel.

Mr. HOLMAN. I see that your mind favors the idea of the government
paying to the ship-builder a bounty equivalent to the taxes imposed up-

182 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

on tlie materials ; that is, equivalent to the taxes which would be impos
ed upon the materials, providing they were imported, Now, if instead of
paying to the ship-builder a bounty, which would be equal to perhaps
thirty per cent, the policy were to be resorted to of returning to him all
the duties on the articles entering into the construction of the ship,
what would the effect be $

Mr. EOACH. I did not come here to ask a bounty. I came here to
tell you that, while all other articles of American produce are protected
to a great extent, there is no protection for American ships. If Con
gress will take off all the duties from American iron, reducing it to tho
price of foreign iron, then we are prepared to compete with foreign ship
builders. The labor question is misstated. We are prepared to meet*
that difficulty, and to ask no further legislation on the subject.

Mr. HOLMAN. You think, then, that a rebate of the taxes would be a
sufficient encouragement to ship-building 1

Mr. EOACH. Yes, sir; if we could avail ourselves of the benefits of it-
But there is a practical difficulty in the way, right here. Iron has come
to supersede wood in ship-building. The ships of the future will be
built of iron. There is a class of iron manufactured, and imported, and
converted into general use all over the civilized world ; it is from the
thickness of four inches to the thickness of a wire ; but only about one-
tenth of the iron we use in the building of a ship, is this imported iron;
so that by the rebate of duties we would get no relief except to the ex
tent of about one-tenth of the materials used. The question may arise,
why not import the whole of the iron used in the ship 1? Simply because
that would involve almost or quite three times the capital required to
carry on the business, and when a man conducts his business upon such
a plan that it requires three times the capital that ought to be re
quired, he cannot conduct that business successfully. For instance, if a
man makes a contract with me to build a ship, in agreeing upon the
terms of payment, I say to him, the first payment is to be made when
the keel and the first tier of plates connected with it are laid; and the
second payment when the next tier of plates is laid; and so on dividing
the payment into ten distinct parts. Now, if I am obliged to import
my materials, I must make my drawings, and send them to Scotland,
and import all those tons of iron at once, and pay for them ; which will
require a Branch larger capital than it would otherwise have been neces
sary for me to use. Besides, it is impossible for one ship-builder to com
pete with another, when the one is obliged to bring so heavy a material
as iron from a distance of three thousand miles, and across the ocean.
The freight on iron is a good deal more than it was some years ago,
when it was transported in sailing-vessels; it is now transported in
steamers. Some is yet transported in sailing-vessels; but the pig-iron,
transported in steamers, is to-day worth in New York two dollars per
ton more than that transported in sailing-vessels. A great proportion
of all the pig-iron sold in New York is sold to consumers &quot; to arrive.&quot;
The purchaser can tell to a day when a steamer will arrive with his
iron on board, and make his arrangements accordingly ; but he cannot
tell within weeks or even months the time when a sailing-vessel will
arrive.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is there much pig-iron imported into this country ?
Mr. EOACH. Very little, in comparison with what has been imported.

Mr. HOLMAN. And this duty of nine dollars per ton in gold, is an
obstacle right in the way of that importation ?

Mr. EOACH. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLMAN. Would not the policy of allowing a rebate to the ship-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 183

builders of the duties on the materials entering into the construction of
a ship, have the effect to bring down the cost of iron in this country 1 ?
In other words, would not the American dealers be compelled to reduce
the price of their iron, in order to prevent ship-builders from going
abroad for it ?

Mr. ROACH. I think it would have that effect. I think the ship-build
ers themselves would become the manufacturers of iron for their own
ships. If such relief is given as will enable us to build ships, I will guar
antee to put a rolling-mill in my ship-yard, and then I will be prepared
to say to a man without regard to Peimsylvanian or other monopolies,
&quot;. I will build you a ship for so much.&quot;

When gold was at 140, I could buy foreign pig-iron at a small price
over what I could buy American iron for. To-day I can buy Scotch
iron for seven dollars a ton less than I can buy American iron ; the dif
ference being in the premium on gold. I am really of the opinion that
this difference in currency is used as a cloak for the advance of all com
modities ; for I find that nothing has Sympathized with gold in propor
tion to the reduction of the

WASHINGTON, D. C., December 21, 1869.

The committee met, all the members present.

Admiral PORTER appeared before the committee and made the follow
ing statement in reply to interrogatories : He said that the European
governments had taken away entirely the American commerce on the
Atlantic, and that we had now no steamships in the foreign trade, except
one or two running to Brazil. If the United States possessed the steam
ships plying between New York and Europe, the government would have
a better navy than it ever had. There was not a ship in the American
Navy that could compare with the best ships on the English and French
lines in point of speed, stability, or for carrying guns. The ship that
would carry merchandise would carry guns. All those vessels could be
fitted with masts in a very short time and rigged completely. They
could keep the ocean three years without bulling a pound of coal. This
remark applied to the European screw-ships, of which he thought there
were now sixty-five engaged in the New York trade, while the United
States had not one. All the American mails were now carried in foreign
steamships, which realized a very heavy profit from carrying the mails,
particularly the French steamer^s. Each of those vessels carried from
thirty to forty thousand letters a trip, and, as the French postage was
double the English rate, it could be seen what a heavy profit they real
ized.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to say that a class of vessels can
be built for commercial purpose that can be readily converted into ves
sels of war ?

Admiral PORTER. Yes, sir 5 nearly every ship that was used during
the war was a merchant ship. He went on to say that this diversion of
the trade was driving from the American service all its naval engineers.
The foreign vessels were all run by foreign engineers 5 there were not
many American engineers on board of them.

When the rebellion broke out, all the American ships that were en
gaged in the European trade got such heavy profits from the government
that they were at once absorbed in the navy. If the United States had
possessed half the number of steamships now engaged in the European
trade with New York, he did not think that the rebels would ever have
got a bale of cotton from a southern port, and that the rebels would
have had to submit long before they did. The American Navy at

184 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

present was made up of tugs and old converted ships. It possessed ten
or twelve or fourteen vessels that were planned to suit Isherwood-s ma-
chinery, and at a cost which nobody knew. There had been $480,000,000
expended by the navy during the war, and he thought that $280,000,000
of that sum had been expended in the steam department, yet the navy
had not much to show for it. Those ships, designed and built for Isher-
wood, were lying in navy-yards entirely useless. The department was
trying to convert one of them into something, but it did not know
whether it would succeed or not. It had been found necessary to take
out half of her engines to make room for the people to live on board of
her, and for the coal necessary to be carried. She was so filled with
machinery and boilers that there was no place in her to carry coal or men.
He referred to the Wampanoag. When that vessel went on the trial
trip and came back into port, she had to send her crew on board the
New Hampshire receiving ship, because she had no place to put them.
There were twelve or fourteen of those vessels in the navy, and they
were practically of no use. The navy also possessed about thirty tugs,
the largest of them about three hundred and fifty tons. Two of them
had been sent to sea the other day to take care of the iron-clad Dicta
tor, going to Key West, and they had got into a gale of wind, and she
had to take care of them ; and these were two of the best of them.
Then the navy had also a lot of little vessels, not inaptly described as
canal-boats ; vessels of five hundred tons. He believed that thirty ships
such as the Pereire, on the French line, would make a better navy than
the United States possessed to-day. There were a great many iron-clads
on the navy list, but twenty-six of them had been condemned as being unfit
for anything, except for old iron, and no one would buy them for that.
There were about thirty good vessels in the navy altogether, fit for war
purposes, and these were wooden vessels, and about ten monitors.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to say that if we had, at the com
mencement of our late war, thirty such vessels as you speak of the best
European steamers they would have been as efficient as was our
entire navy. .*

Admiral PORTER. Twice as efficient; I say that without any hesita
tion. The ships that we had could catch nothing. We never had a
vessel that could run down a blockade-runner during the whole war,
except the Vanderbilt and two others. Whenever we caught blockaders it
was either with one of those fast tugs-5-vessels of fifty or sixty tons or
by the machinery of the blockade-runner breaking down, or by her getting
into a fog and being surrounded by four or five of our vessels, when she
would surrender rather than be fired at. I do not think that during
the war we caught 30 vessels by fair running; that I am quite satisfied
of. Any one of those vessels on the European lines can run away from
anything we have got in our navy, and can run them out of sight in seven
hours, and that is not saying a great deal. The iron-clads that we have
are for home defense. They cannot go to sea. We send them to sea
now and again, because we have nothing else to send, but they all require
two or three vessels to go with them, in case they should break down or
get out of coal. They are therefore of no use, except for harbor defense.
In case of war with a foreign nation, such as Great Britain or France,
our great power would be in cutting up their commerce. Great Britain
could not stand a war six months with a fleet of vessels that we would
send out after her commerce. They would break her up root and branch,
and that kind of warfare would be more apt to bring about peace than
fighting with iron-clads or heavy war vessels. The Alabama and another
confederate vessel destroyed one hundred and eighty -six American ves-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 185

sels, amounting, I think, with cargoes, to about seventy millions of dol
lars. Now, if two vessels could do that, imagine what 200 could do.
I think that one screw-propeller, which would use sail power, and when
necessary put on steam, to chase or to be chased, would do more harm to
a foreign enemy than all our iron-clads put together. We have other
means of defending our coast, by torpedo-boats, obstructions, &c. But
we want a good many fleet cruisers. Great Britain subsidizes all her for
eign steamships. The profits of the Ctiuard line amount to twenty-two
per cent, a year. I think that Great Britain has about three thousand
steamships altogether, and, I suppose, that there must be at least
three hundred of them subsidized.

Mr. CALKIN. You spoke about the decrease of American engineers,
how is it in regard to captains and officers in the mercantile marine?

Admiral PORTER. They would constitute a force which we would be
very glad to draw upon in case of emergency, as we did in the last war.
Our naval force is very small, a mere nucleus. Every naval officer in
time of war becomes an instructor. Tliat was part of his occupation in the
last war. Most of our officers were volunteers from the merchant service 5
hardy, brave fellows, but without education as to the duties of vessels
of war, which it requires a pretty long time to learn. But in a war with
a foreign nation we could not have a better class of men for the purpose
of sending home prizes, or doing other subordinate duty. I am sorry to
say, however, that the best class of men in our mercantile marine are
fast disappearing. When we had sailing-vessels across the Atlantic,
our packets were the most superior vessels in the world, and I do not
think that even the best naval officers were better men than the captains
of those ships. They were the best class of merchant seamen in the
world. They are all disappearing. There is no field for them. They
do not command steamships, and have no opportunity of displaying what
they are, or of learning anything. I think that on that account it would
be very advantageous for us to have a better system. All our good sea
men have left our service and have gone into the service of foreign com
panies, almost losing their identity, and hardly knowing that they have
got a flag. They have sailed so long with the English, the French, the
Germans, and the Dutch, that they hardly fraternize with their own
countrymen.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be the effect of going abroad to buy
ships, instead of building them here?

Admiral PORTER. The first effect would be a very big political con
troversy.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean, what would be its effect upon the character
of our mercantile marine and of our navy in time of war I

Admiral PORTER. If we were to go into that business altogether, it
would break up the ship-building in this country, and that would be very
impolitic. Our policy is to keep up our ship-building interests. There
are only one or two ships on the stocks in New York now, and I have
seen one hundred and fifty of them at a time.

Mr. CALKIN. There is only one ship on the stocks in New York.

Admiral PORTER. I do not think there is one at all in Boston. I was
down the coast last summer, from Portland through the different cities,
examining navy-yards and dry-docks and ship-yards, and I do not recol
lect seeing any more than that one ship building anywhere. That is a
very sad picture.

Mr. CALKIN. There are one or two iron ships building at Wilmington,
Delaware.

Admiral PORTER. Yes, and at this time they ought to be building a

186 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

hundred ships for the home-trade. The only vessels that pay now are
the old rat-traps that we sell out of the navy at a very low price, and on
which profit may be made. As to making the profit that the European
steamships make, they do not begin to do that anywhere in this country.
To put our people in a fair position for the foreign trade, I think we
ought to allow them to buy ships abroad to the extent of about twelve
ships for the European trade, and twelve for the China trade, and then
shut up on that business, and allow our own ship-builders drawbacks on
all the articles used in the ship-building, iron, copper, cordage? hemp, and
labor. The high duties not only affect the merchant service, but affect
the navy. Every piece of iron that we use in the navy we have to pay
duty on, because the American iron is charged for exactly the same as
the English would cost with the duty on, and this takes away one-third
of the appropriations of the navy. The department has, therefore, to
ask for larger appropriations, as one-third of the money that Congress
appropriates for the navy, goes off in duties.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that you think it will be very
injurious to all the interests of our merchant marine, and to our means
of defense in time of war, to depend upon foreigners for our ships?

Admiral PORTER. I think so. That would not do. But I say I would
like to see enough of ships allowed to be bought on the Clyde, under
proper naval inspection, to enable us at once to compete with Europe. I
am quite satisfied that, if we had that privilege, we would drive just so
many foreign ships from the ocean. We can beat them all in running
ships and taking care of passengers. Every American crossing the
ocean likes to travel under his own flag, instead of with foreigners-
Then again, all Americans like to glorify on the 4th of July, and they
find it very difficult to do that on board of a foreign ship. We have, I
suppose, 30,000 Americans travelling back and forward every year for
pleasure, and these 30,000 people are worth considering. I do not think,
however, that it would be a good thing to have indiscriminate pur
chasing of vessels abroad. I think it should be under the control of
Congress. If we had, it would destroy American ship-building forever.
1 think the other plan is preferable, to let the ship-builders have a very
liberal drawback, and I think that with that they could build ships for
pretty much what they did before the war.

Mr. MORRELL. Could it not be done by calculating the cost of duties
and making an allowance to cover it of so much per ton?

Admiral PORTER. Yes 5 there would be no trouble about that. It is
very easy to arrive at the cost of a ship. You can arrive at it within
twenty dollars. When we build a ship of war, we can tell within twenty
dollars what it costs, for every pound is weighed, and every foot of timber
is measured.

Mr. MORRELL. In case it should be deemed wise to make an appro
priation for building such vessels, would you. have them built in the
navy-yards or in private yards ?

Admiral PORTER. I would have them built in private yards. I would
not have them mixed up at all with navy-yards. They would cost more
in the navy yards, because there would be a great deal better work put
in them. They cannot build a bad ship in the navy-yards, they do not
know how.

Mr. WASHBURN. If drawbacks were allowed on all materials entered
into the construction of ships, could we build vessels as cheap as they
build them on the Clyde?

Admiral PORTER. No, sir 5 labor here costs double what it costs on
the Clyde.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 187

Mr. WASHBURN. Then, if we cannot build as cheap, we cannot run
steamships without subsidies.

Admiral PORTER. Not at all ; I do not think that possible.

Mr. WA3HBURN. How much subsidy do you suppose should be given
to steamships?

Admiral PORTER. I would give them all the letter pos *ige.

Mr. WASHBURN. Would any one undertake to build and run a line of
steamships for that?

Admiral PORTER. Yes, I think so. I think they ought not to have
a dime beyond that. I have spent four years myself in running
merchant steamships. I ran for three years to Chagres, and I car
ried a ship round the world, without any. subsidy at all. Before the
rebellion, I took the Golden Age to Australia, and there were in that
time twelve vessels running between Sidney and Melbourne. In six
months I ran every ship of them off. The last trip I made I carried
seven hundred passengers, while the London, the best ship they had,
carried only nineteen ; the Golden Age was run by American officers
who took trouble to please the passengers.- In that way I know exactly
how it pays to carry letters. We carried from London, at the time I
left, forty-two thousand letters, the cheapest of them twenty cents, and
many of them a dollar. The postage all went into the hands of the
British government, and we received, I think, only about two thousand
dollars for carrying the whole concern.

The CHAIRMAN. Has England any system of naval reserves in her
merchant marine?

Admiral PORTER. Yes; a very large system. Every man of the
British navy is amenable to a certain law, by which he is obliged to serve
in case of war. England has in her merchant service a large reserve ot
men, who are always obliged to be ready to present themselves at a
moment s notice. She can raise eighty thousand seamen at a very short
time. They are in the merchant marine in the time of peace, and the
moment they are called upon in the time of war, they are obliged to go.
They are conscripted without any bounty at all.

The CHAIRMAN. So that she has a very much larger contingent naval
force than her naval force proper&quot;?

Admiral PORTER. Yes. Her naval reserve, which she can get
within two weeks, amounts to twenty thousand men. Her merchant
marine is far superior to ours. In the first place, no man will be shipped
in the English merchant marine unless he can show an honorable dis
charge from the last vessel he left. They get good pay, and are better
taken care of than our sailors. They are&quot; getting the same class of men
in their service that we used to have. Their steamships are kept up
exactly on the same principle as a vessel of war; their officers are
uniformed the same as the officers of the navy, and they are all under
naval regulations. Within the last ten years Great Britain has made
the most wonderful strides in that direction.

Mr. HOLMAN. What is your opinion as to the extent to which iron will
enter into the construction of ships hereafter?

Admiral PORTER. I think that the steamers that cross the ocean
should not be built of anything else but iron. I think that if we can
get these drawbacks you will find iron ships going up everywhere, and
that no wooden ones will be built. The life of a wooden ship is only
ten or twelve years, at the most. tVe have an old iron ship at Norfolk
that was introduced in the navy in 1846. She was a failure. She was got
up by some officer who did not understand exactly what he was about.

188 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Her hull is as good to-day as the day slie was built, but she is of no use
at all as a sea-going vessel.

Mr. HOLM AN. What will probably be the policy of the government in
regard to building ships for war purposes hereafter ?

Admiral PORTER. We will probably build clippers of wood, but not
steamers. Steam takes away all life from a wooden vessel. At present
we do not allow our ships of war to use steam at all. They are ordered
to take tugs Avhen they are going to sea, and they make their voyages
under sail. The engine is put away, and, except in great emergencies,
they are not allowed to burn coal. The result is that they come back
with the engines in perfect order, and the hull not injured by heat.
Under that arrangement, wooden ships will last for years. We have
now at the Naval Academy a wooden ship, the Constitution, that
was built in 1796, and she is as good as the day she was built; and we
have also the Macedonian, lying alongside of her, built by the British,
in 1810 or 12. She is a teak-built ship, and she is as good as the day
she was built.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know anything about the composite ships,
built of iron frames and wooden planking I

Admiral PORTER. They do not last at all. Wood and iron do not go
together at sea. There is always an acid in the wood, and in a short
time that acid eats a big hole in the iron. If you are going to build an
iron ship, the best way is to build it of all iron, except the decks.

Mr. HOLMAN. You spoke of there being thirty good ships in our navy ;
are they all wooden ones ?

Admiral PORTER. Yes, sir; they are all wooden. We have no iron
sailing-vessels..

Mr. HOLMAN. What will be the policy of the government hereafter in
building vessels intended for general war purposes?

Admiral PORTRR. The policy will be to build two classes of vessels ;
one of iron vessels for harbor defense, and one class for going to sea.
That policy we have never tried yet. The European governments
have made mistakes in regard to building iron war-vessels. They
tried everything, and have failed so far as making a perfect vessel of
war, and the prospects are now that we will go to work and take advant
age of all their mistakes. When the English do use wood, they use the
teak wood. They get it from China at a very heavy expense, and an
English ship will cost three times as much as any ship we ever build.
Their last ships, built all of iron, cost some five or six hundred thousand
pounds sterling.

Mr. HOLMAN. All the commercial powers, including England, France,
and Russia, not only experiment with iron sea- vessels, but have them in
the service ?

Admiral PORTER. Yes; they use them altogether; they very seldom
use anything else. There is only one objection to an iron vessel ; that
is, that she fouls her bottom so much. The English have overcome that
in a great measure, I think, by making a planking under her and cop
pering that.

Mr. HOLMAN. What would be the effect of a policy of this kind. First,
to permit only American built ships to be used in the domestic trade ;
secondly, to allow American ship-builders a drawback on materials used ;
and, thirdly, to allow Americans to purchase ships abroad, with a tax
on such foreign ships of, say fifteen per cent.

Admiral PORTER. The difficulty would be first in the labor. The
labor is much more expensive here than it is abroad, and there would
be that much in favor of a foreign ship-builder. Labor in England

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 189

averages one dollar and a half a day, and here it averages three dollars.
If the American ship-builder gets a drawback on all the materials, you
put him at once on an equality with the English ship-builder, except in
regard to labor.

The CHAIRMAN. Is not our labor more efficient ?

Admiral PORTER. No, sir ; we do not build as good engines here as
they do in England.

Mr. HOLMAN. Looking at this question as one of national concern in
respect of employing merchant vessels for war purposes; how far would
the allowing this policy of purchasing vessels abroad by American citi
zens contribute to that object, in case of war?

Admiral PORTER. It would contribute very greatly. As I said before,
if we had had thirty, or forty such vessels as are now trading t& New
York, during the war, every port in rebeldom would have been closed,
not a bale of cotton would have got out, nor would anything have got in.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is there any other nation that adopts such an exclusive
policy as we have adopted heretofore with reference to giving registry
to foreign vessels ?

Admiral PORTER. I do not think that any nation does. All other
nations are more liberal. Our policy has been always to encourage ship
building. The result has been that we have built the finest ships in the
world. Until latterly, I have not seen any ships to compare with them.

Mr. HOLMAN. Has not the policy of using iron instead of wood pro
duced a revolution in ship-building?

Admiral PORTER. It has in England, because iron there is so much
cheaper than wood. If they could get wood as cheap as we can, they
would use it.

Mr. HOLMAN. Do you think that the building of wooden vessels in
this country will be continued?

Admiral PORTER. Yes; except steamers. We get white oak, and red
oak, and hackmatack, and locust cheaply. It is only when we come to
live oak timber that it is found expensive ; but this other timber is very
much cheaper than iron.

Mr. HOLMAN. Can we successfully compete with other nations in the
commerce of the world except with steamships fl

Admiral PORTER. Yes; under the fostering care of the government.
We could, if the government would look out for the mercantile interests
of the country, as the governments of Great Britain and France do. Ten
years ago France had comparatively no commerce, and she has now got
a commerce of two and a half millions of tons. I remember well that
it was very seldom you could see a large French ship. Now you find
French commerce all over the world. Ten years ago a Frenchman could
not run a steamship; he did not know anything about it. We always
associated a Frenchman aboard a ship as a &quot; sea-sick Frenchman,&quot; arid as
not fit to be trusted with a passenger ship. But now the French Mes-
sagerie line has run all the British lines off where it is in competition
with it. The French have started a line to Australia, and are now pre
pared to start a line from California to China, which will run our Pacific
mail steamship line right off.

Mr. HOLMAN. Are the French ships most built in France, or are they
purchased abroad&quot;?

Admiral PORTER. All the French steamships that are running here
are purchased in England. The French government allows every latitude
in that way, and is encouraging its commerce without reference to ship
building.

190 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Mr. HOLMAN. And the French government is paying heavier subsidies
than the English?

Admiral PORTER. Yes; the French exact higher rates of postage.
The Postmaster General here has not been able to make a satisfactory
arrangement with the French government for the reduction of postage.
The French claim not only half of the postage on this side, but half on
the other side; and they charge double the amount of postage that is
charged by any other nation, and thus they make foreigners pay their
subsidies.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is not the largest portion of our tonnage employed in
the domestic trade?

Admiral PORTER. Yes, sir. Our tonnage is now very much less than
it use d to be. We were nearly up to Great Britain in amount of tonnage,
but we have lost nearly a million of tons.

Mr. HOLMAN. If we cannot adopt some mode by which the building
of ships in Jhis country may be encouraged, is it not then a simple
question of whether the foreign commerce of the country shall be car
ried on altogether in foreign bottoms, or whether American citizens shall
be permitted to purchase vessels abroad and put them under the Amer
ican flag ?

Admiral PORTER. As the general thing, perhaps, the latter would be
a good plan; but I myself should not favor a rule that would allow that
thing to be universal. While getting possession of the ocean again we
must still protect ship building.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is not that an alternative ? Unless we can adopt a
policy that will revive the ship-building interest, is it not a question of
whether the foreign commerce of the country shall be carried on in for
eign vessels, or carried on in vessels built abroad and owned by Ameri
can citizens, run under the American flag ?

Admiral PORTER. As a matter of course. The first object is to in
crease the commerce of the country, because upon commerce depends
the paying oif the national debt, and every additional steamer that is
put on adds so much more to our commerce.

Mr. HOLMAN. So that we have an object in increasing our commerce,
apart from, and without reference to, ship-building ?

Admiral PORTER. Yes; of course.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe that there is any difficulty in renew
ing our commerce as fast as is required by building our ships at home ?

Admiral PORTER. No ; provided you hold out an inducement for peo
ple to build, have drawbacks, and allow for labor.

The CHAIRMAN. Can our commerce be renewed within a reasonable
time, and as fast as is required, if inducements are held out to ship
builders ?

Admiral PORTER. Yes ; with the exception that I have mentioned.
We are now at that point that I think we should allow a certain num
ber of vessels to be purchased abroad for the purpose of supplying our
immediate wants. They would amount to about twelve.

Mr. MORRELL. Cannot these vessels be built in this country and put
upon the lines almost as quickly as they can be procured abroad ?

Admiral PORTER. No ; they cannot begin to do it here, unless you allow
them drawbacks, and drawbacks on labor.

Mr. MORRELL. By allowing drawbacks, would it not be better, instead
of buying -so many vessels abroad, to encourage the building of them
in this country, and could you not get vessels built here to answer every
purpose ?

Admiral PORTER. They have greater facilities abroad. The great

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 191

machine shop of this country is bound to be on the banks of the Dela
ware, at Chester, Pennsylvania, and at Wilmington, Delaware. I ain
personally interested, for I own a large piece of water front in Chester,
where they are getting up these machine shops ; but I must say, not
withstanding, that 1 do not think they can build steamships here as
they can in- England. They would make a failure at first, if they
attempted to rush the thing through. But, if you go to work and give
these people the right of purchasing 12 or 14 ships to start upon, and
then give the builders of this country drawbacks, and let them go to
work, I think that, in the course of three or four years, we would be
able to compete with Great Britain.

Mr. WASHBURN. Suppose we should agree to grant a drawback to
everybody who would build ships in this country ; suppose we should
say to the people of Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston, and New York,
&quot; Go to work and establish lines of steamers, to leave twice or three
times a week for instance, to leave Boston on Monday, New York on
&quot;Wednesday, and Philadelphia on Saturday and you shall have the
mails, - would capitalists organize and establish steamship lines?

Admiral PORTER. I think so.

Mr. WASHBURN. Then how long would it take to get steamships for
the purpose in this country ?

Admiral PORTER. Two or three years. You cannot do it in any less.
You cannot begin to show in less than three years. It takes a long time
to build the engines, and these ships have to be large vessels.

Mr. WASHBURN. Could you not lend them some of your engines out
of the navy ?

Admiral PORTER. They would not have them. The most that we
have been offered for four ships that cost the government nearly a mil
lion, is one hundred thousand dollars each ; and I do not think the
people who offered it were in earnest then.

Mr. CALKIN. Supposing that we should subsidize lines from Balti
more, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston, and that an American
steamer left New York on Monday, w r ith a foreign steamer leaving on
Tuesday, and a Philadelphia steamer leaving on Wednesday, would you
say that the New York merchant should not be allowed to send his let
ters by the steamer leaving on Tuesday f

Admiral PORTER. No, he could send them as he liked.

Mr. CALKIN. That is where the rub comes in about allowing mail
money. We cannot secure the full mails for American ships.

Admiral PORTER. The merchant has to be governed by circumstances.
The thing will work some day in the same way in favor of the Amer
ican ships when we drive off foreign vessels, there must be a beginning
and a tussle for the prize.

Mr. WASHBURN. The swiftest ships will take the mails?

Admiral PORTER. Yes; they are the ones that will take the mails.

Mr. CALKIN. You cannot build ships to beat these foreign propellers ?

Admiral PORTER. You cannot build ships to do as well as they do
now; but offer bounty and you will see a difference.

Mr. CALKIN. I know that gentlemen say they can make better time
with side- wheel steamers.

Admiral PORTER. I do not believe that. Sometimes it is not so much
in the ship as in the captain. It is the bold running that does the work.
Put an American captain upon one of those steamships, and in from
nine to twelve months he will beat the foreign vessels every trip.

Mr. CALKIN. You made a statement that the mail money would be a
sufficient subsidy for steamship lines ?

192 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Admiral PORTER. I did not say that it would be a sufficient subsidy,
but I said that they would be satisfied with it, and would commence
with it.

Mr. CALKIN. Why could not the American steamship lines compete
with the foreigners before the war?

Admiral PORTER. Because I think the American lines ran the wrong
class of vessels. I knew the Collins line very well, and I know that
they could not run a day in competition with the present line of steam
ships. They burned an immense quantity of coal ; they were fitted out
and fitted up in the most sumptuous manner; they had large crews, a
large number of officers and a large number of engineers, for they had
most powerful engines. They were run at the full speed, and the com
pany had not enough ships on the line to enable them to have proper
relays, so that they began to deteriorate very rapidly, and they ran them
out in a very short time. They had very large buildings in !New York,
a great many officers, and a great many people connected with them.
All these had to be paid. Then there were a great many dead-heads ;
so that I used to be astonished how they kept running at all. I think
that I could have carried on the business at one-third the amount that
it cost to carry it on. Everybody had a chance at these steamships.

Mr. CALKIN. You mean to say distinctly that the American steam
ship lines before the war were badly managed ?

Admiral PORTER. I think they were.

Mr. CALKIN. And then also the subsidy to the Collins s line was with
drawn ?

Admiral PORTER. Yes.

Mr. CALKIN. You also remember the man who was most prominent in
the withdrawing of that subsidy J

Admiral PORTER. I do not.

Mr. CALKIN. Mr. Vanderbilt did more to break up the American line
to Europe than any other man.

Mr. MORRILL. Can you tell us the comparative cost of running side-
wheel steamers and screw steamers.

Admiral PORTER. The cost is very much less with propellers. If you
have a fair wind, or a wind abeam, and have enough of it, you need not
use your steam scarcely.

Mr. MORRELL. They are run with much greater economy ?

Admiral PORTER. Very much greater; and then they have very much
more storage room. I know they say there are some places where they
can run a side-wheel steamer cheaper than a propeller ; but I doubt it.
That is from San Francisco to China. A gentleman was trying to con
vince me of that the other day.

Mr. JUDD. If the government should enter upon this system of sub
sidies, how would it affect naval estimates I

Admiral PORTER. It would save the government millions of dollars
in case of war, because I do not want better ships than those steamships
are ; and then they are kept in order all the time. It is to the interest
of the owners to keep them in perfect order. There is not a ship run
ning on those lines that is not put into thorough order whenever she
comes into port. We can take such ships, run bulkheads across them,
and fit them for sea as privateers, in a week.

Mr. JUDD. And the Navy Department, if the system were entered
upon, would not, as a rule, need to be constructing additional vessels ?

Admiral PORTER. We would have to construct a certain number.
My purpose is to keep the navy down to one hundred and eighty ves
sels. It is now two hundred. During the war we had a thousand ves-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 193

sols. Eight hundred of that thousand were merchant ships that had been
bought by the department. We built very few good ones. The British gov
ernment has a contract with these subsidized lines under which it can take
the ships for government purposes when it needs them. I never had an
idea what the British steam commerce was until 1 went up the Balaklava,
during the Crimean war, just before the fall of Sebastopol; and I sup
pose that there were at that time in the different ports about there,
three or four hundred of the most magnificent steamships, taken at a
moment s notice. by the government, and on which the government had
not to pay a dollar of repairs. I went over in one of them, an ordinary
ship, and she went at the rate of 14 miles an hour.

The CHAIRMAN. You spoke of the failures that w^ere made in con
structing vessels for the navy when the war broke out. Is not that
inevitable after a long period of peace, from depending entirely upon the
Naval Department for constructing war vessels, and would not that be
obviated by providing for the supervision of the building of mercantile
vessels by a naval officer ?

Admiral PORTER. The government would have no right to do that,
except in cases Avhere it gave contracts on subsidies. Not only that,
but there are just as clever constructors in the merchant marine as in
the navy. Some of the best constructors in the world are those who had
charge of our merchant marine.

The CHAIRMAN. The navy, of course, is only brought into use in time
of war, which occurs at long intervals, while the merchant marine is in
constant use, and is consequently brought to greater perfection. The point
I want to get at is this whether by the government pursuing the same
policy which the English government pursues in respect to its merchant
marine, having it under its supervision, and having the vessels con
structed under the supervision of naval officers, that would not con
tribute greater efficiency to the navy.

Admiral PORTER. No doubt of that. But we could not carry that
out with the whole merchant marine, because it would be very dis
tasteful to merchants. Many ships must be built for carrying mer
chandise.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean only as applied to such number of vessels as
would be wanted to make an efficient navy.

Admiral PORTER. It ought to be done in regard to subsidized vessels,
but not to the whole merchant marine. Merchants would not be at all
pleased to have such interference. Sailing-vessels, for instance, have
to be built for carrying purposes, and are entirely unfit for war pur
poses ; and some classes of steamers have also to be built for carrying
purposes that would be entirely useless as vessels of war. Therefore,
as to those classes of vessels, merchants would not consider it a favor
for the government to interfere with their building. A naval officer
would have his ideas which would be entirely different from those of
the constructor. The naval officer would have an eye to the carrying of
guns and to speed, while the merchant would have an eye simply to the
quantity of cargo the vessel could carry.

The CHAIRMAN. I am only speaking of this policy so far as it would
give us an efficient navy at the least cost to the government j so that
the government could always have a navy at hand.

Admiral PORTER. The ships that would be employed by the govern
ment under contract for carrying the mails are the only ones as to which
you could put such a law into operation with effect.

The CHAIRMAN. Has Franco good facilities for ship-building ?

Admiral PORTER. Yes, sir ; their commerce is increasing very rapidly.
13 N i

194 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

They build very handsome, beautiful wooden ships. They build iron
ships, too. They have very fine machine shops in France. All their
naval vessels (and their navy amounts to 490,000 tons) are built at
home.

Mr. CALKIN. Have they really improved upon our models?

Admiral PORTER. Very much. There are no models for men-of-war
equal to the French models. The French ships have been always famous
as fleet sailers. The first great model of a ship ever made was made
by a Frenchman. In the old time, whenever an Englishman captured
a French frigate and put an English crew on board of her, she could
run away from the whole British fleet. They build some of the best
vessels in the world.

Mr. WASHBUEN. I understand you to say that the iron-clad ships of
England and France are failures.

Admiral PORTER. We think so. Here is the Monarch, coming to
this country with the body of George Peabody. She cannot get into
any of our ports, except Portland, Maine ; and that fact is a failure to
commence with. We are very glad to have English ships built in that
way. None of those large vessels can come into our ports, and there
fore they cannot do us any harm. They have great speed, but they
cannot fight with their guns in a sea-way. They roll thirty degrees,
whereas our monitors only roll seven degrees. Our monitors, as harbor
defenses, are a success, and other governments are coming round to the
monitor system. It is the only true principle. The Dunderberg was
the finest ram that we had, and is now the best ram the French have
in their navy.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to say that you think the most
economical and best policy would be for the government to maintain a
comparatively small navy in time of peace, and to depend upon the
merchant marine as an auxiliary force ?

Admiral PORTER. No; that would not be my policy. If I had the
money I would have a good deal larger navy, one superior to any nation.
But we have proposed the navy to be kept at one hundred and eighty
vessels, which is a very small navy for this country; but it is about as
much as the people would stand. We could not get along with a much
smaller naval force, and could add to its effectiveness by having mail
steamers properly built, which we can use in time of emergency. That
is what this country has got to do. We have not only to depend upon
merchant vessels, but upon officers in the merchant marine,* in case of
a long war, because a large portion of our people cannot be made to
understand the necessity of a great nation like ours keeping up a
respectable navy.

The CHAIRMAN. How much would the government have saved directly,
in cost, if it had had thirty or forty of the class of vessels that you speak
of, and could have brought them into use at once &quot;?

Admiral PORTER. The government would have saved thirty or forty
millions right off, because we run into a good many wild schemes in
building vessels. We cannot tell all that it would have saved. It would
have stopped the rebels from getting their supplies as they did. The
blockade runners laughed at everything we had in the shape of vessels.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that the navy cost $480,000,-
000 during the war, and that we dkl not then get an efficient navy &quot;?

Admiral PORTER. Yes; it cost us 8480,000,000.

The CHAIRMAN. Could not the half of that have been saved, if we
had had thirty or forty fast mercantile steamships ?

Admiral PORTER. They would have saved a great deal. I cannot say
how much.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 195

LETTERS FROM AMERICAN SHIP-BUILDERS AND OWNERS.

A circular letter embracing the following interrogatories, and also re
questing their views on the general subjects under investigation, was
addressed to a large number of merchants, ship-owners, and builders,
representing the navigation interests of the country:

What is the present condition of ship-building at your town as compared with the
period from 1854 to 1800 ?

What are the present average rates of wages paid to first-class mechanics on ship-
work ?

What were the average rates of same from 1854 to 1860 ?

What is the present cost per ton for building sail- vessels and of steamers t

Cost of same from 1854 to 1860 ?

What was the cost of materials for each ton from 1854 to 1860 ?

What is the cost per ton of same at the present time ?

Amount of duty op materials in a thousand-ton ship from 1854 to 1860 ; also amount
of same at the present time?

How are vessels built and owned in your town ; are builders and masters generally
owners in the vessels which they build and sail ?

Could you build vessels at the present time in competition with the foreign builder,
providing you could obtain the materials free of duty ?

To .

From the numerous replies received the committee have selected the
following, as giving a fair representation of the views entertained by
the representatives of the important interests under review :

KITTERY, MAINE, December 4, 1869.

DEAR SIR : Yours of the 25th ultimo was duly received, and the following are the
answers we give to the questions you propose :

Question. What is the present condition of ship-building at your town as compared
with the period from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. From 1854 to 1860, as for many years previous, ship-building was a steady
and lucrative business, giving employment to about all the mechanics on the river. At
present, it is in a state o f complete stagnation.

Question. What are the present average rates of wages paid to first-class mechanics
on ship-work ?

Answer. Two dollars and fifty cents per day.

Question. What are the average rates for same from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. One dollar seventy-five cents per day.

Question. What is the present cost per ton for building sail- vessels and steamers t
Cost of same from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. The present cost of building sail-vessels ready for sea is about seventy-five
dollars per ton. Steamers, exclusive of machinery, sixty-five dollars per ton. The
cost of sail- vessels from 1854 to 1860 was about fifty-eight dollars per ton.

Question. What was the cost of materials for each ton from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. About forty -one dollars per ton.

Question. What is the cost per ton for the same at the present time ?

Answer. About fifty-three dollars pei ton.

Question. Amount of duties on materials in a thousand-ton ship from 1854 to 1860 ;
also amount of same at the present time ?

Answer. The amount of duties on a thousand-ton ship from 1854 to 1860 was about
one thousand dollars ; at the present time we think it would amount to from seven to
eight thousand dollars.

Question. How are vessels built and owned in your town ; are the builders and
masters generally owners in vessels they build and sail ?

Answer. All the vessels we have built the past dozen years, have been owned by the
builder, master, merchants, and mechanics, in pieces varying from one sixty-fourth to
one-eighth. It is seldom any one owns over one-eighth.

Question. Could you build vessels at the present time in competition with the foreign
builder, providing you could obtain the materials free of duty ?

Answer. Aa we have to pay one-third of the amount we receive for tbo hull and

196 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

spars of vessels for la,bor, we could not compete with the foreign builder, even with
that materials free of the duty.
Yours truly,

NEAL, MATHEWS & BROOKS.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Washington, D. C.

EASTPORT, December 1, 1869.

DEAR SIR : Your favor of 25th ultimo received, and contents noted. In reply to your
several interrogatories, I will reply to your first, viz, What is the present condition
of ship-building at your town, as compared with the period from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. Full sixty-five per cent, less tonnage built by me.

2. What are the present average rates of wages paid to first-class mechanics on
ship work ?

Answer. Two dollars and seventy-five cents per day.

3. What are the average rates of same from 1854 to 1860 ?
Answer. One dollar and seventy-five cents per day.

4. What is the present cost per ton for building sail- vessels ?

Answer. Sixty-two dollars per ton for sail-vessels at present time. (Steamers do not
build.)

5. Answer. Cost of construction of vessels from 1854 to 1860, fifty dollars per ton.

6. In reply to your inquiry about how the vessels are built and owned, I will state that
associated owners, and generally masters, are interested.

7. In reply to your inquiry whether I could build vessels in competition with foreign
builders, providing I could obtain the material free of duty, I will state that I could,
providing of same class of vessels.

Very truly yours,

CALEB S. HUSTON.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH, Chairman.

CAPE NEDDICK, Name.

SIR : Yours of the 25th instant is received. I built a vessel in this town in 1854 for
thirty-four dollars per ton ; paid first-class carpenters two dollars per day ; ship-timber,
paid nine dollars per ton; copper, paid twenty-one cents per pound; iron, (English,)
paid sixty dollars per ton.

In I860 timber was bought for fourteen dollars per ton ; iron, one hundred and forty
dollars per ton ; copper, forty-five cents per pound ; employed first-class carpenters at
three dollars and a half and four dollars per day.

There have been but two vessels built here in this town since 1860, owing to the high
duty on material. The same class vessels could not have been built in 18GO for sixty-
five dollars per ton.

From the Piscataqua to Monsum Rivers there are five ship-building towns in the
county of York. In Kenuebunk, in 1854, there were seven large ships built : there
were two built in Wells the same year, and one in Cape Neddick ; two large ships in
the town of Kittery, in 1854. All the above-named towns are now idle, except Ken-
nebuiik, where there is one ship on the stocks. Ship merchants build and repair in
British dominions, on account of high duty on material.
Very respectfully,

JOHN BREWSTER.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Washington, D. C.

P. S. If it had not been for what work there was done in the navy yard at Ports
mouth, I do not know what the ship carpenters would have done this fall.

WISCASSET, MAINE, December 6, 1869.

DEAR SIR : As chairman of Special Committee on Navigation Interests, it is perhaps
pertinent for you to have all and any facts that bear unfavorably on the interest of
navigation, and, without further preface, would bring to your notice one of the special
restraints.

Our ship Richard III cleared at Wiscasset 28th October for Charleston, S. C., haviug
in as cargo a small amount of hay and potatoes, on ship s account, consigned to order.
It had bee-en our intention to send the ship off Charleston Bar, there to be met with
letter from it Charleston merchant by pilot-boat off the port, either to proceed south or
go into Charleston. On the 30th October, the morning on which she sailed, our inform-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 197

ation was such that we dispatched the ship direct to New Orleans, where she arrived
oil 25th November, and on entering at customs on 26th November, was lined twenty
dollars for not clearing for New Orleans. I have been a manager of ship property for
twenty-five years ; my father, for twenty-five yjcars before me. &quot; Free from illicit trade
or evasion of proper dues, it has been our only business, and we ought to know whether
we are pursuing right or not. We have often had our ships, both coastwise and for
eign, when they had no cargo to bind them to enter a particular port, seek such ports
as circumstances or convenience might bring them to, and heretofore no intimation of
fine or restriction. It is quite new to us, if such really is a rule or law, and, if of late
enactment, it calls for a change.

In your investigations of the decay of the once great American navigation interest,
it will not seem strange to you when I tell you that our own interest in ten shins, in
the general freighting business, has got reduced to two ships, or that we lack the en
ergy of former days 1 . We are as ready now as ever to bring home to our country
the pay for freighting our own exports and imports, as well as do the freighting busi
ness for any other nation that wants skillful, enterprising, courageous men, and when
we can figure a remuneration will be on hand.

Apologizing for taking up so much of your time, I remain, verv respectfully, yours,

JOSEPH TUCKER.

Hon. Jonx LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on Ncivigation, Washington.

DAMARISCOTTA, MAINE, December 1, 1869.

DEAR SIR : Tour valued favor of the 25th ultimo came to hand by due course of mail,
and contents noted.

In reply, will make answer to the inquiries as best I can from a hasty examination of
records and my own personal knowledge.

1. Ship building has fallen off a^tlris place since 1854 about nine-tenths, as you
will notice by list inclosed of vessels recorded at our custom-house in that year, show
ing over ten thousand tons, and this present year only about seven hundred tons, being
nearly a total suspension of the business.

2. Average wages, first-class workmen, this year, about $2 50 per day.

3. From 1854 to 1860 a wide range in wages was given; say average for 1854 was
$3 per day ; 1857, $1 50 and $1 75, advancing since 1857 to the present rates.

4. The cost per ton varies on larger and smaller sized vessels ; say, a bark of six
hundred tons, two decks, will cost more per ton than a ship of one thousand tons, same
materials, as the larger the vessel the less cost per ton ; think average first-class this
year about $75 per ton, fitted for sea. Soon after the close of the war, some cost as high
as $UO and $100 per ton. Steamers we have never built here.

5. A ship of seven hundred and fifty tons cost here in 1854 about $65 per ton, and in
1857 one of twelve hundred tons cost about $52 per ton ; since 1857 to date prices in
creased.

6. Cost of material per ton, cannot state from 1854 to 1860.

7. Present cost of material twenty-five per cent, more than from 1854 to 1860.

8. Cannot state amount of duties on material.

9. Builders and master s are the owners ; more so at present than formerly, when a
profit in manufacturing was realized. The outright sale of a vessel now from the
builder is a very rare occurrence, and no man can with any certainty build to sell and
realize his money back again, at the high cost. Running the chances in sailing them
is the only inducement to try and get a small return ; take the risk, and get about the
insurance.

10. Have no doubt, could material entering into the building of vessels be free of
duty, we could compete with any nation in the world, and no one thing can ever help
us more as a ship-building community.

Hoping the above may meet the most of your inquiries, I am, very truly yours,

JOSEPH DAY.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Washington, D. C.

Under date of December 28, Mr. Day writes additional facts, of which
the chief portions are here given:

In the year 1854 1 bought into a ship by previous agreement of about seven hundred
Mid fifty tons, at the bills, costing, ready for sea, some $65 per ton, being the most expen
sive year up to that time known here in building, causing many failures in our State
among builders. Freighting declined, and hardly fifty per cent, of cost could be
realized to sell a vessel that fall ; it seemed the beginning of what has since proved
a total failure in tjiat branch of business.

198 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

In the year 1857 built the ship Success, of about one thousand two hundred tons,
a thorough white oak vessel, costing, when ready for sea, about $52 per ton, being a
very cheap year to build, as you will notice in previous letters, as to workmen s wages;
other things entering into construction being in about the same proportion. Still,
business was very dull when ready for sea.

In the year 1866 built a bark of about seven hundred tons, a first-class white oak ves
sel in every respect, costing, when fitted for service, about $85 per ton. This also was a
very expensive year, and in the three vessels named, together, since they began to
run, (and they have been managed by thorough merchants, and good masters as will
average, ) after deducting expenses, insurances, wear and tear, &c., the owners all would
have been thousands of dollars better off to-day had these investments never existed.

The first cause of decline, in a measure, can be traced to the uncertainty hanging
over our national affairs between the North and the South, and the Jack of confidence in
the country as to results of the impending crisis. Our senators and representatives in
Congress were at a loss how to advise, throwing, doubt and uncertainty upon all opera
tions. After the conflict began in earnest, privateers, English influences, and other
complications, finished what was left of hope in the interest of our commerce, and I
truly believe no class of industry has had so much to contend with throughout this
long dearth of some sixteen years, with so little encouragement from any source, as
the ship-owning and building class. Sailing expenses, including insurances of the
various kinds ot risks, &c., have been so much above what the rates of freights would
warrant, these items, in connection with the high costs of construction, with other
causes before cited, have caused the whole life of navigation in this country to be
crushed out, and it now remains to be seen what can be done to repair the great waste
and depreciation of our commerce. Other nations have the start of us in every way
in amount of tonnage and in doing the carrying trade of the world.

Our government should consider well the importance of its situation as regards an
efficient merchant marine when it has realized the effects of such an arm as has here
tofore existed in our country.

It will demand the greatest encouragement evn to get the breath of life in it; but
when once more firmly established, (having the original first cause of decline now
firmly settled,) it will, as ever previous to the years above mentioned, take care of itself
as the one most important branch of our national wealth and glory.

Think no trade has called so littlo for aid or protection at any time from the govern
ment as the ship-building and ship-owning interest previous to the present emergency.

BOSTOX, November 29, 1869.

DEAR SIR : We beg leave to acknowledge receipt of your esteemed favor, 25th instant,
and are glad to have the opportunity of presenting our vieVs, and we earnestly solicit
your considerate attention. There are but two causes of the decline and depressed
condition of our commerce, viz:

First. The destruction of our vessels by the rebel cruisers during the war, and the
sale of a large number to foreign merchants, when the premium on the gold enabled our
ship-owners to realize a handsome profit.

Second. The increased cost of building, and of manning, Victualing and furnishing
the vessels. There is such a difference that we cannot successfully compete with other
nations either in building or sailing our vessels. Our own ports are full of foreigu
ships. We venture the assertion that the total commerce of the country (inland navi
gation excluded) has not paid five per cent, per annum since the war.

These, in our opinion, are the causes of the decline ; and the measures that should be
adopted by Congress to revive these interests are quite obvious to us, aud we do not
see as any difference of opinion can exist among ship-owners.

1. A remission of the duties upon all foreign materials used in the construction of
ships, whether for new vessels or repair, and when used for that purpose.

This would enable us to build or repair ships as low as any other nation. Iron ships
and steamers are built in large numbers in England, and are rapidly taking the place
of wooden vessels. They now command higher rates of freight in nearly all the ports
of the world, and especially for carrying grain and the products of the Indies. This
discrimination in the duty upon iron would enable us to build iron vessels at a cost
not greatly in excess of what can be done in Europe, whereas now the duty is equal to
prohibition.

2. In this connection, we would suggest a law granting American registers to iron
steamers aud sailing vessels when built in foreign ports, and by the payment of a tax,
say five to ten per cent, on the cost ; and for this reason, that even with a remission
of the duty, we have not the facilities for building a large number, and our experience
is limited. Such a law would benefit our commerce for the present, and until we have
had more practical experience in constructing iron vessels.

3. A drawback on duties levied upon stores and goods when purchased for con-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 199

sumption on board said vessel, and when said vessel is bound to any foreign port. And
we think it would be well to include such distant ports in our own country as San
Francisco. This Ls a law ill England. The goods have to be purchased in bond, and
do not include merchandise on which duty has already been paid.

4. Repeal of the tax of thirty dollars per ton, payable every year.

5. The repeal of some of the laws relating to American seamen. These laws, as you
are aware, were enacted during the infancy of the republic, and when our commerce
was but limited. They are entirely impracticable in the existing state of things. A
very large proportion of the seamen now shipped on board of American vessels are
foreigners, and the law requiring or authorizing our consuls to compel the payment ot
three mouths extra pay to crews in certain cases, is greatly to the disadvantage of the
ship-owner, and does not meet the expectation of the law. This law was passed, as we
understand, to provide for the support and payment of the passage home of any Ameri
can seaman who had been improperly treated on the voyage, or who should be unable
to discharge his duties by reason of disability or sickness. The class of seamen now
employed are very different in these times, and are quite unscrupulous, often incom
petent, and nearly all foreigners. The consuls are sometimes only too ready to accede
to their demands, and wo have suffered to the extent of several thousand dollars the
past few years by the payment of three months extra wages, often advanced to a whole
crew of twenty men, and that in gold, when the articles provided especially for theii
wages in United States currency. We protest against such conduct on the part of our
consuls abroad.

It is true* and we know of cases where the seamen have actually feigned sickness for
the purpose of robbing the owners of three months extra pay, and they have obtained
it. We have had proof in several instances the crews of our own vessels have formed
a conspiracy to complain to the consul on&quot; arrival of bad treatment, and thus obtain
the extra pay, and they have only been too successful.

We have lately had a case where the master shipped four seamen in a foreign port,
and the consul, by accident, neglected to give him the articles for the four men. On the
arrival of the ship at Havre, the consul compelled the payment of three months extra
pay, though the master produced the account of the consul at the port of. departure,
showing that the men in question were duly shipped, and in conformity with law. But
as he did not have the articles the law was sufficient to compel the payment.

These laws should certainly be changed, so as to meet the necessity of the times, and
you will be entitled to the hearty thanks of every ship-owner in the United States, if
you will but give this matter your attention and consideration.

We have thus at some length given our views upon the questions you name. Wo are
happy to be able to present them to you, assured, as we are, that you will give them
that consideration which their importance demands. We hope Congress will realize
the necessity of doing something early in the session for the relief of our ship-owners.
The building of ships is now nearly suspended, awaiting the action of Congress. The
argument that if we are enabled to build vessels more cheaply, that it will depreciate the
value of what vessels we now have, is too shallow to require any comment. As large
ship-owners, we prefer depreciation, if such would be the result, to utter annihilation,
which will be the case if some relief is not granted.

These views we believe to bo entirely sound.
We have the honor to remain, very respectfully, your obedient servants,

THAYER & LINCOLN.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on Navigation Interests.

Memorial.

To the honorable the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled :

The memorial of the undersigned, builders, owners, and shippers, engaged in com
merce, respectfully represents:

That the commerce of the country is prostrated; that the foreign carrying trade is
seeking other than American bottoms, and that the skilled labor in this branch of in
dustry has to look for employment from other sources.

The reasons for this state of things will be found in the fact that labor and materials
in this country are higher than in most commercial countries. The labor, because the
necessities of the government have made large taxation necessary, and the materials on
account of a high tariff. The commerce of any one nation having to compete with that
of the world in all the great markets of production, it follows that our government
must afford some relief, or else ours will continue to languish and diminish.

They therefore respectfully petition that your honorable bodies would pass a law re
mitting the duties upon articles used in the construction of vessels; and, as in duty
bound, will ever pray.

200 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

BOSTON, November 29, 1809.

MY DEAR SIR : In answer to your favor of 20th I respectfully submit a short memorial
which I drew up for circulation some mouths ago, and which I believe covers the gist of
the whole matter.

After the breaking out of the rebellion, and when several confederate pirates were
afloat, the government gave ship-owners to understand that they could not protect
their interests upon the ocean or in distant seas because they required all the available
vessels for blockade service.

This led to a transfer, or partial transfer, of many vessels to a foreign flag.

When peace was conquered an attempt was made through Congress to restore the
vessels thus transferred to their own flag, and which was refused.

The effect of that refusal was to keep quite a large tonnage of American-built and
American-owned vessels under a foreign flag, and in fact making it a necessity in the
prosecution of their business by American merchants and growing out of their owner
ship to sustain a foreign flag.

I was never satisfied myself with the debate or the decision of Congress upon this
question. I know, from personal observation, that some of the very best ship-masters
felt unwilling to continue during the rebellion in ships under the American flag, because
the government did not propose in the first instance to give them proper protection, for
the reasons herein recited; and secondly, they were liable to have their vessels burned
under them, and they landed penniless on some distant shore, to find their way home as
opportunity might offer. %

These several reasons have reduced American tonnage, and have prevented American
ship-builders from competing with those of other nations.

There has been a strong effort upon the part of British builders to magnify vessels
built of iron over those built of wood. True to their instincts, English insurers have
done all in their power to keep up the delusion.

England is a country of cheap iron. We are a country of cheap and good wood.

My own opinion, distinct from one of prejudice, is in favor of wood. If our people
ivould study these questions in the light of patriotism they could effectually, with the
proper aid &amp;lt;of government, restpre the commerce of the country to our own flag, and.
thus aid the construction of magnificent wooden ships.

I am, with great respect, your very obedient servant,

GEO. B. UPTON.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH, Chairman, $c.

BOSTON, December 22, 1869.

MY DEAR SIR : I am this morning in receipt of your kind favor of the 18th. I am in
favor of wooden ships for foreign commerce, for these simple reasons :

First. In case of stranding or severe wrecking at sea, tbay are much more easily re
paired. Of all the ports of the world, in South America, the East Indies, and China,
tew or none have the necessary tools or workmen for an extensive repair of iron vessels
while there is hardly one that cannot repair a wooden ship.

Second. A wooden ship, under the same circumstances, will bring or carry her cargo
better than an iron one. Wood is a good uon-couductor ; iron condenses. The dam
age by sweat is very great, and is one, moreover, that insurers do not cover. Iron ships,
for the reason named, are more apt to sweat the cargo than those built of wood.

Third. Wooden ships can be more safely navigated than those built of iron. I am
uware of the improvements in correcting the compass, still the fact exists and cannot
be gainsaid, that in this respect wood has an advantage over iron.

Fourth. The United States have the best and cheapest wood in the world for ship
building. At a gold basis, and with a reasonable concession of duties upon articles
which enter into the fitting and sailing, we can build wooden ships of the best class at
about thirty per cent, less rates than the Clyde can build those of iron.

For these simple reasons, I have always maintained that it was for our interest to
build and carry on our business in wooden ships. They are tools of trade. As a ques
tion of political economy, the cheapest tool which does the work well is the true one lo
procure, and although I am in favor of having and of giving encouragement to skilled
workmen in all branches of industry, iron as well as wood, I do not think the time has
arrived when we can economically use iron either alone or as a composite in ship
building.

I am, with great respect, your most obedient servant,

GEO. B. UPTON.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH, Chairman, #c.

BOSTON, December 3, 1869.

DEAR SIR : In reply to your request in letter of the 25th ultimo we think the govern
ment wrong in not taking some fair and liberal measures immediately after the war for

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 201

the increase of our mercantile marine. At this lato date wo can see no other strictly
safe and sure course to re-establish our commerce, viz :

1. Than by granting the privilege of purchasing tonnage in any part of the world;
that of foreign construction bearing an equitable duty on cost when taking the flag.

2. A drawback on all materials used in construction of vessels.

3. Outfits for vessels taken from bonded stores exempted from duty.

ours, very respectfully,

THOMAS B. WALES & CO.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on Navigation Interests.

BOSTON, December 6, 18G9.

SIR : When I received your favor of the 25th ultimo I was not in condition to attempt
an answer. Since then I have seen a copy of a long article by the Hon. E. H. Derby,
of this city, which is to appear in the coming Atlantic Magazine ; also, a pamphlet by
Captain John Codman, addressed to you ; and also the report of the commissioner of
the New York Chamber of Commerce, the writer of which,Mr. A.A. Low, is well qualified
to speak on the subject. I concur almost without reserve in these several papers, and I
think they embody the views of merchants. Only one point of peculiar interest to
me has not been touched upon, and to this I propose to confine my remarks. It had
much to do with the decadence of American commerce.

It is this: the government by force of circumstances failed to give protection to our
commerce. In a great emergency like that which came so suddenly upon us in 1861
it was quite natural, not to say necessary, for the government to turn its attention
exclusively to blockading the ports of the enemy, and leave the shipping to take care
of itself. If it could have turned its attention to protecting our foreign commerce
it would have been obliged to send out vessels wholly unfit for the purpose. The
government had not then and has not now any efficient cruising ships. The class of
vessels built during the latter part of the war (of the type of the Madawaska, Warn-
panoag, &c., known as the &quot;canoe ships,&quot; intended for great speed) are perfectly use
less as cruisers to go in search of Alabamas ; millions of dollars were wasted in their
construction, and millions may be wasted in keeping them in order to do nothing useful.
I do not hesitate to say that it would be good economy to burn every one of them
rather than to finish, repair, and employ them. I think this sweeping statement will
be found confirmed by a report of distinguished naval officers and an engineer, made
by order of the Secretary of the Navy, and probably accessible to your committee.
There are a few, very few, foir-sailiug, fair-steaming, and fairly economical ships in the
navy, as the Hartford and Brooklyn, and some that I cannot identify under their new
names. There is an intermediate class, like the Ticonderoga, Monongahela, Lacka-
wanna, and Detroit, mounting five heavy guns, and of thirteen hundred to fifteen
hundred tons, old measurement, which came much nearer to being useful cruising
ships than the &quot;canoe ships;&quot; but by reason of an incompetent jury-rig, they are, or
were, wholly unfit to make long cruises without frequent coaling.

The large class of vessels, like Colorado, Minnesota, Franklin, and Wabash, mount
ing forty guns, and averaging about thirty-six hundred tons, old measurement, are very
fine vessels for flag-ships on foreign stations in time of peace, but they are too large and
too expensive for cruising ships, and they are wholly unfit to contend with iron-clads.
As an illustration of the want of economy sometimes practiced, I would remark that I
have recently seen under repairs at this station a ship built at Philadelphia in 1864- 5 I
believe either the Shenandoah or Ticonderoga. She lias been almost entirely rebuilt,
and it would be interesting and instructive to know how much has been expended on
her. I think the most cursory observer who saw her plank oil&quot; would say that it would
have been good economy to take her to sea and sink her in preference to repairing
her.

With this sketch of the inefficiency of our navy in ships adapted to keeping the sea
for any considerable time, mostly under canvas, for the protection of our commerce
and for hitting the first hard blows at the commerce of the* enemy, it is quite apparent
that at the beginning of the war our government could not have effectually protected
our foreign commerce, and could not to-day should a -war occur. One great cause,
therefore, for the decadence of American commerce on the ocean was the want of due
protection. Another prominent cause was the want of due encouragement to private
enterprise to fit out vessels to capture the enemy s cruisers. Had any sufficient induce
ment been held out, regularly commissioned vessels would have been fitted out by
private enterprise.

The remedy for this short list of evils is very simple. It is to construct a fleet of
fast-sailing, efficient screw steamers, with full supply of canvas, such as we see under
all but our own flag, crossing the ocean in nine and ten days ships with light arma
ments, not fit to encounter iron-clads or old-style fighting ships, or to batter forts, but

202 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ships well adapted to catch the commercial ships of an enemy, and to escape from a
superior force ; and for government to grant subsidies to those who should build mail
packets fit for conversion for these purposes.

Such ships would afford valuable training schools for seamen, and to this end everv

encouragement should be given to young men to enlist on board of them. They would

afford excellent training schools for young officers, and in time of peace as well as in

time of war, would prove very valuable auxiliaries to promote and protect commerce.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

R. B. FORBES.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman, #c., Washington, D. C.

BOSTON, December 20, 18G9.

MY DEAR SIR : I am in receipt of your note of the 25th ultimo asking my opinion
on the &quot; causes of the decline and present depressed condition of the ship-building and
general navigation interests of the country, and the means of legislation necessary to
revive those interests.&quot;

My business engagements have been such as to prevent me from making an earlier
reply, and I must now give you my views briefly. But little, however, need be said, as

T J-l, * ,1_ *i Ml 1 /V* _|_ J. _ . * J.1 T _ J_ . . . J? _ - . _ ^V* _ / i 1 t

of
them, however, will appear quite plain.

Before the Avar of the rebellion, in the course of years, our commercial enterprise had
placed our country in the front rank among nations. The amount of tonnage of our
sea-going vessels was more than one-seventh part greater than that of England at the
beginning of the year 1861, and rapidly increasing. The demands of foreign commerce
had directed attention to the business of ship-building, and this branch of industry had
grown up to great importance, engaging the capital, skill, and energies of a large
number of our citizens, and resulting in securing to our ships a reputation before all
others in the world for beauty and speed. When the war of the rebellion broke out
our government was not only unprepared to protect her commerce abroad, but was,
for the *ime at least, mainly dependent upon the building establishments which had
grown up under private hands for those ships which were needed to enforce the block
ade of the rebel ports and meet the attacks of their armed vessels ; while the rebels, with
the substantial aid and comfort given by our foreign rivals, were enabled to sweep
the ocean nearly without hinderance. No vessel was safe but under a foreign flag.
Under this state of things, what with the capture and destruction of many of our ves
sels by the &quot; confederate allies,&quot; and the natural decay and loss, (amounting to about
ten per cent, annually,) the decline of our navigation interests such as we have expe
rienced was inevitable ; and it would take years of prosperity, under the most favorable
circumstances, for us to regain the position which we thus lost. But our circumstances
are not favorable.

The wants of the government during the recent war had to be met by a system of
taxation depressing to every branch of business, more or less, but especially heavy upon
that which we are now considering. It is not necessary to specify the particulars. The
builder of a ship must now pay very heavy duties and taxes upon every article used
in and upon it. The purchaser and owner will pay about seventy per cent, upon her
outfit, and thirty cents per ton annually for a license. No hopes can be entertained of
a revival of these interests under such influences. The disabilities of our present posi
tion must be removed by action of the national government.

England in 1853, and France in 1856, saw the necessity for doing something for the
encouragement of navigation among their citizens. They saw the United States taking
the lead in commercial affairs, and about to do the greater part of the carrying trade
of the world. England at once took off all duties upon everything belonging to the
building of a ship, and on all outfits taken out of bond at the time. Ship-building
was then in as depressed a condition there as it now is with us. At the time when her
mechanics struck for higher wages, she passed the neutral law, by which any one of
her citizens could build a ship wherever he might choose, and by paying one shilling
per ton, could procure her registry precisely as if she had been built at home. France
passed a similar law. In fact, we are the only maritime nation that has not done the
same. England, moreover, went further thaii this, and enacted a law whereby a for
eigner (an American for instance) might take charge of an English ship without deny
ing allegiance to his own country, and, if necessity required, he might call on either
country for protection of his rights with reference to it. The mercantile marine of a
country is one of the greatest elements of its strength. No nation can be really great
or strong without it. It seems to me that on national grounds, as well as on the plain-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 203

est principles of economy, that our government should take especial care of these
interests, on which her standing among the nations so materially depends.

The course necessary to be pursued seems to mo plainly indicated in the policy
which our great rival has pursued so successfully.

I would recommend in the interests of the ship-builder, the merchant, and the whole
country, the passage of a law remitting all duties and taxes on whatever enters into
the construction or outfit of vessels ; the enactment of such measures as will allow
one of our citizens to build, buy, or equip, in any part of the world, any vessel what
ever to be used in legitimate commerce, and to take out an American register for the
same by payment of some specific tax upon her cost or tonnage, stiy twenty-five cents
per ton. This would create a competition, not however specially injurious \o any of
our interests, but resulting in the general good. The skill, energy, and greater effi
ciency of our mechanics would be more than an oifset to the cheap labor, cheap iron,
and cheap coal of England. We should soon be building ships for the world, as wo
did from 1846 to 1859. I have myself built for England, France, Germany, Peru, and
Chili. England has taken our place now. Shall she keep it?

Next in the interests of our commerce, (as I have before had occasion to state to
another department of the government,) I should recommend to Congress such enact
ments as shall give liberty of a free exchange of all productions and commodities in
the shape of raw materials. The restrictions placed upon a free trade should be, as far
as possible and as soon as possible, removed. In a moderately fair field wo have no
cause to fear any rivals. American ship-masters and officers are, as a class, superior to
all others, and so generally acknowledged to be such that, if there is a freight to bo
had, the American will command it in preference to others.

Another recommendation I would make with regard to our steam navigation: This
is a branch of our marine of great and increasing importance, and should receive some
special encouragement. A subsidy law for United States mail steamers, so liberal in
its provisions as to secure the services of our own citizens in ,the carrying of foreign
mails, is very desirable.

I have thus hastily given my views upon the subject presented. So confident am I
of their correctness that, if I myself were the United States government, and my
pocket the treasury, I should not hesitate immediately to adopt all the provisions
which I have recommended.

I am, sir. most truly yours,

ISAAC TAYLOR.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman of Committee, Washington, D. C.

The following is from a letter of Donald McKay, ship-builder, of East
Boston :

*** * * ***

I annex a list of duties (in gold) upon various articles entering into the construction
of a new ship of one thousand tons :

Iron , 120,906 pounds $1 , 209 06

Iron spikes, 9,966 pounds 249 15

Galvanized spikes, 2,409 pounds 60 23

Castings, 14,408 pounds 216 12

Chain cables and rigging chains, 58,300 pounds 1, 457 50

Anchors, 10,700 pounds 240 75

Metal and nails for do., 20,338 pounds 711 83

Salt, 1,200 bushels 216 00

Manilla, 12,423 pounds 310 57

Hemp, 28,774 pounds 863 22

Duck for sails and house-tops, including spare sails, 7,150 yards 714 90

Clinch rings, 1,800 pounds 36 00

-Foreign white pine lumber and decking : 825 00

Foreign hackmatack knees 330 00

Copper bolts, composition, castings, paints, oils, crockery, cabin trimmings,

nails, and sundry outfits 1, 225 00

Total dutiable articles for 1,000-ton ship (gold) 8, 665 33

As a partial relief to the ship-building interest, I would suggest that Congress permit
a drawback of duties paid on materials entering into the construction of new vessels,
(which at the present date on a thousand-ton ship proves to be between eight and nine
thousand dollars, as shown above,) and this privilege is accorded to the ship-owners and

204 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ship-builders of Great Britain, enabling them to compete with all other commercial
nations, and their drawback extends to all articles of construction, equipment, and
stores used in building and fitting out of new vessels.

Interested persons can obtain from the honorable Secretary of the Treasury, for pur
poses of comparison, the registered amount of tonnage built each of the past twenty
years. There have been so few vessels built for our merchants in recent years that the
average age of American sea-going ships is over ten years, and on this account our
insurance companies meet with many losses, and yet the ship-owner now pays double
the old rate of marine insurance.

DONALD McKAY.

OFFICE OF W. H. WEBB, SHIP-BUILDER,

No. 200 Lewis Street, New York, December 29, 1869.

DEAR SIR : In the absence of Mr. W. H. Webb, who is at present in California, we
have to acknowledge your letter of the 20th instant, since receipt of which we have
consulted some of our largest insurance companies in this city on the points you raise,
that in the absence of Mr. Webb we might forward you the opinions of men in whom
he would repose confidence, leaving Mr. Webb to write you his own ideas at a little
later day, as \ve shall send your letter on to him.

These&quot; gentlemen, such as Mr. Dennis, of the Atlantic Mutual Company, Mr. Phulixion,
of the Sun Mutual Company, neither knowing the other was consulted, expresses
identically the same opinion, that they would rate the composite and the iron ship of
similar quality at same rate, insure them at same cost, take as much on the one as on
the other, and they would expect the one ship to class as long and last as long as the
other. As iron ships &quot; sweat&quot; a good deal, their conversation left us to believe that,
until that fault is got over, the composite ships would be on the whole more favorably
regarded by them.

In reply to a question put by the Treasury, asking if, in his opinion, the composite
class of vessels would succeed here, Mr. Webb replied so recently as November 3, of the
present year. &quot; Yes, without doubt ; our great command of wooden materials in this
country enabling us to compete more successfully in building this class of vessels, as
against foreign ship-building, than with those wholly built of iron.&quot;

Hoping that, until Mr. Webb is able to address you, this may be of some service, we
remain, very respectfully,

C. METZGAR,
N. M. GILLAN,
Joint Attorneys for Win. H. Webb.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH, Washington, D. C.

SAN FRANCISCO, January 10, 1870.

DEAR SIR : Your valued favor of the 20th ultimo has been forwarded to me here by
my attorneys at New York.

I can do but little more at this distance from home than indorse, which I do fully,
their reply under date of 29th ultimo, a copy of which I have before me.

At this port I learn that the English-built iron ship is quite as favorably considered
as the American-built wooden ship for shipments to Europe, but I attribute much of
this to the unfortunate fact that most of those shipments from this port, as well as from
the Atlantic ports, now are controlled by agencies of foreign houses, or foreigners
themselves established in our country.

I may add, in regard to the building of composite ships in our own country, that if
the tariff on materials used, other than wood, was removed, or an equivalent granted
in some other manner, we could succeed eventually, as against all Europe, in producing
not only a better but cheaper composite vessel ; but we need aid from the government
to enable the ship-building interest of the country to engage in this, to us. new branch
of our business, and one which requires a larger investment of capital than heretofore*
employed in the building of wooden vessels.

I am confident that composite ships can bo built in this country to advantage, and
such as would have advantages in several respects over those wholly built of iron, cer
tainly as regards comfort of passengers in hot climates, the preservation of cargoes,
as well as economy in the running, and the safety of passengers and freight when
stranded.

Trusting the above will satisfy your inquiry, I am yours, very respectfully and truly.

W. H. WEBB.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Washington, D. C.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 205

NEW YORK, 38 John st., December 4, 1869.

SIR : I take tho liberty of placing before you my views of the disadvantages tlio
American ship-builders, shipwrights, and other mechanics are at this time laboring
under, caused by tho heavy duties and taxes paid on all material used in building and
repairing vessels, and as your committee have obtained so much valuable information
on the subject of building both wooden ami iron vessels, I will not dwell on this point,
but will endeavor to more fully demonstrate the fact, that the luildiny of vessels w but
a part of the disadvantages which the mechanics of this country have to contend
with.

It is a well known fact that the lifetime of a vessel is from ten to fifteen years, and
that she has to be repaired a number of times during this period, and in many cases
the outlay for repairs is nearly equal to the first cost. For instance, a wooden vessel
has to be recaulked and remetaled every two years, and rebuilt at least on an average
every seven years. An iron vessel requires to be docked at least every six months for
the purpose of cleaning and painting. You will at once perceive that repairs on iron
vessels are not so expensive as on the wooden vessels, but at tho same time you will
observe that the iron vessel requires more careful attention and is much oftener
docked.

Another great detriment to the shipwrights, and other mechanics of this country, is
that the greater portion of tho foreign freighting business is carried on by foreigners,
and these foreign vessels will not make their repairs in this country, as a matter of
economy, on account of tho high prices of material, such as iron, and other metals,
cordage, &c., caused by the high tariff. This takes away from our dry-docks and
mechanics that employment and revenue which we did have when our American
vessels controlled foreign freighting business or tho greater portion of it. It is also a
well known fact, that there are no repairs made on these foreigners in this country,
unless they are so disabled that it is impossible for them to get home, and even then
the repairs made are only temporary. As an illustration, I will here mention the case
of the steamship City of Cork, of the Inman Line, which vessel struck on a rock
when entering the harbor of Halifax, Nova Scotia, in July, 1868, and . came to New
York and was docked in one of the docks which I built for the &quot; Erie Basin Dry -dock
and Warehouse Company.&quot; Her stern was badly damaged, but it was only tempo
rarily repaired with wood and iron to make her safe to reach Liverpool, where tho
repairs could be made thoroughly, and employment given to their own mechanics, and
also allow them to make a handsome saving over our prices. This is but one instance of
many I could name, whereby our docks and mechanics are deprived of employment on
account of great cost of material, when it is an acknowledged fact that our mechanics
can execute fifty per cent, more work in a given time than European mechanics ; still
our government gives no aid to our commercial interest, either in the way of subsidies
or special protection, to enable us to run a line of steamers, or to compete with the
foreign ship-builders, or our merchants and others interested in dry docks and mechan
ical pursuits, for the heavy duty on sheathing metal and copper drives by necessity
many of our American vessels to Europe to be remetaled, and as a natural result our
dry docks and mechanics remain idle. To give you a more clear idea of the determin
ation of foreigners not to give employment or spend any money in this country, I will
stftte the following fact : The ship Mayflower, hailing from Liverpool, arrived at Port-
laud, Maine, in August last, with a cargo of coal, and leaking so badly that it was neces
sary to keep a steam-pump going most of the time. Ho refused to make repairs there,
but sailed for Halifax, Nova Scotia, so that he could employ his own countrymen. I
think you will at once see that there is as much lost to the shipwright, dry docks
companies, and other mechanics, in repairing vessels, as there is in building. My
opinion is, if the duty is removed from all material used in the construction, repairs,
and sailing ships, within a short time, we shall as heretofore be able to compete with,
if not rival the world in building as well as sailing both wooden and iron vessels, for
we have the material and ability to do so, and trust our representatives in Congress
will give us that aid and protection which will enable us to realize our highest expec
tations.

I have the honor to remain your most obedient servant,

JAS. E. SIMPSON,
President Portland Dry Dock and Warehouse Company.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Congressional Committee on Sh ^-lttilding.

NEW YORK, January 13, 1870.

SIR : Irt reply to yonr communication of the llth instant, we would give as our
estimate of the cost of victualing and manning an American ship of 1,000 tons regis
ter, say $1,100 per month. It would bo difficult, however, to estimate the cost per 100

206 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

tons register, to apply to vessels of all sizes, as a vessel of 500 tons requires as many
officers as one of 1,500 tons, (with the exception of the third mate,) and pays nearly as
high wages. Frequently, too, vessels of the same tonnage have a difference of two or
three sailors in the number of their crews, as some are more heavily sparred than
others, and require more men to handle them.

An average crew for an eastern ship of 1,000 tons register, would cost, at the present
rates of wages, about as follows, viz :

Master, ($125 to $200, according to qualifications,) say $150

Mate, $50 ; second mate, $40 90

Cook, steward, and carpenter, each $35 105

15 sailors, each $30 450

795
Making twenty-one persons, &quot;all told.&quot; Victuals average fifty cents per day. .. 315

1,110

Some ships carry three or four boys or &quot; ordinary seamen,&quot; at one-half or two-thirds
the wages of &quot; able-bodied seamen,&quot; and ships bound on long voyages can obtain
sailors now at twenty-five dollars per month, but in the Atlantic trade the current rate
is thirty dollars per month, as above stated.

We annex memorandum of the actual cost of manning three vessels of different
sizes, now in this port, and all hailing from Maine ; and should you require any addi
tional information, we are always at your service.
Your obedient servants,

RICH. P. BUCK & CO.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Com. an Nav. Interests.

Bark of 563 tons :

Master $150

Mate 50

Second mate 35

Cook and steward, (one man for both) 40

Eight seamen, at $30 240

515
Victualing twelve persons at fifty cents per day, average 180

695

Ship of 1,308 tons :

Master $150

Mate 60

Second mate 40

Cook 35

Steward 40

Carpenter , 35

Fifteen sailors, at $30 450

810
Victuals for twenty-one 315

1,125

Ships of 1,506 tons :

Master $200

Mate CO

Second mate : 45

Third mate 35

Carpenter 40

Cook 35

Steward 35

Eighteen sailors, at $30 * 540

990
Victualing twenty-five persons 375

1.365

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 207

The master of the latter ship was formerly in one of 1,116 tons, new measurement,
and although nearly 4UU tons smaller, she required and carried the same crew as this
Dew one.

NEW YORK, January 20, 1870.

DEAR SIR : We have delayed answering your favor of the 15th instant, in order to
obtain reliable information respecting the sailing of French vessels. The only French
captain wo can find has a vessel of about 400 tons. Her crew list is as follows :

Fraiics.

Captain 400

First mate 150

Second mate 75

Cook and steward, (one person) 70

Carpenter 70

Six seamen, at 50 francs 300

Two apprentices 70

One boy 25

1, 1GO

At 5i francs per dollar in gold ................................................

Victualing per month 1,200 francs, equal ...................................... 229

Gold ............................................................ 450

Add 25 per cent, premium on gold ............................................ 1LJ

Equal in United States paper .......... . ......................... 56b

Estimate for a French ship of 1,000 tons :

Francs.

Captain ..................................................... ................ 600

Mate ......................................................................... 200

Second mate ............ .................................................... 100

Third mate .................................................................. 70

Carpenter ................................................................... 70

Cook ........................................................................ 70

Steward ..................................................................... 70

Twelve seamen .............................................................. 600

Three boys .................................................................. 100

1,880

At 5^- francs per gold dollar $358

Victuals per month, 2,000 francs .381

Gold 739

Add 25 per cent, premium on gold 185

United States currency 924

Estimate for a British ship of 1,000 tons :

& s.

Captain 16

Mate 7

Second mate 5

Third mate 3 5

Carpenter .-. 510

Cook 3 5

Steward 3 15

Twelve men, at 2 15* 33

Three boys, at 15* 2 5

79 00

At $6 currency per pound sterling, (being $4 80 gold, and 25 per cent, premium) $474
Victualing, twenty-two persons at 15 cents per day, 41 5s., equal 247

United States paper currency 721

208 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

A bark now here, hailing from Sunderland, pays the following, (she is 546 tons

Captain, 14; mate, 6 10s 20 10

Second mate, 4 10*.; carpenter, 5 10s 10

Cook, 3 5s.; steward, 3 15s 7

Eight able seamen, at 2 15*. ; and three boys, at 15s 24 5

Gl 15

At $6 United States currency per pound $370 50

Victuals, seventeen persons, at 15d. per day 191 25

. . United States currency 5G1 75

Hoping this information will reach you in season to be of service, we remain, your
obedient servants,

RICHARD P. BUCK & CO.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman, &amp;lt;fc v Washington, D. C.

P. S. Light dues are still collected by England, and we find from our vessels ac
counts that they amount to five or six pence sterling per ton in the Bristol channel.
There are other local charges of this kind on the English coast and the British posses
sions.

NEW YORK, January 13, 1870.

DEAR SIR : In reply to your note to our senior, Mr. A. A. Low, we beg to say that
our experience gives about $125 per ton per month, or $1,250 per month for vessels of
1,000 tons each for victualing and manning. For such vessels we have

Master, say 150

First mate , GO to 70

Second mate 35 to 40

Steward 40

Cook 40

Sailmaker 40

Carpenter 35

Sixteen able seamen 25

Four ordinary seamen 15

Four boys 5

Average wages, about $900 per month.

Average victualing, about $350 per month.

Very truly yours, &c.,

A. A. LOW & BRO.
JOHN LYNCH, Chairman.

AMERICAN SHIP-BUILDING.

The following letter is from a gentleman who was formerly an English
iron-master, and now in business in Philadelphia. He has a practical
knowledge of the subject upon which he writes :

From the morning papers of the 25th of October it appears that the congressional
committee appointed to investigate the cause of the decline of the mercantile navy of
the United States, and the best method of restoring prosperity to the ship-building in
terest, haveadjourtied to meet in Philadelphia on the first Thursday in December next;
that the questions before the committee were narrowed down to distinct propositions,
which will probably be recommended to Congress. These are the remission of all du
ties on materials entering into the construction of ships; the permitting foreign ships
to be purchased and admitted to American register ; and the granting of subsidies to
steamship lines ; and lastly, offering a premium for building ships in this country, by
allowing a drawback on the imported materials used.

On a subject of such national importance, and one involving such immense inter
ests, there must naturally be a great diversity of opinion, and any information that
may show the subject in a new light may, perhaps, be deemed acceptable. With this
view the following observations are thrown together to endeavor to show that it is not
the comparatively low standard of wages in Europe alone that prevents iron for ehip-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 209

building purposes being produced in this country on equal terms with that brought
from Europe.

It is chiefly the lack of organization, and the situations of the different establish
ments, that prevent ship plate-iron being cheaply produced. It is a fact beyond dis
pute, that pig-iron can be made as cheap, and coal can be obtained cheaper on the Ohio
than on the Tees, in England. Why, then, cannot iron for ship-building bo made,
and ships be built on the Ohio at the same price by ton with American iron, as at the
Atlantic ports with European iron, even if no duty is paid on it ? Simply for want of

Mie organization used in England, and the policy used in France.

* * * ** ** * * * *

The pig-iron is dear on account of the relative position of the ore, coal, and transport
f o the mills ; here again profit must bo made on the pig-iron, after the miner has made
his on the ore and coal, and the railway company made theirs on the transport; thus
everything used is to the disadvantage of the ship-builder, and vessels cannot be built
at a low price. The question is, how and when can this be altered? To this no satis
factory answer can bo given as long as ships are built ou the eastern coast of the States;
and to solve the diifieulty a new location must bo chosen, where iron-ore and coal are
found in a near proximity to a navigable river, that pig-iron can be made as cheap as
in England, and where coal can be obtained for manufacturing the same at as low a
price as it costs at works there, and where ships can be built and launched as cheap,
except the difference in the price of labor; but this difference can be compensated by
the fact of the superiority of American iron over English, which will enable vessels to
be built of lighter iron, and consequently a greater tonnage for their weight than British
built ships.

The proposition about to be made may at first appear to be impractical to those
accustomed to launch their vessels in salt water, but on considering the improvements
of the age, and the facility with which ships are now by machinery lifted out of tho
water, the proposition will show no difficulties which may not be overcome.

The best locality for building iron ships in the United States will be found to be on
the Mississippi or Ohio Rivers, above Cairo, and tho situation whose iron for building
the same can be made as cheap as in England is on the Ohio.

Here, then, in, the center of the States, iron ships can be built to any extent or bur
den, and be towed down to New Orleans, either alone or partially supported on lighters,
according to their size, and thence to New York or elsewhere to receive their engines
and full riggjng, or their engines can be sent to and fixed in New Orleans.

To carry out the foregoing suggestions it would be necessary to form a company of
the most practical men for each department, with ample capital to carry out the whole
plan.

It is the magnitude and extent of the grand rivers of this continent which enables
one to see the foregoing plans as quite practicable, although at first sight they deviate
from the old beaten track, yet on the slightest reflection by practical men, the whole
project will be accepted, as the only means that can be devised of enabling America
successfully to compete with Europe in establishing an independent mercantile navy.
Let us for an instant refer to what has lately been proposed to assist tho shipping
interest. First, the remission of duties on materials entering into the construction of
ships.

By building ships with iron from Europe the States will bo dependent, and continue
so, for its ship-building material, as no attempt would be made to produce native ma
terial on the east coast, while foreign iron could bo purchased cheaper thau it could bo
made there. Then, again, purchasing foreign ships ; this might be done at a cheaper
rate than they are now built here, but is it the policy of this country virtually to em
ploy European ship-builders in Europe to build vessels which can, by a proper syste
matic arrangement, be built as cheaply by Americans in this country ? The answers to
these questions are evident.

But other questions may be asked. Can pig-iron be made on the Ohio, and coal
worked for converting it into ship-plates at the same price as iron and coal costs in
England ? The answer is decidedly yes, and scores of places could bo pointed out on
the Ohio whero pig-iron can be made and coal delivered quite as cheap as in England,
and why this is not generally known could easily be explained, if necessary. This sub
ject is one of the greatest national importance, and should be investigated by those
who are interested in the prosperity of the country, before measures are taken which
will only partially assist in improving the condition of ship-owners, and which can
never satisfy the nation. With such enormous deposits of iron-ore and coal throughout
the country in situations most favorable for working them, is it policy to let them
remain undisturbed, and purchase ships, with gold, from other nations, or employ
capital at home in developing the resources of the country, and give employment to
thousands of its inhabitants 1

JOHN PLAYER,
3904 Walnut street, Philadelphia.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on Ship-building, &amp;lt;fc.

210 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

WILMINGTON IRON WORKS,

Wilmington, Del., January 18, 1870.

DEAR SIR : Your favor of 13th was received, and I take pleasure in replying to your
interrogatories to the best of my ability.

In the United States, where no positive practice regulates the standard of dimensions
of the parts and pieces of an iron vessel, but the whole question of strength of detail
is left to the experience and knowledge of the builder, or, more frequently, to the crude
ideas of the party for whom the ship is to bo built, it has always been the custom of
the builder to determine his price by the amount of iron and other material to be used.
Hence you will readily understand how two ships of the same tonnage may cost differ-
ent figures.

In England and France, where insurance depends upon the kind of construction, tho
builders have all fallen into one class of specifications, in which the size of the vessel
determines the proportions of each piece or part, and consequently a price per ton can
easily be given which will fit all cases.

Supposing that your inquiry relates to strictly first-class ships, 1 have to say that
the labor upon a sailing-ship of 1,000 tons, (hull and cabins only,) the material being
iron, can be done for $58,000, and that the material of all kinds can be purchased for
$42,000 to $46,000.

For a steamship of like capacity the cost would not differ materially in tho items of
labor and material, of course, exclusive of machinery.

For a screw steamship of 1,000 tons there Avould be required an engine of sixty inches
diameter and sixty inches stroke, which, with boilers of adequate capacity, with all
the details complete, would cost $48,500.

For a side-wheel ship of 1,000 tons, there would be required a lever-beam engine of
fifty-six inches diameter, ten feet stroke, which, with boilers, &c., complete, would cost
$51,000.

The masts, sails, rigging, furniture, outfit, and stores of a sailing-ship of 1,000 tons
would cost from $15,000 to $18,000.

For a steamship the figures would not materially differ ; tho diminished cost of
masts, rigging and sails would be made up nearly by the stores and fixtures for the
machinery department.

Will be pleased to further serve you if in my power.
Very truly yours,

WM. G. GIBBONS.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH, Washington, D. C.

CHICAGO, December 20, 1869.

DEAR SIR : I hereby acknowledge the receipt of your communication of tho llth
instant, requesting answers to certain interrogatories, for the use of tho committee
named.

I have carefully considered the subject alluded to, and beg leave to make the follow
ing statement in answer thereto :

The present condition of ship-building in Chicago, as compared with the period from
1854 to 1860, may be described by the word &quot; abandoned,&quot; with the exception of a few
tugs, canal-boats, dredges, and scows, built for local uses. Ship-building has been
almost entirely given up since the war. From 1854 to 1860 it was practicable to build
vessels with profit in ChicagQ, and several propellers and schooners were built during
this period.

The present average rate of wages for &quot; new work&quot; may be set at $3. I think men
could be got for less this winter, if any new vessels were to bo built. As there are no
vessels building this quotation may be more nominal than real. Tho wages on repairs,
or &quot; old work,&quot; are $3 50 for ten-hour days, and $3 for eight-hour days in winter ; and
wages on &quot; old work&quot; are always and everywhere about fifty cents a day greater than
on &quot; new work.&quot;

The average rates of wages, from 1854 to 1860, were from $2 to $2 25 per day.

The cost per ton for building the hulls of sail- vessels or steamers would be, probably,
if any were building, from $40 to $45. Tho cost of same, from 1854 to 1860, was from
$30 to $35. Tho cost per ton for the sails and rigging usually amounted to about one-
half the price of tho hulls : say, hull, two-thirds sails and outfit rigging one-third tho
whole price of vessel.

The cost of materials for each ton of hull, from 1854 to 1860, was from $8 to $10. The
coat of same per ton, at the present time, would be $12 to $15. (Tho cost of rope and
canvas is, I think, greater proportionately than formerly.)

It might be useful to state, in this connection, that about ten days labor may bo
regarded as entering into the production of one ton of the hull of lake shipping, old
measurement, upon which the foregoing approximations have been based. As tho now

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 211

measurement is about twenty-five per cent, less than in the old, in the case of lako
sail-vessels, seven and a half days may be taken when the new measurement is used.

The amount of duty on materials in a thousand-ton ship, or in each ton of a ship,
built in this port, might at first sight be deemed to depend upon the extent to which
articles of foreign growth or manufacture enter into her construction. Aud here,
where the wood and iron of the hull is of home production, and the rope, canvas,
ground tackle, or machinery, may be wholly or partially imported, it might appear
that duties had but slight influence in adding to the cost of vessels ; but, nevertheless,
it is true that duties do add to the cost of vessels in every case where it would be
cheaper to import the materials, could they be brought in free of duty. American
phip-builders had become rivals with those of England lor the construction of the fleets
of the world. Vessels had become articles of export to all nations, as well as carriers
of commerce between them all ; and duties laid upon the materials entering into their
construction was of the nature of a bounty paid to our rival from whom many of those
materials must come. It is not material, therefore, to enter upon the determination of
the precise degree of impolicy embodied in this most impolitic measure of levying
duties upon so grand an article of export as the noble ship that careers over the course
of ocean like a thing of life.

Vessels, when built in Chicago, are generally constructed on contract for the owners.
The masters are frequently part owners.

I think vessels could be built in this port for Chicago vessel-owners, in competition
with provincial builders, providing we could obtain the materials free of duty, and this
for the following reasons : First, the cost of materials being the same to our builders
in the provincial port, the expense of transportation only need be added to place them
under the hands of our builders in their own yards. Against this disadvantage we
should offset the cost and inconvenience of owners going to a foreign port to superin
tend a vessel s construction. Second, the greater skill of American mechanics may be
fairly placed against the lesser wages of the Canadian workman, with the controlling
advantage in our favor, that the style of model and workmanship of our bumlers better
suits the taste of our owners than the style of provincial builders.

But were the vessels to be imported free of duty rather than the materials, then
would our builders and workmen go to the provinces and build all our vessels ; and,
thereafter, a ship-yard on the American shore of the lakes would be a place non-existent,
with its mysteries forgotten and unknown to our people, and the history of its achieve
ments become as obscure and mythical as that of the &quot; mound builders&quot; anciently in
habiting this region of country.

I am, sir, yours respectfully,

WILEY M. EGAN.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on Navigation Intwcsts.

BUFFALO, December 15, 1869.

DEAR SIR : Yours of 8th instant is at hand, and contents noted, and in reply would
Bay:

1st The ship-building is very much less now than it was from 1854 to I860. 2d.
The present average wages, $3 50 to $3 90 per day. In 1854 to 18GO, they were $2 to
$2 25 per day. The cost, what we call old measurement, was in 1854 to 18(30, $28 to $30
per ton; at present it is $48 to $50 per ton. Flitch, which is for frames, six
inches, in 1854 to 1860 cost $12 to $14 ; now costs $22 to $26 per thousand. Ship plank,
1854 to 1860, cost $16 to $20 per thousand ; now costs 8oO to $50 per thousand. Duty on

material in 1854 to 1860 and at present time . There is now a government tax of

about $300 on small class vessels, when the keel is first laid on blocks, which there
was not in 1854 or 1860.

At present, as in 1854 to 1860, ship-builders, in some cases, own interest in vessels ;
also, some masters. It costs so much at present to build, that the most of them are
not able to own ships or vessels.

An 800-ton vessel all ready for sea, at present would cost about $60,000 to $65,000.
In 1854 to 1860, same vessel would cost $38,000 to $40,000. We could build as cheap
or cheaper than any other nation, with same price of material and dut y off, as I think
our mechanics do more work in a day than they do in Canada. Our people are more
active. The several trade unions in United States are a drawback on all ship and
othor work, as wo are troubled with strikes. Our vessels here on the lakes are fur
superior to the Canada vessels in model, strength, and speed. The reason is, I think,
that we have better ship draughtsmen. In 1853, I built a steam propeller at a cost of
$36,000, and the same propeller would now cost about $75,000 to $80,000. I have sailed
from a boy until 1855, and owned and do now own steam and sail vessels, and I find
that for the last seven or eight years vessels have not made any money, and would bo
pleased to sell out if I could do so. Find that rope is twenty-five cents per pound, and

212 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

in 1854 to 18GO it cost ten cents per pound, and most everything else in same propor
tion. We now pay government tax of thirty cents per ton, which all goes to enhance
cost of vessels. Thirty cents per ton is called tonnage dues, and income on profits
&quot;when there is any.

Hoping the above will be what you inquired for, I am, yours respectfully.

FRANK PEREW.

JOHN LYNCH, Esq.

CUSTOM-HOUSE, COLLECTOR S OFFICE,

Portsmouth, N. H., January 4, 1870.

SIR : From information received fro m communication with prominent ship-builders
of this place, I am enabled to reply to the questions submitted in your letter of tho
15th ultimo, as follows, viz :

Question 1. What is the present condition of ship-building at your town, as compared
witti the period from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. During the period from 1854 to 1880, there were in our city five ship-yards
in successful operation, producing ships equal if not superior to any ailoat. At that,
time, ship-building was the business of our city. At the present time there are only two
yards in operation, and these are doing a very small business, comparatively.

Question 2. What are the present average-rates of wages paid to first-class mechanics
on ship-work ?

Answer. The present rate of &quot;wages to first-class mechanics on ship-work is $2 50 per
day working hours from sunrise to sunset in the winter season, and in the summer
ten hours for a day.

Question 3. What were the average rates of same from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. The average rate from 1854 to 1860 was 2 per day.

Question 4. What is the present cost per ton for building sail-vessels, and of
steamers ?

Answer. Tho present cost per ton for building sailing-vessels, ready for sea, averages
$75 ; for steamers, exclusive of machinery, $65.

Question 5. Cost of same, from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. The average cost of sailing-vessels, from 1854 to 1860, was about $60 per
ton ; steamers, $55 per ton.

Question 6. What was the cost of materials for each ton, from 1854 to 1860 ?

Answer. Average cost of materials for sailing-vessels, about $42 per ton ; steam
ers, $40.

Question 7. What is the cost per ton of the same, at the present time?

Answer. Cost of materials for sailing-vessels, about $52 per ton ; steamers, $45.

Question 8. Amount of duty on materials in a thousand-ton ship, from 1854 to
1860?

Answer. About twelve hundred dollars.

Question 9. Also, amount of the same at the present time ?

Answer. Seven thousand five hundred dollars.

Question 10. How are vessels built and owned in your town ? Are builders and
masters generally owners in the vessels which they build and sail ?

Answer. Vessels are owned mostly in small shares, by the builders, masters, and men
of small means.

Question 11. Could you build vessels at the present time in competition with the for
eign or provincial builder, providing you could obtain the materials free of duty ?

Answer. If ship -building materials were free from duty, we could, in a very short
period, compete with foreign builders.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

JOHN H. BAILEY, Collector.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH, M. C.,

Chairman Congressional Committee, &amp;lt;fc.

AUGUSTA, MAINE, February 5, 1870.

DEAR SIR: The ship-building business in our place has dwindled down next to
nothing. In 1854, there were twelve ships built on one river, (Damaris cotta,) besides
other smaller vessels; 1869, one barque ; and this year, one schooner, is all that I know of.

No one thinks of building now, except he has money equal to the cost, and knows
no other business. Wages for common carpenters are about $2 per day of ten hours.
In 1854, wages were about $3 25, but the money panic in the fall of 1854/55, and 56,
carried wages down to about $1 75.

The present cost of an A 1 ship, (sail,) 1,000 tons, fitted for sea, is about $75 per ton.
Cost of the same 1854, thence up to I860, was about $50 to $55 per ton.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 2 1 3

I have no experience in steamers. The cost for the materials in a ship of 1,000 tons,
at present time, is about $52 50 per tou ; 1854 to I860, about $36 per ton.

The duties on a thousand ton ship, at present time, are about $8 or $9 per ton.

Duties on same in 1854 to 1860, about $1 to $1 50 per ton. The above estimates aro
on old measure. Vessels are generally owned and sailed by the builders and masters in
this vicinity.

Maine is suffering in this respect more than any other State, as you will see by the
Secretary of the Treasury s report. But, as things now are, our yards are deserted;
carpenters migrating West, and the men otherwise becoming depleted, so that in case
of a sudden war, wo shall neither have skilled ship-caipeiiters nor American sailors.
In the last rebellion we could not have existed as a nation without either class of
those men.

We then had well-trained sailors ready to defend the flag. Our government cannot
make so profitable an investment for its defense, as to foster its navigation by grant
ing a drawback for duties, and remit the taxes on ships. It would be absurd to permit
foreign-built ships to bo imported free, and sailed under the American ilag, while our
ship-builders are being starved by high duties and taxation.
Respectfully,

B. D. METCALF.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH.

LETTERS FEOM UNITED STATES CONSULS.

The following inquiries were addressed, through the State Depart
ment, to consuls of the United States at various ports of Europe and
British America, in regard to

Cost in Great Britain of wooden ships per ton, fitted for sea, in 1860.

Same of iron ships per ton, fitted for sea, in 1860.

Same of wooden steamers per ton, fitted for sea, in I860*

Same of iron steamers per ton, fitted for sea, in 1860.

Also, cost of each of foregoing at present time.

Rates of wages of first-class mechanics on ship- work, in London, on the Clyde, and
on the Tyne, in 1860 ; rates of same at present time.

Rates of insurance in wooden and iron steamships, sailing vessels, &c.; regulations
adopted by English government to ascertain amount of material entering into the con
struction of ships, which are exempt from duty ; advantages possessed by ship-owners
and builders in Great Britain over the same class in the United States ; character of
officers and crews of English vessels, as compared with those of the United States.

What measures are adopted to secure efficiency in the merchant marine service, and
in what regard is the merchant marine held as a means of national defense ?

The amount of subsidies paid to various lines of English ocean steamers ?

To what extent aro iron superseding wopden vessels 1

Mr. Morse to Mr. Fish.

No. 47.] UNITED STATES CONSULATE GENERAL,

London, December 27, 1869.

SIR : In reply to a series of questions in reference to the interests of the American
mercantile marine, addressed to me, through the Department of State, by Hon. John
Lynch, &quot; Chairman of the Committee on American Navigation Interests,&quot; and Nathan
Sargent, esq., commissioner of customs, I have the honor to submit the following re
port. Without answering in their order each interrogatory, I have, for the economy
of time and space, endeavored to respond to the inquiries of each gentleman as fully
as my means of information will permit.

In answer to the request for an &quot; English Report,&quot; showing the number, tonnage,
&c., of the vessels belonging to the British navy, and which of them were built in
private, and which in government dock-yards, I forward herewith the official quarterly
&quot; Navy List&quot; for October. This &quot; Navy List &quot; is published by authority of the govern
ment, and gives many particulars as to the character and efficiency of all service:iMo
vessels in the British navy, and may be relied on for accuracy. But there is no oihVial
or unofficial report or document informing us how many, and which of these vessels
were built in government and which in private yards, and I had to procure the infor
mation from other, though equally reliable, sources.

214 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The following list is a full and complete record of all tho serviceable vessels of every
class, including transports, or troop ships, now comprising the British naval vessels.
It gives their names, tells whether they are screw, paddle-wheel, or sailing; the ton
nage, horse-power of each, and tho number of guns carried by each one. It states of
what materials each is constructed, whether of wood or iron, or of iron frame and teak
wood planking, (called composite,) and which of them are armor-plated. It states
which of them were built in government and which in private dock yards. I have sep
arated those built in government from those built in private yards, first giving tho
names and particulars of those built in government, followed by those built in private
yards. The following list was furnished rno by high authority, and is entirely correct.

(See Appendix, table.)

The whole number of serviceable fighting ships in the British navy is three hundred
and ninety-four. Of this number thirty are gun-boats of small size ; two hundred and
fifty-six of the whole number were built in government dock-yards, and one hundred
and thirty-eight in private yards. Only nine of those built in government yards are
constructed of iron, eight are composite, and all tho rest were built of wood. Twelve of
these government-built wooden ships and eight of the nine iron ones are iron-clad or
armor-plated. Of the one hundred and thirty-eight ships built in private yards fifty-
five are iron ships of a large class, twenty-five of which are armor-plated ; three of the
wooden ships built in private yards are also armor-plated, making twenty-eight iron
clads built in private yards, and twenty in government yards. It will thus be seen
that there are now in the British navy forty-eight large, sea-going iron-clads. Tho
aggregate tonnage of these forty-eight ships is 170,000 tons. They average 3,541 tons
each, and carry 653 guns. Several of these iron-clads are yet incomplete, but ready for
sea. The forty-eight will cost 16,000,000, or nearly $78,000,000.

Iron war ships and armor-plated ships are of recent date, and when the admiralty
decided to introduce iron ships into the navy, iron steamers and sailing ships had fo^r
some years been in use in the mercantile marine, and these several private yards, well
equipped for the construction of iron vessels of any class, whether sailing or steam,
while yards had not then been fitted for such purposes, and could not readily respond
to the call of the government for iron war ships, even if it were the policy of the gov
ernment to rely on its own yards for its supply. Although some of the government
yards are now equipped for building iron ships, and no doubt could now supply all tho
wants of the government, unless perhaps in cases of sudden emergency, yet we see that
only nine of the sixty-four iron ships belonging to the British navy were built in gov
ernment yards, and of the thirty-three iron armor-plated ships, only eight were built
in the navy yards and twenty-five in private yards.

There are now building fourteen iron armor-plated ships for the government, all of
large size. Seven of these iron-clads are building in government, and seven in private
yards, and the engines for all these ships are being constructed at private works, and
all but one are on the improved expansion plan with surface condensers. All marine
engines of any importance, required for the British navy, are made at the works of
private engine-builders. Up to tho year 1868, Penn & Maudslay, two of the leading
engine-builders, whose works are located in London, built nearly all the engines for
government ships, whether the ships were built in private or government yards. Now,
as a general rule, the war ships built for the government in tho yards of Napier or
Laird have their engines built also in the yards of these gentlemen. Though this is
not always the case, for Peun & Maudslay are still the chief builders of government
engines. Within the last few years, Rowerdiill & Humphreys have built occasionally.
I may add that iron armor-plated war steamers have frequently been and continue to
be built in the private yards of this country for nearly all the maritime nations of
Europe except France, and she has had troop ships built here, and some of her largest
and best merchant steamers are Clyde-built.

SUBSIDIZED LINES OF MAIL STEAMERS.

I have procured and forwarded, as desired, the post ofiico reports for tho last ten
years, but they do not give the full information asked for, but from other reliable
sources of information, I find the existing contracts with steamboat companies for car
rying the mails to be as follows :

CONTRACT WITH THE CUNARD LINE.

In December, 1868, a contract was made with the managers of the Cunard line to
carry a mail twice a week to the United States, every Saturday to New York, and every
Tuesday to Boston, for 70,000 per annum. Under this contract the company carries
the mails on the outward voyage only. This contract runs to tho year 1876, and can.
be terminated any time thereafter on giving twelve mouths notice.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 215

CONTRACT WITH THE INMAN LINE.

On the 9th of March, 1869, a contract was made with William Inman, manager of tho
Inman line, to carry one mail each week to New York, for 35,000 per annum. Like
the contract with the Cunard line, tho Inman contract can bo terminated after the
year 1876, on giving twelve months notice.

NORTH GERMAN LLOYD S LINE.

In December, 1868, a contract was made with the North German Lloyd s line to
carry a weekly mail from Southampton to New York for the postage, Is. per ounce for
letters, 3d. per pound for newspapers, and 5d. per pound for books.

TO BERMUDA AND ST. THOMAS.

In December, 1867, a contract was made with the Cunards to carry a mail every
fourth week from Halifax to Bermuda and St. Thomas for 19,500 per annum.

BRAZIL, ETC.

In June, 1868, a contract was made with the Royal Steam Packet Company to carry
a mail once a month from Southampton to Brazil and tho river Plate, touching at
Lisbon, St. Vincent, (Cape de Verde, )Pernambuco, Bahia, Rio de Janeiro, Montevideo,
and Buenos Ay res, for 33,500 per annum. This contract can be terminated at tho
close of the year 1874, on giving twenty-four months previous notice.

FROM LIVERPOOL TO BUENOS AYRES, ETC.

In July, 1868, a contract was entered into with the &quot;Liverpool, Brazil, and River
Plate Steam Navigation Company,&quot; to carry a mail once a month from Liverpool to
Buenos Ayres, touching at Rio do Janeiro and Montevideo, on the outward voyage,
and at Montevideo, Rio de Janeiro, and Bahia, on the homo voyage, for the postage, at
the rate of 2. Gd. (60 cents) per ounce on letters, newspapers, 3d. (6 cents) per pound, and
on books, 5d. (10 cents) per pound.

LIVERPOOL TO MONTEVIDEO, ETC.

One other contract was made with the &quot; Pacific Steam Navigation Company &quot; to
carry a mail once a month from Liverpool to Montevideo, touching at Bordeaux, Lis
bon, Rio de Janeiro, and St. Vincent, for the postage at the same rates as those last
named.

LIVERPOOL TO PUERTO CABELLO.

in July, 1869, an agreement was made with the &quot;West India and Pacific Steamship
Company,&quot; to carry a mail from Liverpool, on the 5th of each month, to Puerto
Cabello, touching at La Guayra.

LIVERPOOL TO TAMPICO, ETC.

From Liverpool, on the 10th of each month, to Tampico, Port-au-Prince, and Vcra
Cruz.

LIVERPOOL TO SANTA MARTHA.

From Liverpool, on the 20th of each month, to Santa Martha.

FROM FALMOUTH TO BUENOS AYRES, RIO DE JANEIRO AND MONTEVIDEO.

During the present year a contract was made with tho &quot; London, Belgium, Brazil and
River Plato Royal Mail Steamship Company &quot; to cariy a mail from Falmouth, on the
3d of each month, to Buenos Ayres, Rio de Janeiro, and Montevideo. These last four
postal services are performed for tho postage money received on letters, newspapers,
and books, at 2s. Gd. (60 cents) per ounce for letters, 6 cents per pound on newspapers,
10 cents per pound on books.

WEST INDIES.

In June, 1868, a contract was entered into with the &quot; Royal Mail Steam Packet Com
pany,&quot; to carry a mail from Southampton on the 2d and 17th of eack month, to the
Islands of Antigua, Barbadoes, Demerara, Dominica, Grenada, Guadaloupe, Havana,

216 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Jacmel, (Huyti,) Jamaica, Martinique, Porto Rico, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, St. Thomas, St.
Vincent, Tobago, and to Trinidad. Also, to Aspinwall, Carthagena, Grey Town, Santa
Martha, Tampico, and Vera Cruz, on the continent. For performing this mail service
the company receive 172,914 per annum, $830,362. In addition to this sum the com
pany receive 2,000 per annum for landing the West India mails at Plymouth, on the
return voyage. This contract can he terminated in 1874, on giving twenty-four months
previous notice.

PANAMA AND THE PACIFIC COAST.

A contract with the &quot; Pacific Steam Navigation Company n was made in July, 18G4,
to carry a mail twice a mouth, on the 10th and 25th of each month, from Panama to
ports on the Pacific coast, for 18,250 per annum. This contract runs to 1872, when it
may he terminated, 011 giving previous notice.

LOCAL LINES IN WEST INDIES.

Contracts with two local lines have been made, one to carry a mail four times a
month between St. Kitts, Nevis, and Montserrat, for 490 per annum, and one twice a
month between St. Thomas, Puerto Rico, and Havana, for 2,000 per annum.

WEST COAST OF AFRICA.

In July, 1866, a contract was made with the &quot;African Steamship Company &quot; to carry
a mail once a month to Madeira, Teneriffe, Bathurst, Sierra Leone, Monrovia, Cape
Palmas, Capo Coast Castle, Oneva, Jellah Coffee, Lagos, Benin, Bouny, Old Calabar,
Camavoons, and Fernando Po, for the sum of 20,000 per annum, contract terminable
in 1872, provided twenty-four months previous notice has been given.

CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.

In June, 1868, a contract was made with the &quot;Union Steamship Company&quot; to carry
a mail twice a month to the Cape of Good Hope, touching at St. Helena and Ascension,
for a sum equal in amount to the Sea and British inland postage on the mail matter
conveyed.

TO ALEXANDRIA, SUEZ, AND INDIA.

On the 19th of November, 1863, the post office department entered into a contract
with the &quot;Peninsula and Oriental Steam Navigation Company&quot; to convey a mail once a
week to and from Southampton, Gibraltar, Malta, and Alexandria ; and between Mar
seilles and Alexandria, and between Suez and Bombay.

Also, once a fortnight, between Suez and Calcutta, Bombay and Hong Kong, Hong
Kong and Shanghai, Shanghai and Yokohama, for the sum of 400,000 ($1,944,000) per
annum. This contract expires in 1880, if twenty-four months previous notice has been
given.

With the same company to carry a mail every four weeks between Point de Gallo
and Sidney, for 130,000, ($631,800.)

DOVER AND CALAIS.

With the Southeastern Railway Company for a daily mail, between Dover and
Calais, for 6,000 per annum.

NUMBER OF SUBSIDIZED LINES AND AMOUNT OF SUBSIDY.

Here are twelve lines of steamers under contract for carrying the majls, for which they
are paid an annual subsidy of 903,750, or $4,392,244, and four other important lines
running to the West Indies and South and Central America, subsidized by having
granted to them the postage on all the mail matter they convey.

In addition to the contracts above specified, contracts have been made for a mail ser
vice between Halifax and Newfoundland, New Orleans and Balize, British Honduras,
and between New York and Bahamas. The negotiations of these contracts have been
left to the local governments, the home government pledging itself to pay one-half the
cost of each service.

It is hardly necessary here to repeat the well-known fact, that the establishment and
support of these transatlantic lines of steamers, and the local lines in the West Indies
and along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of Central and South America, has brought
by far the largest part of the trade of those countries to this side of the Atlantic. If
wo wish to extend our trade with these countries, we must offer greater facilities for
conducting it, and not oblige traders to go to the most distant markets, because the
means of communicating with them are more fre.quent, regular, and rapid.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 217

PRICE OF WOOD AND IRON SHIPS IN GREAT BRITAIN.

On tho subject of the value of now wood and iroii first-class English and Scotch
built sea-going steamers and sailing-ships, much depends on the service for which they
are intended, the materials out of which they are constructed, the standing of the
builder, and the character of the outfits. The price depends on these several points
and the classification or standing with underwriters on the nature of the materials and
manner of construction. I have conversed with ship-owners and builders on the sub
ject, and have the figures of some of them in writing. From one of the most reliable
houses in London, as surveyors and valuers of shipping, I have received the following
statement of the prices of wood and iron sailing-ships and of iron steamers for tho
years I860 and 1869:

SHIPS BUILT OF WOOD, 1860.

Classed for fourteen years, 16 16s. to 18 18s 15

Classed for thirteen years, 16 16s. to 17 17s 14 to 15

Classed for ten years, 12 to 13 10s 11 to 12

Classed for nine years, 11 to 12 10 to 11

Classed for eight years, 10 to 10 10s 9 10s. to 10

At tho above prices the ships will have their bottoms covered with yellow metal and
bo furnished with a complete East India outfit, which includes a double suit of sails,
spare spars, &c.

The best colonial-built ships can bo bought here now for about 7 ($34) per ton, and
second-hand American and colonial-built at a much lower rate.

COMPOSITE SHIPS.

Composite sailing-ships and steamers, built of iron, except the planking, which ia
generally of teak-wood, on account of its great durability, were a commercial experi
ment in 1860. They have proved a success, and are much approved of for the India
and China trade, especially for the tea trade. They are iron ships in all respects
except their planking. Wood is used for the outside covering, because it can bo
easily coppered or yellow-metaled, and the ship or steamer thus prevented from
becoming foul from barnacles, sea-weed, &c. I am not aware that a wood bottom is
preferred for any other reason. But now that a cheap and durable remedy is said to
have been discovered and coming into use, which prevents the bottoms of iron vessels
from fouling, it is not probable that composite ships will form a much larger propor
tion of the mercantile tonnage than they do at the present time. The authority
already quoted names from 13 to 16 per ton as the average price of fair and good
composite sailing-ships, classed for fourteen, fifteen, and sixteen years, ready for sea
with India outfit.

A ship-owner informed me that he had built two composite ships the present year
for the China trade, which had cost him, coppered, with India outfit, about 17 per
ton. But he called them &quot;fancy ships, and unusually expensive.&quot; Into one of theso
ships he put auxiliary steam-power at an additional expense of about 8,000, which,
with latest improved engines, mov^d the ship through the water, on her trial trip, at
the rate of about eight knots per hour, on only nine tons of coal per day. Steam
power on these auxiliary ships is used only on going into and out of port, and in
calms and continuous head winds and bad weather, when found more economical or
safe than to depend on sails. When sails only are used, the screw is hoisted out of
water, and the space in which it played is filled up with a piece of wood fitted for tho
purpose. There are comparatively but few composite ships built, and theso are gen
erally built with a view to some special service.

The authority heretofore quoted, and several ship-owners and builders whom I have
consulted on the subject, all agree that the price per ton of a first-class iron sailing-
ship, with India outfit, ranged, in the year 1860, from 17 to 18 per ton. But such
was tho demand for iron steamers from the years 1860 to 1864, caused in part, and
very largely, too, by the American war, that tho price for sailing-ships was run up to
20 and 21 per ton. Since 1864, the price has gradually fallen to from 12 to 14 10s.
per ton, according to their classification and stylo of finish. Tho classification
depends on the character of the materials used, the workmanship, and, to somo
extent, on tho reputation of the builder and the place where built.

A first-class iron ship, that will class A 1 at Lloyds for twenty years, can now be built
and fitted for sea for less money than the best English-built wood ship, which, when
built in the best manner, under Lloyds survey, can never be classed A 1 for more
than fourteen years. The iron ship, ordinarily, will cost but little for repairs, and at
the end of twenty years may continue on in tho same class for twenty years more,
while tho wood structure, during the period of her first classing, is liable to, and very
often does, become rotten in various parts of her hull, making extensive and expensive

218 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

repairs a necessity. Slie will also require to be newly coppered about every third
year. Wood ships generally depreciate in value about one-half in ten years, and then
pass into the second, and on to the third class, with increased expenses for repairs
and insurance, while her earnings are less, when she soon disappears from the records
of shipping. The iron ship of the same age, in the mean time, continues on in her A 1
classification, with but little comparative depreciation in value. At the same timo
the iron ship has a preference over her wooden competitor of from three to seven
shillings sterling per ton (the amount of preference depending on the nature of the
cargo) in the leading freight markets, because both ship and cargo insure for less,
and she delivers her cargo in better condition.

Iron ships now take the most valuable cargoes, when such ships can bo obtained,
and the less valuable is left for the wooden ship, such as coals, chalk, lumber, guano,
jute, seeds, rice, and bulky raw material of inconsiderable comparative value. On
cargoes of low value the insurance on the ship is higher, because in case of such disas
ters as are brought under general average, cargoes of low value contribute less to
repairs than more valuable ones, and the loss falls more heavily on the ship than it
would had she been loaded with a cargo of greater value.

The preference given in this country to iron sailing-ships for the foreign freighting
business is clearly shown by the character of the tonnage annually constructed for such
service. During the year 1668 five hundred and ninety-six wooden sailing vessels of
every description were built in this country. The aggregate tonnage of these vessels
was 87,151 tons, giving an average of 146 tons each. One hundred and one of these
vessels were of 300 tons burden and upward, very few reaching 400 tons. They were
principally small, for lishing aud coasting, and the largest ones for some special trade,
and were built in old yards in sections of the country where iron ships are not usually
built. During the same time, the year 1868, one hundred and sixty -two iron sailing-
ships were built in Great Britain, the entire tonnage of which was 131,731 tons, aver
aging 813 tons each. At the same time twenty-nine composite sailing-ships were built,
the united tonnage of which was 18,805 tons, and averaging 700 tons each. There are
one hundred and ninety-one large sea-going iron and composite sailing ships built in
this country in one year, the aggregate tonnage of which was 150,536 tons ; while dur
ing the same period very few, if any, &quot; deep-sea&quot; wooden ships were built which
come up to the average size of one of these one hundred and ninety-one iron and com
posite ships. The result of the operations of the present year will no doubt show a
still wider difference in favor of iron ships.

In addition to the sailing vessels above particularized, there were built in the British
Possessions during the same year seven hundred and one wood sailing vessels, tho
tonnage of which was 141,313 tons, averaging 201 tons each; five hundred and five
of these vessels were built in the BYitish North American Possessions, the tonnage
of which was 129,720 tons, averaging 250 each.

If any stronger facts are necessary to show of what material deep-sea vessels must
hereafter be constructed to command a participation in the carrying trade of the world
on equal terms, they may be found in the character of the- steam vessels built in tho
United Kingdom during the year 1868. In this year only thirty-nine wooden steamers
were built, altogether only 1,134 tons, and averaging but 29 tons each. They were
mere launches, river yachts, and perhaps three or four small tugs, not a freight or pas
senger steamer amony them, showing that iron only is now used in this country for tho
construction of freight and passenger steamers.

Continuing our analysis of ship-building in this country for the past year, it is shown
that there were built in private yards, and registered as British vessels, one handled and
ninety-three mercantile iron steamers, the aggregate tonnage of which was 77,376 tons,
and averaging over 400 tons each. Many of them were large first-class ocean steam
ers, for passenger and freighting service. During the same year only five composite
steamers were built. By this official record, we see the time has already come when
not a solitary wooden sea-going steamer is built in this country, and probably no large
first-class wooden sailing-ship. Many of these large steamers have but moderate pas
senger accommodations, and were built mainly for the purpose of carrying cargo.

Notwithstanding the great revelation which iron and steam have so rapidly intro
duced into the commercial marine of Great Britain, the success of the Suez canal, it is
believed, will necessitate further changes. The completion of this great work lessens
by one-half the distance to India, and by thousands of miles the passage to China,
Australia, and all ports east of the Red Sea. The questions which have thus been
forced on the consideration of commercial men here are : Will not the most of the trade
which has heretofore gone round the capes pass through the canal, and be carried on
mainly by steamers, instead of so largely by sailing-ships, as is now done? Looking
forward to such results, some merchants are now hesitating about the wisdom of add
ing further to their sailing-ships for the eastern trade, while a few others, I learn, have
already begun steamers on a uefr model, with greater length, greater breadth of beam,
and less depth of hold than the old models, for the same trade via the Suez eanjal. It is
very probable that this now route, to all the countries lying beyVmd the Red Sea as far

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 219

as Australia, is destined to bring about great and rapid changes in the currents of trade-
and commerce to those countries. Instead of the long, slow route over which their
trade has heretofore been conducted, and until recently almost entirely by sailing-ves
sels, this canal will open a short route, and place the most valuable and probably the
principal part of the trade at the command of steamers better adapted for carrying
cargo than any heretofore constructed. Should these anticipations be realized, a large
amount of sailing tonnage will be released, to seek employment in other channels of
trade. Such an amount of sailing tannage thrown upon freight markets already over
stocked with ships seeking business will cause a greater reduction in the profi ts of capi
tal invested in this kind of property. I think it is a conceded fact among commercial
men in the United States that capital invested in sailing-ships, taken as a whole, has
f6r the last six or eight years been less remunerative by at least tweuty per cent, than
for a series of years prior to the time when this new revolution in ocean commerce,
caused by iron and steam, had shown its strength and power to ride. Such, also, is tho
opinion of the same class of men in thte country. But in England it is not so much
felt, because capitalists are content with a lower rate of interest on their investments.
Yet in effecting this great change in the commerce of the seas from wood sailing-
ships to iron and steam, the loss in the depreciation of ship property, as well as tho
commercial advantages, will be greater to this country than to any other, and probably
as great as to all others, because she now has a larger number of large sea-going
wooden ships seeking business than all other nations combined, which their owners
would now be glad to dispose of at a price very far below the value which would have
been set on tonnage of the same amount, character, and age, six or eight years ago.
Since the year 1854, the tonnage of Great Britain has increased fifty per cent., while in
nearly all other European countries tonnage has actually diminished or remained nearly
stationary. The United Kingdom alone had last year 8,168 vessels, large and small, en-

faged in an exclusively foreign trade. The tonnage of these vessels amounted to
,265,349 tons, and they averaged 522 tons each ; 862 of these vessels were steamers, the
united measurement of which was 619,199 tons, which would do the work of 2,000,000
tons of sailing-vessels, and the proportion of steam tonnage is rapidly increasing from
year to year. In proportion as steamers enter into the carrying trade, the tonnago
necessary to carry on that trade will diminish, because steamers on the best models and
most improved engines will perform about three times the labor of sailing-vessels.

While there is no doubt but that for certain branches of the carrying trade wood
ships will continue to bo built for a time and used, the transformation irom wood to
iron and steam is sure to go on until the principal part of the commerce between nations
will be carried on through their agencies, and the adoption of any measures, public or
private, intended to promote the restoration of our commerce, which look to anything
short of the change, of at least that portion of our mercantile marine required for inter
national commerce, from wood to iron and steam, will surely fail of their object. It is
not temporary relief to &quot;tide over&quot; temporary disaster that is required to meet tho
necessities which are upon us; but change, radical change in structure, to effect which
government and people must act in harmony ; the government to extend all proper
encouragement and inducements for commercial men to meet promptly the emergency
that is forced upon us, and tho merchant and ship-builder to set about in good earnest
the reconstruction of our mercantile fleets. Our remedy is not to be found in a restora
tion of tho past ; that era of ocean commerce is fast passing away, and a new and more
progressive one has overtaken us. We must move on with it and deal with facts and
events as they meet us to-day or give up all idea of recovering our old ocean supremacy,
retire substantially within our coast lines, and yield this great and noble field of enter
prise, once so gallantly contested and won, to be controlled and monopolized by other
heads and hands.

I am asked to state &quot; what regulations have been adopted by the British government
to ascertain the amount of materials entering into the construction of ships which aro
exempt from duty ? &quot;

No regulations of such a character aro required, because there is no duty assessed on
any article that goes into the construction of vessels or steamers of any kind. Not only
are all such materials free, but all vessels bound on foreign voyages are permitted to
take a supply of such dutiable articles as may be needed for the ship s use from bonded
warehouses iree of duty.

&quot;What advantages are possessed by ship-builders and ship-owners in Great Britain,
over the same class in the United States ? &quot;

Here ocean commerce is held to be one of the great branches of national industry
and sources of wealth, and ranks with manufactures and agriculture. It is tho pride of
a commercial people, and the whole nation is united in watching over it, and in trying
to gain for it every advantage that sagacity, wealth, talent, mechanical skill, science,
and ample protection on every sea can command.

The Board of Trade is a department of the government, and is always in charge of able
and experienced men, who have been long in its employ, and has tho commercial
marine under its special care.

220 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The merchant shipping act extends legal protection in a thousand ways, whenever
needed, to ship, cargo, ami sailor. This important law is often amended or revised with
great care and labor, as a wider experience and a change of circumstances or new features
appear to make revisions desirable. The latest revision was reported at the last session
of Parliament, and will, no doubt, after some amendments, be passed into law at the
next coming session. Again, the consular corps of this country are generally trained
men. They are selected for their supposed fitness for the places they are wanted to fill,
and the study of how best to extend and secure British trade and commerce is made
one of their chief studies. No nation is so watchful over everything that affects its
trade and commerce as the English nation, and the whole nation is reaping the benefit
of this care and vigilance, constantly exercised in every available manner.

The preparation of a yard, buildings, machinery, &c., for the construction of iron
vessels, requires a much greater outlay of capital than what is necessary for building
vessels of wood. But capital has always been ready to open as many of these expen
sive yards as the demand for ships required. It is said the yard belonging to tho
Thames Iron Ship-building Company cost half a million sterling, nearly $2,500,000 in
gold. The Minotaur, one of the largest armor-plated ships in the British navy, was
built there. It has within its limits two dry-docks, built of stone, of a capacity suffi
cient to receive ships of the largest class, the heaviest rolling machinery, forging, plan
ing and slotting machines, iron spar-yard, and, in fact, every convenience necessary for
constructing and completing five or six large ships, steam or sailing, at the same time.
There are several yards similar in character on the Thames, several on the Mersey,
several in the north of England, and a much larger number on the Clyde than in any
other locality. With this constant national attention in every necessary form, these-
many large well organized and equipped yards in complete readiness for every depart
ment of iron ship-building, with an abundance of native iron and coal delivered in
them at low rates, and everything free from taxation, it will be perceived that ship
builders and owners in Great Britain have already gained advantages over us which
only time, close and careful attention, all proper encouragement, and a full determin
ation to succeed will enable us to reach. Besides transforming the vast mercantile
fleet of this country from wood to iron and steam, more or less mercantile steamers,
sailing-ships, and ships of war are continually in progress of construction for the mari
time nations of Europe, China, Japan, and the British possessions.

The geographical position of England and the position held by her in relation to the
trade, capital, and commercial enterprises of Europe and the whole Eastern hemi
sphere, is of such a controlling character as naturally to conduct a large portion of the
trade of those countries to her. Ten years ago much of this trade was done by Amer
ican ships which were chartered by English merchants, but English iron and composite
ships now take the most profitable part of this trade ; and although American ships still
get a portion of the second-class business, the number thus employed is fast dimin
ishing.

The labor of all grades and classes of artisans employed in the construction of ships
in England and Scotland is cheaper than in the United States, ranging in London from
As. to 7s. 6d. per day ; on the Clyde about Is. less per day, and in the north of England
still lower. But this does not afford the English builder much if any- ad vantage, be
cause in America mechanics perform more labor in a given time than the same class of
workmen do in this country.

&quot; Character of officers and crews of English vessels as compared with those of tho
United States.&quot;

There is an acknowledged difference, in favor of the American officer, in the prepar
atory education of American and English ship-masters. While the American is as
good a seaman, he is to a certain extent also a merchant. He is very frequently a part
owner in the ship he commands, and when abroad seeking business is to a great ex
tent intrusted by the other owners with the general management of the ship and busi
ness connected with her, such as looking up business, deciding on what offers to ac
cept, and protecting her interests in all ways. The English ship-master is rarely a
part owner, or intrusted with any such responsibilities. He is generally a good sea
man and obeys the instructions laid down for his guidance. His duty is to sail tho
ship, keep her in good order, and deliver cargoes in good condition. The business is
entirely in the hands of the owners and ship-brokers. As a general rule American
ship-masters make greater dispatch, sail their ships with a less number of men, feed
them better, and their port charges are less. Before an English master can take
charge of a ship, he has to pass a rather rigid examination before a board of examin
ers appointed by the Board of Trade, and receive a certificate from them of compe
tency and good character. For any misconduct or incompetency as master, this cer
tificate may be suspended or taken from him. It is said the rigid enforcement of this
law has produced a decided reform in the service.

A majority of the seamen in our mercantile service are foreigners. We have no
licensed shipping officers and no provisions of law for their protection until they sign
tiio shipping articles and go on board ship. No certificates of competency as seamen

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 221

and of good conduct are given them on their discharge, and they are left while in port
to the tender mercies of landlords and shipping-masters and their runners. They are
frequently robhed of the proceeds of their last voyage, and their advance wages for
the next, and delivered aboard ship by those who control them, destitute and help
less, like any marketable commodity. In all these respects the English sailor is care
fully protected by law and the constant watchfulness of government officials. In the
leading ports he has, when in them, a good, well-regulated boarding-house to go to,
with books, papers, amusements, savings banks, medical attendance, &c., forming a
part of the establishment, and, what is perhaps of more importance, shipping officers
licensed and controlled by the government. At these government shipping offices all
seamen for the British mercantile service musfbo shipped. They have, before they can
bo shipped, to produce their recommendations from the captains of the last ships on
which they served, and to the shipping office pay the small fee of one shilling,
(twenty-five cents,) and it is made unlawful to exact any larger sum. I went over
this subject with some care in a dispatch to the Department of State, dated May 12,
1806, and numbered 375. This dispatch was called for and published, with another on
the subject of commerce, by the fortieth Congress, second session, Executive Document
No. 283, and may bo found on page 22 ot this document. As I have not time to
co over the question in detail before this paper ought to be sent forward, now too
long delayed by illness and pressing official duties, I must respectfully refer the hon
orable committee and the.Cominissioner of Customs to that paper for further informa
tion on the subject. The revised merchant shipping act, which will come before tho
next session of Parliament for adoption, contains a clause permitting foreign ships to
enjoy the benefits of these government shipping offices in English ports. This will bo
an excellent thing for American ships and seamen in British ports, and all masters
should be compelled to ship such men as they may want through these licensed ship
ping offices, instead of through irresponsible private shipping offices, on which foreign
ships in British ports now depend, and where sailors are so often deceived, robbed, and
ill-treated. It is to be hoped that some efficient measures will soon be established by
law to give American and foreign seamen an equally good protection within the limits
of the United States.

The establishment of the coast guard corps of mariners, and navy pensions, are the
chief inducements to encourage seamen to enter the government service when called
for. For more full information on this branch of their inquiry, I must again respect
fully ask to refer the committee to the published dispatch (No. 375) heretofore men
tioned. I will investigate this question further, and if I find any additional facts
worth reporting I will communicate them hereafter.

French Lloyds is more favorable to American ships than tho English, because tho
construction of American ships conforms more nearly to the surveys and specifications
laid down by French Lloyds. No American-built ship, whether English-owned or
otherwise, can be brought within the requirements of English Lloyds, yet American
ships can bo classed as A 1 there, by having the letter F placed against them, signify
ing foreign built.

There are no fixed and established &quot; printed rates of wages paid English seamen,
firemen, and engineers &quot; in the mercantile service. Such wages fluctuate according to
supply and demand. Tho rates of wages of all persons serving in the navy, from sea
men upward, are established and may bo found printed in the &quot; Navy List,&quot; two copies
of which I herewith forward. I think quite full answers to the inquiries put to mo
will be found embodied in this paper ; but if any point has been overlooked, or any
further information from me desired, I will endeavor to supply such omissions on
further calls, with as little delay as practicable.

I have the honor to be your obedient servant,

F. H. MORSE, Consul General.

Hon. HAMILTON FISH,

Secretary of State.

P. S. I will make the price of iron steamers tho subject of another communication,
I hope, by next post.

A 1.

UNITED STATES CONSULATE GENERAL,

London, January 15, 1S70.

DEAR SIR : In answer to your inquiry in regard to composite vessels, I would say
they have only one advantage over iron, which is more than overcome by several dis
advantages, and the one advantage I feel quite confident is only temporary. It is, they
can be easily coppered and thus kept clean longer without docking than an iron ship
with the ordinary coating on her bottom. But this is not found from experience of

222 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

sufficient advantage to give them a preference over iron. The first cost of the compo
site vessel is greater than if built of iron. The wood bottom wears out quicker, and
must be replaced with new at heavy expense. Then there is the additional outlay for
sheathing with copper, or yellow metal, which must be renewed every two or three
years. The iron ship had to be docked and scraped, or washed down as her bottom be
comes foul, but a cheap coating, put on with a brush, like paint, is coining into use here,
which it is said after trial keeps the bottom more free from sea-weed and barnacles
than copper. This coating has to be renewed about once in fifteen or eighteen months.

You will bear in mind that a composite vessel is built entirely of iron, except that
the planking is of wood, secured to the iron frame by through bolts and nuts screwed
on to their inside ends, and by washers and rivets. This planking, on the iron plating
of an iron frame is the most simple part of the structure, and when the machinery is
provided for the preparation of the other parts of the vessel, and the frame up, com
plete in all its parts, except planking or plating, the difficulty is over, and putting on
the outside covering becomes a very simple and easy matter. Composite, though ex
cellent vessels, are not gaining in this country anything like the rapidity that iron is.
I have not yet obtained full statistics for the year just closed, but I think it will be
found that t he number of iron ships over composite, Avill be comparatively greater than
the year before last, which shows that the experience of persons engaged in maritime
commerce is setting their judgments in favor of iron ships.

It must be evident to all who have given any thought to the subject that we cannot
expect a revival of our shipping interest without some measures of relief and en
couragement from government; in regard to the mode of applying which, men differ
according to the standpoint from which they view the subject. If the object bo
merely to possess iron ships and steamers, without any other object in view, no matter
where built, the way is easy to gain such possessions. Open the door and admit a
foreign supply. But if nothing else is done, the certain effect of. such a policy will be,
as long as it may be continued, to prevent the establishment of iron ship-building
yards within our own country. The object should be, not merely to possess, but also
and chiefly to create facilities and encouragement for opening yards and constructing
iron steamers and sailing ships on our own soil. It is, I think, an admitted fact that
there is now more tonnage at the command of merchants who have freights to offer
than is, in the present condition of trade, necessary to do the carrying trade of tho
world ; and therefore capital invested in sailing ships does not now, taken as a whole,
pay well. It is true that some steani lines make large dividends, and some sailing
ships kept in certain trades are doing a fair business, but, taken as a whole, the ship
ping interest has not been for the last few years a remunerating business.

If this view be correct, and the iron ship-builders could have/ree materials and could
put a ship afloat at as low a price as it can be done in Great Britain, I should not look
for an immediate and general revival of our shipping interests, especially for gen
eral freighting service. A few yards would probably be started, and ships and steamers
be built for special service. Government could also greatly eneourage iron ship-build
ing by giving a liberal subsidy to a few leading lines of postal steamers, on the express
condition that all the regular steamers on the lines should be either iron or composite
steamers of the highest class, and at least one-half or more of the number on each
line should be built in the United States. The great end to be kept in view and gained
should be the development, to the highest state of perfection, the art of iron ship
building among ourselves, and free us from dependence on foreign countries for our
mercantile marine and means of transport, and give us facilities for building the most
efficient sea-going sliips-of-war in time of need. Any measures which look only to the
increase of our mercantile marine by the purchase of foreign-built ships will render
no aid in placing us in such an independent position, but will tend rather to hold us
back from it.

I forward Avith this note a letter from Suuderland, in the north of England, where
the largest number of the wood-ships built in this country are constructed. This will

five you the price of steamers, sailing-ships, and the rate of wages in that part of tho
ingdom. I also send a list of ships, over a certain size, built there during the year
1869. You will notice only six wooden sailing ships on tho list, and not one of them
comes up to the average of the whole number of iron sailing ships built in the United
Kingdom during the year 1868. And what is more discouraging for wooden ships, the
writer says in a letter to me, dated 30th December, 1809,

&quot;A great many wooden vessels that were finished last year (1868) are still lying un
sold, as they have gone off very slowly this year, while on the contrary a great many
iron vessels have been contracted; for in fact, nearly all the iron vessels that have been
built have been invariably sold before they were finished.&quot;

If I can do anything more here to aid the object for which you are laboring pleaso
inform me, and it shall be promptly and cheerfully done.

I have been relying on one of the principal London ship-building firms, for a state-

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

223

mont in reference to ship-building on tlio Thames, similar to the one from Sunderland,
but it has not yet been sent to me. On its receipt, I will forward it immediately.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,

. F. W. MORSE,

Consul General.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH, If. C.

B 1.

SUNDERLAND, January 3, 1870.

DEAR SIR: Wa now have tho great pleasure of handing you copy of a letter received
by ua this naorniug from one of our eminent ship-builders, in which you will iiud a
more detailed account of wages, and also in prices of iron sailing vessels and cargo
boats, as follows :

&quot; Replying to yours of 9th instant, wo have pleasure in furnishing you with tho fol
lowing particulars for your American friends, viz :

&quot; Tho rate of wages paid to iron shipwrights arid artizans in several years :

Tears.

-2

Z+

B
P

8. d.

s. d.

*. d.

s. d.

IPCO

4 8

4 2

ISO 1-2

4 6

4 g

3 6

4 Q

1863

4 8

3 6

18G4

5 6

3 4

5 G

r &amp;gt;

1869

4 G

4 6

4 2

4 G

3 4

4 6

The prices of A A iron sailing ships of highest class at Lloyd s, and with East India
outfit: In 1861, 15 10s. per register ton ; in 1862 and 1863, 17 17s. Gd. per register
ton; in 1869, 14 per register ton.

Tho price for nine years on A B cargo steamers, fitted complete, with engines and
boilers ready for sea: In 1861, 18 per register ton; in 1862 and 1863, 19 2s. Gd. per
register ton ; in 1869, 16 per register ton.

&quot; I hope this information may bo what your friends require ; any further I can give I
shall be happy to do.

&quot; Please note that all the information wo have given you about steamers has been
for what we call cargo boats ; that is, steamers of large carrying capacity but with
only moderate horse-power ; while for ocean-going steamers the price is about 25 per
register ton, and the price of this description of steamer varies very little, as the cost
of fitting these vessels up for passengers, the engines &c., are always much about the
eame ; thus for a boat of 2,000 tons register, fitted up with full passenger accommoda
tion, with engines on board of large horse-power to give the boat great speed, and all
tho other requisites required for this class of boats, the price would be about 50,000.

Trusting this information will be of service to you.
Wo are, dear sir, yours truly,

PEACOCK BROTHERS.

F. H. MORSE, Esq., London.

B 2.

Vessels built at Sunderland, England, during the year 1869.

Number.

Iron ships 28

Iron steamships 9

Totaliron ships 37

Composite ships 12

Composite steamships 1

Total.. . 13

Wooden sailing ships .
Total..

6
56

224

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

Tornagc.

Vessels from 4SO to 1,000 tons burden 42 28,114

Vessels from 1,000 tons and upward 14 18,179

Total tonnage 46,293

2 COWPER S COURT, CORXHILL,

London, December 7, 1869.

Sir. : In reply to your favor of yesterday s date we have much pleasure in giving you
the following information, as to the value of wood and iron ships, as in the year 1860
and at the present time :

In the case of sailing-ships the price varies according to the standing and repute of
the builder, and the character of the outfit.

The same remark applies to steamers, besides which the fittings and outfit of pas
senger boats must be considered, and also the higher prices of engines, by the first en
gineering firms, on the Thames and Mersey.

1860.

1869.

&quot;Wood ships with East India outfit and yellow metaled :

18 18 to 16 16
17 17 to 16 16
13 10 to 12 00
12 00 to 11 00
10 10 to 10 00

&amp;gt; Very few built.

18 00 to 17 00
17 00 to 16 00

21 00 to 20 00
35 00 to 25 00

15 00 to 00 00
15 00 to 14 00
1-2 00 to 11 00
11 00 to 10 00
10 00 to 9 10

16 00 to 13 CO

[A] 14 10 to 13 00
[A] 13 00 to 12 00

16 00 to 10 00
30 00 to 20 00

Nine years class

Composite vessels, East India outfit and yellow metaled :

-Fifteen years class

Iron ships, East India outfit :

Nine yours class

Screw steamers, including average power to tonnage, cargo
boats and small passenger accommodation

&quot;With larger passenger accommodation and greater power.

Paddle steamers of greater power in proportion to tonnage, say difference in horse
power at 40 to 30 per horse-power.

Wood vessels that have been built on speculation and have remained some time on
builders hands may now be bought at a considerable reduction on prices quoted above,
the demand for wood vessels being now very limited.

Wood steamers have been entirely superseded by iron, excepting a few tug-boats.
Tendering our services at any time,
We are, sir, yours respectfully.

GEO. BAYLEY & WM. RIDLEY.
Hon. F. H. MORSE,

Consul General United States.

No. 1025.] UNITED STATES CONSULATE,

Liverpool, December 18, 1869.

SIR : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch inclosing a letter
from the Hon. John Lynch, chairman of the Committee on American Navigation in tho
House of Representatives, requesting information about the cost of ships, wages to
workmen, &c., in Great Britain in 1860 and 1869.

I have found quite a discrepancy in the costs of building vessels, owing partly, no
doubt, to the competition among builders both now and in 1860. With regard to
wooden vessels, there were very few built in Great Britain in 1860, and less at the
present time. So far as I can learn, there are no wooden steamers built at the present
time. Price of wooden sailing-ships in Great Britain, in 1860, from 18 to 21 per
ton. Price of wooden sailing-ships in 1869 from 15 to 16.

The price for wooden steamers in 1860 is given to me at 30 per ton. All say there
are none now building.

Price of iron sailing-ships in 1860 may be given at about 19 per ton.

Price of iron sailing-ships in 1869, 15 10s.

Price of iron steamers of average engine power^ in I860, 6 10s. ; in 1869, 22 10s.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 225

The above prices are, assuming the vessel to be in every case of about 1,000 tons,
builders measurement, supplied with an East India outfit, but without passenger ac
commodation, and the steamers to have engines of 150 nominal horse-power. Larger
vessels would be dearer, and smaller ones cheaper, than the rates given.

The wages of mechanics on ship work in Liverpool, in 1860, was fixed by the Ship-
Carpeuters Association, a kind of trades union. The foreman received nine shillings,
and ordinary workmen seven shillings per day. These are the wages paid at the
present time.

The rates for insurance in Liverpool, for first-class vessels, were as follows :

British-built vessels, in I860, about seven guineas per cent, per annum. In 1869,
about ten guineas.

Colonial-built vessels, in 1860, nine guineas per cent, per annum. The same in 1869,
about twelve guineas per cent, per annum.

On steamers, wood and iron, in 1860, from five to six guineas per cent, per annum.
The same in 1869, from eight to nine guineas per cent, per annum.

The only advantage possessed by ship-builders and owners in Great Britain over the
same class in the United States, is cheaper labor and cheaper iron. In this country
there is a redundance of labor, consequently labor is cheap. The redundancy is so
great that very nearly one man out of every twenty, taking England and Wales to
gether, is a pauper, that is, has to bo provided for in whole or in part at the public ex
pense, to keep him from starving. The effect of this is felt not only in the construc
tion of vessels, enabling builders to build cheaper, but to the owners as well in con
ducting their commercial pursuits, enabling them to run their vessels at less cost, and,
as a general thing, with a better class of sailors. As an instance, wages of able sea
men in New York, at present time, are about $30 per month in currency, while in Liver
pool they are only 2 10s., or equal to $12 10 in gold, or about $16 or $17 in currency.
Iron is also cheaper in this country, which is accounted for by the same reason, viz,
that labor is cheaper, thereby enabling those engaged in the iron business to produce
iron cheaper than it can be made in the States.
I have the honor, &c.,

THOMAS H. DUDLEY.

Hon. HAMILTON FISH,

Secretary of State.

UNITED STATES CONSULATE,

Quebec, November 24, 1869.

SIR : Your favor under date of October 30th has been acknowledged. I have given
the shipping interests of Quebec considerable attention the past year, and am now able
to make the following communication on the subject of your letter :

1. Wooden sea-going sailing-vessels. The present cost of building this class, including
both material and labor, is about the same as in 1860. The price of material is higher,
while labor is lower than in 1860.

2. The cost of same. Vessels of nine hundred tons cost about $38 per register ton ; ves
sels of fourteen hundred tons, $36 per ton. *This does not include the yellow metal for
sheathing, the cost of which is $3 per ton. Vessels are usually sold in Europe before
they are sheathed.

3. Value of same in England. At no time have Quebec-built vessels been held in very
high repute in England ; to-day they cannot be sold at remunerative prices. They sell in
England for about seven pounds sterling per register ton, to which may be added about
five dollars per ton for outward freight. Ship-owners do not like wooden vessels. Iron
and composite are taking the place of wood in Europe, except in some special branch
of the service, such as the freighting of lumber, &c. But iron and composite have never
been built at Quebec or in Canada.

4. Steamers. There never was but one wooden sea-going steamer built here that

was many years ago. There are ocean steamers sailing from this port, and quite

a number down the river to the ports below. All of them are of iron, and built on the
Clyde, in Scotland. Among the latter are the Gaspe, formerly Emma, City of
Quebec, formerly Dunbartou, and the Seacrit, all old blockade-runners in the rebel
service.

5. Tariff of 1868. Previous to 1868, all materials for ship-building purposes imported
into Canada were subject to duties, but with a drawback to the full amount of duties
paid. The act 01 May 22, 1868, so far as it relates to the ship-building interests, was
drafted by J. W. Dunscomb, esq., collector of customs at Quebec, assisted by McKay &
Warner, Americans, and large ship-builders here. It was the intention of these gentle
men, and also of the government, to have all material imported for ship-building free
of duty, but, through some mistake, a few minor articles were not included, such as a
certain class of nails, &c. All other articles were made free entirely, except cables of
hemp or grass, cordage, varnish ; when for ships only, free, otherwise fifteen per cent,
duty.

15 N I

226 NAVIGATION- INTERESTS.

G. Cost of material. In order to shorten this communication, I will refer you to my
report on the shipping interests of Quebec, to Hon. J. A. Graham, Acting Register of tho
Treasury, under date of October 20, 1869.

7. Wanes of laborers in ship-yards. I will refer you to my report to Mr. Graham.

8. Composite vessels are those with iron frames with planking of wood.

9. Ships now building at Quebec. There are seventeen in all, including three half
composite, for market of 1870.

10. Character of officers and crew. About the same as in the United States.

11. General information. The labor per ship of about one thousand tons classed A 1,
at Lloyds, will amount to ten dollars per ton.

I fully believe that iron is to take the place of wood, eventually ; that iron steam
ships will take the place of sailing, for nearly all freights except lumber. The great
majority of ships to-day from Europe (England and France) to the East Indies are
iron propellers. You may place the advantages of iron over wood for means of trans
portation in a greater ratio than you would water over land.

In the classing of vessels, Lloyds have heretofore given Quebec ships A 1, seven years.
I am now advised that in order to advance the interest of the Dominion, they will give
eight years in 1870.

You will find the wages of seamen, from the master down to the boy, in my report to

Mr. Graham above referred to.

***********

I am, sir, your obedient servant.

CHARLES ROBINSON,

United States Consul.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH, M. C.,

Chairman Committee on American Navigation.

UNITED STATES CONSULATE,

Kingston, Ontario, November 29, 1869.

SIR : In obedience to a request contained in yours of October 30, I have the honor to
submit the following report :

1. Cost in Kingston of wooden sailing-vessels per ton, fitted for lake navigation, in
1860, (old custom-house measurement,) two hundred and fifty tons and under, $50;
o er that tonnage, $45 per ton.

2. Wooden steamers, for passengers, in 1860, $100 per ton.

3. There is but slight, if any, difference in the cost of Ouilding tho foregoing at the
present time.

4. First-class mechanics, in ship-yards, in 1860, received from $1 50 to $1 75 per day.
The same prices are paid now as near as may bo.

5. Steamers to class A 1. Insurance for tfre season six per cent. ; sailing-vessels, one
per cent less.

6. I am not aware of any regulation by this government to ascertain the amount of
material entering into tho construction of vessels, except the required oath of tho
builder or owner.

7. All material imported for vessel-building by the builder or owner comes into the
province free of duty, while there is a heavy duty on all material entering the United
States for the same purpose, thereby giving to the builder or owner here a decided
advantage.

8. Character of officers and crews of Canadian vessels rates as near as possible tho
same as on American vessels of same classes.

At the present time, compared with 1880, pitch, tar, and oakum are a shade lower
in price, and timber a shade higher.

From the best information I can get these trifling variations in price about neutral
ize, thereby making the cost now about the same as in 1860.

For a short time during the late rebellion oakum, pitch, and tar were at fabulous
prices, but at the close of the war dropped back to the old prices.
All of which is most respectfully submitted.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

S. B. HANA,
United States Consul.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH, Chairman, $c., Washington, D. C

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 227

CONSULATE OF THE UNITED STATES OP AMERICA,

Halifax, N. S., December 2, 1869.

SIR : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication, making
certain inquiries in relation to the ship-building interests of Nova Scotia, and in com
pliance with your request have much pleasure in furnishing the following information :

1. The cost in Nova Scotia of wooden ships, iron fastened, per ton, fitted for sea, in
1SGO, was fifty-five dollars ; and of coppered and copper-fastened, about sixty-five dol
lars per ton, register tonnage.

2. There is no material difference in the cost of building this class of ships at the
present time, the increased price of some of the raw materials being equivalent to tho
abolition of the duty of five per cent, on imported articles.

3. No wooden steamers are built in Nova Scotia.

4. The rates of wages of first-class mechanics on ship work, in 1860, were from $1 50
to $1 75 per day, and at the present time are about the same.

5. Steamships crossing tho Atlantic are generally insured in England. The rate 01
insurance on such, steamers is about nine per cent, per year, or one-half per cent, per
voyage.

6. On sailing vessels, the rates of insurance here on voyages from Halifax to England
are from two and a half to three per cent. ; on voyages to the West Indies, from one
and three-fourths to two per cent. ; and to tho United States, one per cent.

7. No specific regulations are adopted by the government to ascertain the amount of
materials exempt from duty entering into the construction of vessels. The articles are
admitted free merely upon the oath of the importer that they are intended solely to ~be
used in the construction of vessels. But by act of Parliament the importation of goods so
exempt from duty, and all matters relating thereto, are subject to such regulations as
may be prescribed by the governor and council for the purpose of preventing fraud or
abuse under pretext of such exemption.

8. The advantages possessed by ship-builders and ship-owners in Nova Scotia over
the same classes in the United States arise from the lower rates of wages, the cheaper
raw materials, and the exemption from duty of all imported articles required in the
construction of ships.

These advantages are partially counterbalanced by the greater durability of Ameri
can-built vessels, owing to the better quality of the timber used in their construction.

Formerly the duty in Nova Scotia on ship-building materials was five per cent., but
under the present Canadian tariff they are admitted duty free.

There has been no material change in the price of labor and ship-building materials
in this province since 1866, and I respectfully refer you for many particulars relating
thereto to my report on that subject made in that year, and published (page 219) in the
appendix to the report of the Special Commissioner of Revenue.

But a small number of American vessels have been registered in Nova Scotia.

While the admission of American vessels to registry in the British North American
provinces is of but little practical importance to American citizens, the admission of
foreign vessels to registry in the Uuited States necessarily involves the opening of our
coasting trade to foreign competition.

This would be most injurious to the ship-building interests of our country.

It is not, therefore, it appears to me, by admitting foreign vessels to registry upon an
equal footing with our own, and thus opening our extended coasting and inland trado
to foreign competition, that the shipping and ship-building interests of the United
States are to be restored to their former state of prosperity, but by the reduction of
duties on all imported materials for the construction of ships, and by liberal subsidies,
under judicious regulations, to ocean mail steamers.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

M. M. JACKSON.

United States Consul

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman of the Committee on American Navigation Interests

UNITED STATES CONSULATE,
St. John, New Brunswick, November 29, 1869.

SIR : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt, this 18th day of November, of
your letter, dated October 30, 1869, forwarded me through the Department of State,
asking certain information concerning ship-building interests of the province.

Inquiry of the same character having lately been made of this office by the Treasury
Department, I am therefore enabled to answer your questions without much delay.

The cost of wooden ships and wooden steamers built in this province in 1860 and
1869 is the Bame. A comparison of ships and steamers built then and now show no
difference in cost per ton worth noting. Sailing vessels of from 1,200 to 1,500 tons reg-

228 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

ister, complete with anchors and sails, ready for sea, can be built for $40 per ton.
They are what the Liverpool market term soft-wood ships. Frames arc spruce ; stan
chions, keelsons, waterways, stringers and rails are hard wood ; that is, hackmatack
or pitch pine. They class 3-3; 1-1. Seven years French Lloyds, wooden steamers,
for use on the St. John s Eiver and Bay of Fundy, are built here at a cost, when ready
for sea, fitted complete, of $90 to $95 per ton register; the largest being about (550
tons register, with 150 horse-power, cabins and saloon, built of hackmatack and Bay
spruce. No steamers are built but those required for local traffic.

The rate of wages for ship-carpenters have varied but little in ten years. I am in
formed by different parties that the difference has not exceeded ten cents per day at
any time within ten years last past. First-class ship mechanics get from eight to nine
shillings a day, that is, $1 60 to $1 80.

Rate of insurance on sailing vessels is twelve per cent, per annum, to go anywhere,
except Gulf of St. Lawrence in winter season. Rates of insurance on steam vessels are
the same as on sailing vessels. Fire rates are from two to two one-half per cent.

There are no regulations whatever adopted, by which the amount of material enter
ing into the construction of vessels which are exempt from duty can be ascertained.
The Dominion government, in their tariff of customs, exempt certain articles intended
for the construction of vessels. There being no check other than the oath of the im
porter that the articles are imported for the purpose of ship-building, it is impossible
to ascertain what part or how much of such importations actually enter into the con
struction of shipping. An examination of the customs records shows the entire import
ation of these exempted articles to be for ship-building purposes.

The advantages claimed by New Brunswick ship-builders over those of the United
States are numerous, the most important being cheapness of timber, low wages of
ship-carpenters and laborers, free entry of all foreign material entering into the con
struction, use of less timber and bolting, giving a lighter and stronger vessel than the
American build. (This is a question of construction, and one worthy our American
ship-builders attention.) Building their vessels under the inspection and scrutiny of
London Lloyds and French Lloyds, giving them a preference in market over those not
classed, or those classed in American Lloyds. The ship-owners of the province get
their vessels at very low prices, because of there being no foreign demand for colonial
ships. That although the spruce ships may not be as durable as our oak, still their
greater buoyancy gives great advantage in carrying dead freights. The difference
they claim to be twenty-five per cent, in their favor, and more than compensates for
difference in durability.&quot; My knowledge of officers and crews being confined almost
entirely to those of American shipping, I am unable to contrast them with those of
New Brunswick. As far as my observation goes, I think our officers superior in educa
tion and general business capacity, but the New Brunswick skipper is generally a
thorough sailor and of steady habits. As to the crews of the different vessels, it would
be hard to make a distinction. The only nationality attaching to any of them being
the flags under which they sail from time to time. When we find an American sailor
who has a pride in his nationality, he is generally a very superior man to those of any
other country. That he is a better sailor, I cannot say.

In former years the colonial ship-builders found market for their vessels in Liver
pool, which often gave them fair profits, and again, heavy losses were suffered. Their
ships went to market, like any other article of sale, the prices depending upon the de
mand. They were built of hackmatack, pitch-pine and oak, and under the scrutiny of
Lloyds, London, the most of them receiving their (Lloyds) classification of seven
years, A 1, which was indispensable, in case of sale in that market. The demand for
this class of vessels having ceased, the builders are engaged in the construction of the
spruce or soft-wood vessel, depending upon the citizen, merchant, and ship-broker of
the province as purchasers. The demand is quite limited, and for three years the
business has been rapidly declining. The few ships built pay the builder no profit,
notwithstanding the advantages they have in cheap material, labor, &c. They are
generally built under the inspection of French Lloyds. Ship-owuers inform me their
spruce vessels are giving better satisfaction than expected, and so well pleased are
they, that they declare their intention of confining their future investments to that
class. They cost about five dollars per ton less than the hackmatack ship, and carry
fully sixteen per cent, more guano or coals.

In giving the cost of these vessels at $40 per ton, I intend it as a fair average. It
would probably give a clearer understanding to the committee to give the different
kinds of vessels and cost of each. Small vessels, single deck, to class in French Lloyds
A 1, five years, will cost $34 to $37 per ton. Vessels classed A 1, 3-3, five years, will
cost from $38 to $39 per ton. Vessels classed A 1, 3-3, six years, will cost &quot;$39 to $40
per ton. Vessels classed A 1, 3-3, seven years, will cost $42 to $44 per ton. The ves
sels of the five-year class may be built of timber wholly the growth of the province.
In the six year class, the rudder, stock, and windlass, must bo southern oak, and the
stems, stern-posts, aprons, knight -heads, bills, corners, &c., must be either oak or
hackmatack. In the seven-year class, southern oak for all cases Avhere hackmatack or

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 229

oak is required in the six-year class, also, tamarack or pitch-pine beams, pitch-pine or
oak keelsons, waterways, stringers, rails, &c., &c. All of these vessels, when running
from two hundred to four hundred tons register, more or less iron knees are required
under every beam. Above six hundred tons, in addition to the knees, iron straps on
the outside, or an equivalent in the ceiling, with edge bolting, &c. Ships may be built
in this province from one to two dollars per ton less, but only when the object is pro
duction at the lowest possible cost.

In building spruce ships, much depends upon the condition of the timber and the
care in putting it together, it being very essential, indeed, indispensable to long ser
vice, that the timber be cut in the winter season ; that every part have thorough
ventilation, and so salted that the salt remains where placed and not .allowed to collect
on the bottom. When ready for sea a spruce ship should never be allowed to cruise in
tropical climates until she has had a year s service in northern waters. When carefully
and properly built and cared for, spruce vessels are known to have sailed, discharging
their cargoes in good condition, from sixteen to twenty years. Again, when con
structed of timber cut in bad season and probably sent south, while green, they have
become utterly worthless in five years.

That the committee may have some of the reasons advanced by the builders here of
their advantages in construction over our American builders, in a form more ship- shape
than I can give, I enclose extract of letter recived from Mr. Tucker, the very intelli
gent and long experienced agent of Lloyds, London, who has made the construction
of ships a study for forty years, and who has been the agent of the committee of
Lloyds in this province for fifteen years, in which time ho has introduced many and
radical reforms in the construction of sailing vessels.

I ani sir. very respectfully, your obedient servant,

D. B. WARNER,

United States Oonsnl.

Hon. JOHN LYXCH,

Chairman Committee on Navigation Interests.

[Extract.]

Permit me to state that since the appointment of surveyors to these
provinces by the committee of Lloyds, London, so great has been the reduction in cost
of construction of our vessels, while the improvements have been considerable, from a
personal knowledge, and [ believe it is generally concorded. Ships of any required
model and build to class A 1 in the society of Lloyds register, London, can be con
structed in the Dominion of Canada for one-fourth less cost than they can be turned out
of any building yard in the States of America. As a consequence, the reduction of ex
penses in construction being so important, comparatively, where colonial vessels are
returning interest upon the outlay to their respective owners, the mercantile vessels of
the United States are, as a general thing, running to a disadvantage; in fine, are yield
ing no profitable return to those who may be interested.

It is also generally admitted that vessels constructed of tamarack or spruce have a
material advantage over others, because of their buoyancy, while they are equally as
durable when properly cared for ; this species of timber not being of the same specific
gravity compared with that which enters into the construction of ships built in the
United States. Our colonial vessels, as a consequence, when either light or laden, do
not become so deeply immersed, sailing, it is estimated, about one-sixth lighter, admit
tedly carrying a heavier dead weight and measurement cargo, tonnage being compared,
and have a much more free board than ships built wholly of oak.

Again, your builders adhere to the anciut method of building ships with wood lodg
ing and vertical knees, which are pretty to look at, because of the diffuse quantity of
short bolts introduced for fastening, considered by those practically acquainted with
ships, but very indifferent security, those knees not only increasing the weight, the
former of no longitudinal strength, occupying a largo space of the ship s carrying
capacity, also preventing that free passage of air so essentially necessary in all vessels,
of whatever may be their material, thus causing, it may fairly bo presumed, the ships
to prematurely decay.

In the better class of colonial vessels, especially those constructed to class at Lloyds,
wood vertical knees to beam ends have, as a general thing, become obsolete, and in
many instances both vertical and lodging knees of wood are dispensed with, and in
lieu thereof, shelves and water-ways are worked equal in transverse sectional area to
the respective beams at their ends. Iron hanging knees and knee riders are substi
tuted, the latter embracing all the points of the frame, bolted through and through,
the bolts being spaced less than every twenty-one inches apart, the whole length of
rider, thereby giving those vessels an advantage over yours in regard to connection,
general strength throughout, better ventilation, and larger carrying capacity.

230 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

It would also be needless for ine to state other than that our better class of vessels
are more liberally supplied with ground tackling and general equipments, those im
portant essentials required to be, by Lloyds register, rigidly tested at public machines
recognized by them. While stating those advantages and requirements I admit that
there are many fine points about your American-built ships to be admired: their very
fine model, the application of modern appliances to reduce labor and facilitate the
working of ships, their general smooth finish, the generally acknowledged accommo
dation for the mariner who traverses the storm-tossed deep, and the general stores
supplied, excepting anchors and chain cables, which although of the most vital im
portance for the safety of both life and property, those, as a general thing, are found
light and untested. * *

UNITED STATES CONSULATE,
Prince Edward Island, November 22, 1869.

Sm : In reply to your letter of October 30, 1869, this day received, I have the honor
to state :

1. The cost in Prince Edward Island of wooden ships, fitted for sea, was 9 4s. 6d., or
$29 52 per ton, medium tonnages, in 1860.

2. Steamers are not built on the island.

3. The cost of wooden ships, fitted for sea, is, at this time, 10, or $32, per ton.

4. The rate of wages for first-class mechanics, on ship work, was, in 1860, 7s. 6d, or
$1 20 per diem.

5. Wages of same class, at present time, Qs. 6d. to 7s., or $1 04 to $1 12, per diem.

6. Rate of insurance on steamships and sailing-vessels from eight to ten per cent.

7. There is no government regulation for ascertaining the amount of materials used
in the construction of vessels which are exempt from duty.

8. The character of officers and crews of Prince Edward Island vessels is very inferior
to that of the same classes on vessels of the United States.

9. I would. mention, in explanation of the cost of construction, as above given, that
the pound currency of this island is equal to three dollars and twenty cents of federal
money.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

E. PARKER SCAMMON,

United States Consul.
Hon. JOHN LYNCH, M. C.,

Chairman Committee on Navigation Interests.

CONSULATE GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Frankfurt am Mam, December .31, 1869.
To the Hon. Committee on American Navigation Interests :

During the present month I had the honor to receive from the Department of State,
a dispatch inclosing certain inquiries, by your committee, concerning the navigation
interests of Prussia. Sensible of the importance of the subject under your considera
tion, not only as it affects all persons directly engaged in ship-building and commerce,
but also as it bears upon the nuances and vital interests of the government, I have en
deavored to furnish full and satisfactory information upon the matters involved in your
inquiries, however it may affect your object. .

Prior to the year 1866, Prussia was a member of the old Germanic Diet, and up to
that time, neither Prussia alone, nor the Diet exhibited any inclination or ability
either to extend its commerce, or to establish a navy and increase its inaratime strength.
The secession of Prussia and the events of the year 1866 attending and consequent
thereon, scattered that confederation. A North German Union was formed of the sev
eral northern powers of Germany ; the other powers remaining isolated. Prussia is
the head, and principal power of the twenty-two distinct independent governments
constituting the North German Union, as it alone contains 24,000,000 of the 30,000,000
inhabitants of the whole Union, and covers five-sixths of the wiiole territory of the
Union.

The principal ports of the North German Union are the free cities of Bremen and
Hamburg. The merchant marine is mostly confined to those free cities, and there is
but little merchant marine in any port of Prussia. Each power of the Union may reg
ulate its own merchant marine independently of all the other powers of the Union, but
it can have no separate navy. The navy belongs to the Union as a whole. I shall,
therefore, in answering your inquiries, inform you upon the subject-matters of inquiry

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 231

not only as they affect Prussia, but also as they affect the North German Union as a
confederation.

The inland location of the states of the North German Union would seem not to ad
mit of a large merchant marine or require a powerful inaratiino force, still individuals
are greatly increasing the former, and the government immensely enlarging the latter,
and all tending to a great maritime power.

These tables * show in detail the present amount of the merchant marine according
to the last public accounts and the latest information that can be had. Only ordinary
merchant vessels are built in Prussia. The most valuable and largest of ocean steamers
are still built upon the river Clyde.

To the second inquiry: &quot;What encouragement the Prussian government offers to
ship-builders and ship-owners by way of bounties, drawbacks, and exemption from
taxation. If material entering into the construction of ships is exempt from duty, or
a drawback is allowed upon it, what regulations are adopted by the government to
ascertain the amount used,&quot; I reply that no bounties, drawbacks, or exemption from
duties or taxation are provided either by Prussia or the North German Union.

There is a general complaint among those interested in the merchant marine that
their interests are neglected by the government in favor of the navy. As an evidence
of the feeling upon this subject, I call your attention to the discussion, at the last
meeting of the German Nautical Association, of the new law of the federal council of
the North German Union, requiring a more technical school education, and more
thorough qualifications of captains and inferior ship officers, and subjecting them to
more rigid technical examinations, without regard to practical knowledge. This asso
ciation is composed of the leading ship-owners, ship-builders, underwriters, and cap
tains of Hamburg and Bremen. The association expressed their dissatisfaction with
the apparent disregard by the government of the merchant service, and severely
denounced the tendency of Prussia to shape all naval matters and regulations to the
interest of the navy on the ground of the pretended great necessity of making tho
&quot; Union &quot; a powerful maritime power, to the neglect and injury of tho merchant marine
service of the ports of the country. They ask the question &quot; What importance as a
maritime power had Prussia previous to the annexation of Schleswig-Holstein and
Hanover If&quot; The answer was, &quot; That except on the Baltic, where Denmark, Sweden, and
Russia also dominated, Prussia had no maritime power at all ; while tho Hanseatic
flag, that of Hamburg, Bremen, and Lubcc, had carried the German name to every
quarter of the globe.&quot; It thus appears that the ship-builders and ship-owners receive
not only no encouragement, but that the government is more intent upon aggrandizing
its own power upon tho sea, as well as upon tho land, than advancing the commerce
and shipping of its ports.

To the third inquiry : &quot;Whether shipstores are allowed to bo taken in bond for con
sumption on the voyage ? &quot; I answer that no dutiable shipstores are allowed to be
taken on board, under any privilege of exemption from duty, by any law of Prussia or
of the &quot; Union.&quot;

To the fourth inquiry : &quot; What subsidies are paid to lines of Prussian steamers ?&quot; I
answer that no subsidy is paid to any lino of steamers by the North German Union or
by Prussia, and it is not supposed that tho free cities of Hamburg or Bremen pay any
subsidy or allow any privilege or exemption from duty to any line of steamers leaving
said ports.

The Bremen and Hamburg steamship companies have contracts with tho North Ger
man Union for carrying tho mails, bnt they are paid only for the exact services per
formed, and at very low rates of compensation.

To the last inquiry: &quot;What measures are adopted to improve the character of and
secure efficiency in the merchant marine service, and what relation does this service
hold to the navy of Prussia ?&quot; I reply that tho North German Union have not had
time to adopt measures, which experience, the essential portions of which are herewith
given, might show to be useful to itself or instructive to others.

Some of the ports have established schools for tho study of navigation, which have
attained distinction. There are laws regulating the sea-worthiness of vessels, also
laws respecting ship-building.

The relation of the merchant marine service to tho navy is best answered by a trans
lation of those articles of the constitution of tho North German Union referring to
navigation, viz :

&quot;SECTION 53. The federal navy is a united one, under tho supreme command of
Prussia. The organization and composition of the same is incumbent upon his Majesty,
the King of Prussia, who appoints all the officers of the navy, and to whom the latter,
together with the marine troops, must take tho oath of allegiance.

u The ports of Kiel and Jahde are federal war ports.

&quot; The cost and expense incurred in tho foundation and maintenance of the navy and
the institutions connected therewith will bo borne by the federal treasury.

*Tbc report of Mr. Webster was accompanied by an elaborate set of tables, translated
)r. Engels, cbiof of tbo Prussian statistical bureau.

__ i from a work of

Dr.

232

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

The entire marine population of the Union, the body of engineers, and marine
mechanics included, is dispensed from the service in the army, but obliged to serve in
the federal navy.

&quot;The distribution takes place in proportion to the existing marine population, so
that the number to be furnished by each government will be deducted from the quota
to be furnished for the army.

&quot; SEC. 54. The merchant men of all the federal States form ?. joint merchant marine.

&quot; The Union will fix the mode of ascertaining the tonnage of sea vessels, regulate the
issue of bills of tonnage, and ships certificates, and the conditions of licenses of sea
Tessels.

&quot; The merchant men of all the federal states are uniformly admitted and received at
the seaports, and on all natural and artificial water roads of the several federal states.
The imports on vessels or cargoes for the benefit of any institution shall not exceed
the cost of same.&quot;

I have thus endeavored to give the desired information upon the subject-matter of
your inquiries. I fear that you will derive but little light from the information that
will enlighten your investigations. The government aims to enhance itself, and mag
nify its strength and power as a nation, more than to aid the individual or develop
the industry and wealth of the country. Neither is government aid much needed
where every kind of material is so cheap, and labor so poorly paid. If the merchant
marine is allowed to develop itself, wherever commerce demands or justifies its estab
lishment in the ports of Germany, and is not burdened by government, it will regulate
itself, and will compensate all persons employed in its interests. The kingdoms of
Bavaria and Wurtemberg and the grand duchies of Baden and Hesse-Darmstadt being
still independent, and forming no part of the Union, are not referred to in this com
munication.

I trust that a satisfactory result will follow as the reward for your arduous labors.
I have the honor to be your obedient servant,

WM. PREUTIN WEBSTER,

Consul General.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on American Navigation Interests.

Sea vessels and river steamers in the old Prussian provinces. State at the end of the year 1867.

NUMBER AND QUALITY OF MERCHANTMEN IN THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR 1868.

Number
of vessels.

Lasts.

SAILING VESSELS.

Sea vessels of a tonnage of more than 40 lasts *

960

183 742

Coastin 01 vessels of less than 40 lasts

422

9 746

STEAMERS.

Sea steamer

3 959

Steam tow-boats, river-steamer

1,677

Total

1 464

199 124

Of the above steamers there were

Tonnage
of lasts.

Horse
power.

26 sea screw-steamers

3,788

1.667

2 pachlle steamers

171

240

21 tow-boats and river screw-steamers. . A

500

372

C3 tow-boats and river paddle-steamers

1 177

2 399

112 steamers

5 636

4 G78

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.
Changes in the state of 1363 to 1867.

233

Of the vessels built at home
there were built in

1863.

1864.

1865.

1866.

1867,

43
37
4

2
1

For domestic ship owners

93
63
14
1C

76
48
14
12

85
64
12

73
56
16

Coasting vessels

For foreign account . . .

8
81

Total

100

In the beginning of the year 1868 there were building on Prussian and Pomeranian
wharves 31 sea vessels, 5 coasting vessels, and 2 steamers ; that is to say, just as many
as in the preceding year.

During the years

1863.

1864.

1865.

1866.

1867.

There were bought in other states

Of which there were stranded and brought off

Sold to other states

15-

Wrecked

Sea and river vessels of the province of Hanover. State at the end of the year 1865.

NUMBER AND QUALITY OF MERCHANTMEN AT THE END OF TEE TEAK 1865.

as
II

Soa vessels

862

64 371

5 324

River and coasting vessels

2 762

30 175

5 556

A last is like two tons, or 4,000 pounds.
Changes in the state, 1862 to 1866.

Province of Hanover.

Sea
vessels.

Tonnage in
lasts of 4,000
pounds.

1862

843

54 169

1863 i

842

60 251

1864

814

60 101

1865

862

64 371

106G

859

62 123

The five principal ports of the province were at the end of the year 1866 in possession
of 377 sea vessels, of a tonnage of 37,954 lasts, viz :

Vessels.

Tonnage
of lasts.

2 759

Gecstomunde .

10 567

5 397

Le/&amp;gt;r . . .....

3 202

Paponburg

182

16 029

234

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.
River and watching revenue vessels.

Tear.

Vessels.

Lasts.*

1362 ...

2,748

3t 173

1863

2,776

31, 22D

Ig64

2,792

30 8G3

1865

2, 7C2

30, 175

1866 .

2,809

31, 034

* A Prussian last is equal to two tons.
Of the same -were steamers, viz :

Vessels.

Tonnage
of lasts.

1862

410

1863

471

1864

443

1865

560

1866 ....

753

As regards ship-building, there were finished in the course of

Sea vessels.

River and watch
vessels.

No.

Tonnage
of lasts.

No.

Tonnage
of lasts.

1862

93
112
70
74
66

9,246
12, 221
9, 123
8,858
7,910

130
125
100
106
95

2,483
1, 928
1, 223
1^207
1,159

1863 .

1864

1865

1866

Schleswig-Holstcin merchant marine. Changes in the state of 1860 to 1866.

In the year

Number of
vessels.

Tonnage of
lasts.*

In the year

Number of
vessels.

Tonnage of
lasta.*

I860

2 549

63 408

1864

2 552

CG 506

1861

2 590

63 814

1865

O fJTI

68 173

1862

2 633

65* 766

1866

2 57

69 g65

1863

2 639

67 582

* A Prussian last is equal to two tons.
State of the merchant marine of the North German Union on the 1st of February, 18G9.

& 3

States to which the vessels belong.

|l
c ?

o ri

&amp;gt;

1. Prussia:

Province of Prussia and Pomerania

1 382

403 COO

8 000

Province of Hanover

1 310

133 r )00

800

Province of Sleswig-Holstein

919

114 500

5 GOO

Total

3 611

651 000

14 400

2 Hamburg...

467

4 r ) 300

36 900

3. Bremen

307

044 700

39 200

4 Mecklenburg

449

17 600

5. Oldenburg

231

57 KiO

6 Liibeck

10 500

5 500

In all

5 103

1 381 00

113

96 OOQ

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

235

Sd
o

C&quot;3 00

5-3

T
Ci OCO

If 11

WH3&amp;lt;J
TH ci ^

M.23 3

lllll

TH- CJ

il.

a a

li
I!

236 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

UNITED STATES VICE-CONSULATE,

Copenhagen, December 7, 1869.

SIR : Your letter, dated the 5th of last month, (addressed to George P. Hansen, formerly
a United States consul, but now returned to the United States,) expressing a desire to
obtain information respecting the ship-building and navigation interests of this country,
has been transmitted to me by the Department of State, and, in reply thereto, I shall
endeavor to give you an explanation as satisfactory as I have been able to obtain it,
giving my reply in the same order as your different questions are made.

The annexed register of ships belonging to this country has been issued in the be
ginning of this year, and shows very near the present state of the Danish merchant
marine, (of course with the exception of some alterations through ships lost, ships built
or bought from foreigners, or ships having shifted owners, since the register issued.)*
The building of sailing-ships is in a tolerable efficiBncy, especially in the province ports,
because the work is cheaper there than in this city, but steamship &quot;building is only car
ried on at this port, at a moderate scale, however, there being only one establishment
for such building, and the same is working at high prices. The merchant marine steam
service, on account thereof, is frequently supplied by the purchase or chartering of
foreign steamers.

The government offers no encouragement to ship-builders and ship-owners by way of
bounties, drawbacks or exemption from taxation. Ship-owners business, however, is
free ; that is to say, not subject to any concession such as many other lines of mer
chants business, but it is, of course, the same as all other situations, subject to income
tax when such is imposed. Foreign material entering into the construction of ships
built for account of Danish citizens is subject to duty according to the tariff annexed,
(oak timber only is free of duty.) But vessels built in Denmark for foreigners account,
or foreign vessels repairing average suffered or other damages, are in that respect better
situated, as they may obtain a permission to take such articles as metal sheathing and
bolts, chains, anchors, sails, and cordage, &c., out of bond. (The prerogative thus al
lowed foreigners arises from a desire to attract work and secure the labor to Danish
citizens.) The material taken out of bond is not treated &quot; ad valorem,&quot; but in con
formity with the said tariff annexed. Ships stores for consumption on the voyage are
allowed to be exported out of bond.

There are no subsidies paid by the government to lines of Danish or foreign steamers,
nor of sailing-ships, except a trifling remuneration of postage for letters carried, brought
as well as sent ; but steamers enjoy a separate favor, having only to pay port charges
according to the quantities of goods loaded or discharged, and reduced into tons, or,
better, into Danish lasts ; consequently, they do not pay in proportion to their regis
tered tonnage.

There are no measures adopted to improve the character of, and secure efficiency in-
the merchant marine service, and that service bears no relation to the navy of Den,
mark. If the royal marine department occasionally is in want of ship-room for any
kind of transport, the department charters ships in the same way as private charterers.

Being at present aware of no further suggestions or facts deserving to be mentioned,
I only add translations of the laws concerning the registration and measurement of
ships, and remain, sir, very respectfully, your most obedient servant,

L. MEETSCHER,
United States Vice-Consul.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on Navigation Interests.

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 5, 1870.

SiR:&amp;gt;I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th instant
asking me to send to the special committee of investigation on the causes of the decay
of American commerce any communication as to what, in my judgment, has created
those causes, at least, in that part of the country with which I am acquainted, and
suggesting, at the same time, what steps I would consider best adapted to remove
them, and to establish in their stead an invigorating impulse by which American com
merce would acquire that development and influence which the extent and importance
of the agriculture and industry of this republic give it a right to expect.

Among various causes, too extensive to enumerate in the space of an ordinary com
munication, I beg to state that, in my opinion, the following are the most important,
viz:

I. Neither the American government nor any portion of the American people, con
stituted as a body, have ever done nor directly attempted anything to secure the object
they desire to attain.

* Accompanying this cominunicatioa. were Danish official documents, which have been omitted.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 237

II. The commerce of those localities in the West Indies with which I am acquainted
has always been allowed to follow its primitive course without any efforts from the
capitalists or the government of this country to take advantage of their proximity, in
order to alter that course and try to give it a direction to these shores.

III. Instead of that, capitalists of Liverpool, Glasgow, Antwerp, Bremen, Hamburg,
Paris, Havro, Marseilles, both as individuals and as corporations, make yearly advances
for the productions to bo shipped from most of those islands and from Central and
South Amorica, and secure thereby, at very advantageous profits, the consignment of
such produce.

IV. France and England, especially the latter, have several lines of steamers touch
ing at the various ports, largely subsidized, and offering great accommodations for
freight and passengers.

V. The governments of England and Franco watch with a jealous eye over their
vessels in those distant ports, and whether justly or not, they never allow the slightest
interference wtth them, be it in time of peace or not, thus securing them, at all times
and under every circumstance, the facility of taking and landing freight. That policy
has been earned so far that most of the merchants in those unsettled countries rather
prefer, for security s sake, to have their freight under English or French flags.

These are the principal causes, according to my judgment, which have unfavorably
influenced the development and progress of American commerce both in South America
and in the West Indies.

A contrary course would insure a contrary result :

I. The American government should lead, by initiatory measures, the American capi
talists to invest their capital in the trade of those countries.

II. The American capitalists should, like the European, make advances to these
different localities, in order to secure their consignment in return.

III. The American government, alike with England and France, should encourage the
establishment of frequent communications by steam with all these countries.

IV. The American agents in all the different ports, while the country is in a state of
war, should be instructed not to allow any interference with American vessels with
out due, formal, and immediate redress from the party, whomsoever it be, that may
have caused such interference.

A few years of thH policy would, I believe, give an unprecedented forward impetus
to the development and growth of American commerce in this hemisphere.

Though I feel confident that none of the above considerations could have escaped the
sagacity and attention of the committee, yet I send them with pleasure as a proof
of my sincere desire to be always ready to give my service, however limited it be, for
the good and prosperity of the American people.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient and humble servant,

A. TATE.*
Hon. JOHN LYNCH.

UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT BREMEN,

January 18, 1870.

SIR : In compliance with your favor of November 5, 1869, transmitted to me through
the Department of State, Washington, D. C., making inquiries concerning ship-build
ing and navigation interests of Germany, I have the honor to submit the following
facts collected from statistics and other sources of information upon this subject, viz :

The German government offers no inducement to German ship-builders, but the ma
terial entering into the construction of ships is exempted from duty, or a drawback is
allowed on it upon the following conditions : The builder can import, free of duty, all
raw materials which are used for the construction of vessels, or in case the material is
partly or wholly manufactured hen;, the government remits the duty which was origi
nally paid on the imported raw metal.

The ship-builder who claims these advantages for building or repairing vessels, be
fore commencing, has to give notice to the custom officer in whoso district the vessel is
to be repaired or built, by presenting a declaration, giving an exact description of the
vessel, as well as the metal articles which will be used for building and outfitting, either
in their manufactured condition imported, or the amount of foreign metal used for
manufacturing same.

Those articles marked, which the ship-builder imports from foreign countries in a
manufactured or half-manufactured condition, must be presented to the collector of his
district in the mentioned declaration, stating the various shapes and condition in which
said articles or materials are to be imported, which articles are entered according to the
weight and number of pieces in the Canto-register, and marked with a stamp in order to
pass the custom-house duty free. To control this, the custom officer inspects the vessel

* Recently minister plenipotentiary from the Republic of Hayti to the government of the United States.

238 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

while she is built, or after her completion, and if these inspections prove that the de
claration is made correct, said articles or material are cancelled out of the Conto-register.

-Should the articles manufactured here, but from material imported from other coun
tries, be used, the builder has to state the amount, quality, and kind of material for
every article in his declaration ; on this it passes the custom-house, every piece being
stamped, -weighed, and entered in the Conto-register by the custom officers. The num
ber of pieces and the weight of the articles manufactured from these materials is also
taken on their completion by the custom officer and compared with the Conto-register
and if found correct said materials are exempted from duty.

The bars imported for the use of building coppered vessels, are entered in the samo
manner, but when the bolts are cut out in the dock it must be done in the presence of
an officer of customs, who has to count and weigh such bolts, and see that they are
used for the vessel, and on his certificate the bars are exempted from duty.

All declarations must be sworn to by the ship-builder, and should it be proved that
fraud was intended, the builder is deprived of these advantages forever, besides paying
the penalty.

Ship stores are allowed to be taken in bond for consumption without being subject
to any duty.

No subsidies whatever are paid to lines of German steamers.

Masters are required to take on board his vessel one apprentice for every one hundred
&quot;lasts&quot; (a last equal to 4000 pounds) measurement of his vessel. These apprentices,
after having served a term of years, are advanced to the grade of regular sailors, in
which capacity they are required to serve three years, at which time they can make
application for admittance to the navigation school, where they have to pass severe
examinations before they can be commissioned as second and first officers or command
ers. As every able-bodied man is required to enter in the army on arriving at the age
of twenty years, so is every seaman at the same age required to enter the navy.
I remain, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

R. M. HAUSON,

United States Consul.

Hon. JOHN LYNCH,

Chairman Committee on American Navigation Interests, Washington, D. C.

APPENDIX.

STATISTICAL TABLES.

No. I. List of steamships and vessels of the British navy.

BUILT IN GOVERNMENT DOCK YARDS.

Description.

Names.

No. of

guns.

Tons.

Horse
power.

Of what built.

Aboukir

3 091

400

Wood

Achilles

6,121

1, 250

Iron armor-plated.

Paddle

Advice

197

100

Wood

African

Iron.

Double screw

Agamemnon

3, 102

600

Wood.

Paddle

Alberta ...

391

160

Wood.

Screw

3 117

400

Wood

Screw

Alert

751

100

Wood.

Screw

Algiers

3, 340

600

Wood.

Screw

Alison

3 336

800

Wood.

Screw

Arethusa

3,141

500

Wood.

Paddle

Argus

981

300

Wood.

Screw

Ariadne

3,214

800

Wood.

Atlas

3 318

800

Wood

Screw*

Aurora

2,558

400

Wood.

Screw

Brcchanto

2 667

600

Wood

Paddle

Barracouta

1 053

300

Wood.

Screw

Barrosa

1,700

400

Wood.

Paddle

Basilisk

1 031

400

Wood

Double screw

Beacon

465

120

Composite gun vessel.

Screw and paddle

Bee

Wood

Screw

Bellerophon

4,270

1,000

Iron armor-plated

Double screw

Bittern

663

160

Gun vessel

Screw ...

Blanche

1.268

350

Wood.

Sail

Boscawen

2 213

Wood

Double screw

Boxer ... . .

465

120

Composite cnn vessel

Sail

Brilliant

954

Wood

Screw . ...

Brisk

1 087

250

Wood

Screw

Bristol

3, 027

600

Wood.

Sail . ..

Britannia

115

3 995

Wood

Screw

Briton

1,322

350

Wood.

Screw trim vessel . .

Bullfinch

663

160

Wood.

Screw

Bulwark . ...

3,716

800

Wood.

Paddle

Buzzard

980

300

Wood

Screw

Caesar

2, 767

400

Wood.

Screw
Screw

Cadmus

Caledonia

1, 466
4 125

400
1,000

Wood.
Armor-plated

Sail

Cambridge

3, 101

Wood.

Screw

Cameleou

952

200

Wood.

Paddle

267

150

Wood

Sail

Castor

1 293

Wood

Screw

Centurion

2,590

400

Wood.

Screw

Challenger

1 462

400

Wood

Screw

Chanticleer

950

200

Wood.

Screw

Charybdis

1 506

400

Wood

Screw

Clio

1,472

400

Wood.

Screw

Columbine

672

150

Wood.

Paddle

Confiance

295

100

Wood.

Screw

2 845

500

Wood

Screw

Constance

3,213

500

Wood.

Screw

579

150

Wood.

Screw gun vessel

Cormorant ...

695

200

Wood.

Double Screw

Cracker

467

120

Composite gun vessel.

Screw

Double screw gun vessel

Cruiser
Curlew

5
3

752
665

60
160

Wood.
Wood.

Sail .....

Daedalus

1 082

Wood.

Screw ...

1 287

350

Wood

Screw...
Paddle

Daphne

1,081
260

300
100

Wood.
Wood.

Screw...

Dauntless

1 575

5SO

Wood.

Paddle .

Dee

704

220

Wood.

Screw.&quot;..

Defiance... ......,

3.475

*800

Wood.

240

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. I. List of steamships and vessels of the British navy Continued.

BUILT IN GOVERNMENT DOCK YARDS.

Description.

Name.

No. of
guns.

Tons.

Horse
power.

Of what bunt

Screw

4 406

800

Screw.^

Diadem

2 483

800

Screw

Dido

1 268

350

Wood

Screw

Donecal

3*245

800

Wood

Screw

2 483

800

Wood

Screw

Druid

1 322

350

Wood

Screw

Dryad

1 086

300

Wood

Screw

Duke of &quot;Wellington

3 771

700

Wood

Screw

3 727

800

Wood

Sail . . &amp;gt; .

Durham

1 627

Wood

Double screw

Dwarf ... .

465

120

Composite gun vessel.

Paddle .

Echo

295

140

Wood

Screw

Edgar

3 094

600

Wood.

Paddle

Elfin

Wood

Double screw

Elk

465

120

Composite gun vessel.

Screw

Emerald

2 913

600

W&quot;ood

Paddle

Enchantress

835

250

Wood.

Screw

2 486

500

Wood

Screw

Enterprise

*993

160

Armor-plated

Sail

Excellent

2 311

Wood

Screw.

Exmouth

3 109

400

Wood

Screw

Falcon

751

100

Wood.

Screw

Favorite

2 094

400

Armor-plated

Screw

Fawn

751

100

Wood.

Sail

Fis^ard

1 069

Wood

Double screw

Flirt

464

120

Composite gun vessel

Sail

Flora

1 634

Double screw

Fly

464

120

Composite gun vessel

Screw

Forte

2 364

400

Screw

Fox

1 131

200

Wood.

Screw

Frederick William

3 241

500

Wood

Screw

Galatea . .

3*227

800

Wood

Screw

579

150

Wood

Screw

Gibraltar .

3 729

800

Wood

Paddle

Gladiator

1,210

430

Wood.

Screw

Glasgow

3 037

600

Wood

Double screw

Glutton

2 709

Turret ship armor-plated.

Screw

Goliath

2 596

400

Screw ..

Greyhound

880

200

Wood.

Screw

Hannibal

3 136

450

Wood

Screw

Hastings . .

1 760

200

Wood.

Paddle

Helicon

837

250

Wood.

Screw . .

Hercules

5 234

1 200

Iron armor-plated.

Screw

Hero

3,148

600

Wood.

Sail

Hibernia

104

2 53U

Wood

Screw

Hood

3,308

600

Wood.

Screw

Howe

4 245

1 000

Wood.

Paddle

Hydra

818

220

Wood.

Screw

Icarus

580

150

Wood

Screw

Immortalit6

3 059

600

Wood.

Sail

Impregnable

2 406

Wood

Screw . .

Inconstant

4 066

1,000

Iron cased with wood.

Sail

2 098

Wood

Double screw

Iron Duke

3 774

800

Iron armor-plated.

Screw

2 642

400

Screw

James Watt

3*083

600

Wood.

Screw gun vessel

Jasewr

427

Wood.

Screw

Jason

1 711

400

Wood.

Screw

Juno

1 462

400

Wood.

Screw gun vessel

Landrail

427

Wood.

Double screw gun vessel

Lapwing

663

160

Wood.

Sail

Screw

Liberty
Liffey

12
30

428
2 654

&quot; 600

Wood.
Wood.

Paddle

Lightning

296

100

Wood.

Screw

Lion

2 611

400

Wood.

Screw

Liverpool

2,656

600

Wood.

Paddle

Locust

284

100

Wood.

Screw

London

2 687

500

Wood.

Screw

Lord Clyde

4 067

1 000

Armor-plated.

Screw

Lord Warden

4 080

1,000

Armor-plated.

Screw

Lyra

488

Wood.

Double screw gun vessel .

Magpie

665

160

Wood.

Screw

Marlborouf h

4 000

800

Wood.

Sail

Martin

481

Wood.

Paddle

Medusa .

889

312

Wood.

Screw

Melpomene

2 861

600

Wood.

Screw

Mersey

3 733

1, 000

Wood.

Screw

Miranda

1 039

250

Wood.

Screw turret ship

Monarch

5 102

1 100

Iron, armor-plated.

Screw...

Mutine...

883

200

Wood.

NAVIGATION- INTERESTS.

241

No. 1. List of steamships and vessels of the British navy Continued.

BUILT IN GOVERNMENT DOCK YARDS.

Description.

Name.

No. of
guns.

Tons.

Horse
power.

Of what built.

Myrmidon

695

220

&quot;Wood

Sail

Nankin

2 049

Wood

2 6G5

400

Wood

Screw

Nassau . . .

695

150

Wood

2 830

500

Wood

Screw

Nereus

1 094

WV&amp;gt;od

3 035

600

Wood

Newport

425

Wood

Screw

Niger. . .

1 072

350

Wood

Nile

2 622

500

Wood

Screw gun vessel

Nimblo

428

Wood

Niobo

1 083

300

Wood

Screw ... .

Nympho

1 084

300

Wood

Screw

Ocean

4 047

1 000

Screw

Octavia

3 161

500

Wood

Screw

Orlando

3 740

1,000

Wood

I aildle

Osborno

1 536

450

Wood

Screw

Pallas

2 372

600

Screw &quot;Tin vessel

Pandora

426

Wood

Screw

Pearl

1 4G9

400

Wood

Double screw

Penelope

3,096

600

Screw

Perseus

955

200

Wood

Screw

Peterel

6G9

150

Wood.

Screw

Phaeton

2,396

400

Wood

Screw

Phrcbo

2 896

500

Wood

Double screw gun vessel

Plover

GG3

160

Wood

Paddle

Porcupine

382

132

&quot;Wood

Sail

President

1 537

Wood

Screw

Prince Consort

4 045

1 000

Screw

Prince Regent

2 762

500

Wood

Sail

Prince of \\ T ales

115

2 646

Wood

Sail

Princess Charlotte

2 443

Wood

3 129

400

W ood

Paddle

Pyscho ....

835

250

W&quot;ood

Screw

Pylades

1 278

350

Wood

Queen

3 249

500

Wood

Screw

Racer

579

150

Wood

Screw

Ilaccoon

1 4G7

400

W ood

Screw

Ranger ....

427

Wood

Screw

Rapid

672

150

Wood

Screw

Rattlesnake

1 705

400

Wood

Screw.

Reindeer

953

200

Wood

Renown

3 319

800

Wood

Screw

Repulse

3 749

800

Armor-plated.

Screw

Research

1, 253

200

Armor-plated.

Screw

Revenge

3 322

800

Wood

Screw

Rifleman

486

100

Wood.

Screw

Rinaldo

951

200

Wood

Double screw gun vessel

Ringdove

666

160

Wood.

Robust

3 716

800

Wood

Screw

Rodney

2 770

500

Wood.

Screw

Rosario

673

150

Wood.

Sail

Royal Adelaide

2 446

Wood

Screw

Royal Albert

107

3 726

500

Wood.

Royal Alfred

4 068

800

Armor-platod.

Screw

Royal George ....

2 616

400

Wood.

Royalist

669

150

Wood

Screw

Royal Oak

4 056

800

Wood.

Screw turret ship
Screw

Roval Sovereign
Royal William

5
72

3,765
2 849

800
500

Wood.
Wood

Screw ram

Rupert

3,159

700

Iron-clad.

Screw

St. George

2 864

500

Wood

Screw

St. Jean d Arc

3,200

600

Wood.

Sail

St. Vincent

2 612

Wood

Paddle

Salamander

818

220

Wood.

Paddle

Salamis

835

250

Wood.

Screw

Satelite

1, 462

400

Wood.

Scout

1 462

400

Wood.

Screw

Scylla

1,467

400

Wood.

Sea-^ull

663

160

Wood.

Screw mortar ship

Sea-horse

1,258

200

Wood.

Sail

Sea-lark

319

Wood.

Screw

Severn

2 767

500

Wood.

2 667

600

Wood

Screw

Shearwater

669

150

Wood.

Screw

Sirius

1 268

350

Wood.

Screw

Spartan

1 269

350

Wood.

Screw gun vessel

Speedwell

428

Wood.

Paddle . .

Sphinx...

1,061

500

Wood.

16 N I

242

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. I. List of steamships and vessels of the British navy Continued.

BUILT IN GOVERNMENT DOCK YARDS.

Description.

Name.

No. of

guns.

Tons.

Horse
power.

Of what built.

Paddle

Spiteful

1 054

280

Wood.

Paddle

Spitfire

432

140

Wood

Sail

Squirrel . . ...

428

Wood.

Screw

Sultan

5,226

1,200

Iron armor-plated.

Double screw gun vessel

Swallow

664

160

Wood

Screw

Sylvia

695

150

Wood.

Screw

Tenedos

1 268

350

Wood

Paddle ...

Terrible

1 850

800

Wood.

Thalia

1 459

400

Wood.

Double screw

Thistle

465

120

Composite gun vessel.

Thunderer

4 406

800

Screw . . ...

Topaze

2*659

600

Wood.

Serew

Screw

Trafalgar

Undaunted

GO
28

2, 900
3 039

500
600

Wood.
Wood.

Paddle

Valorous

1 257

400

Wood.

Screw

Vestal

1 081

300

Wood.

Screw . . .

Victor Kmiuiui l

3 087

600

Wood.

Screw

Victoria

102

4,127

1,000

Wood.

Paddle

Victoria and Albert

2 345

600

Wood.

Sail

Victory

2, 164

Wood.

Sail

Vindictive

1 758

Wood.

Paddle

Virago . . .

1,059

220

Wood.

Paddle

Vivi3

350

160

Wood

Double screw gun vessel . .

Vulture

663

160

Wood.

Screw

&quot;Wasp

974

100

Wood

Paddle

Widgeon

164

Wood.

Sail

&quot;Winchester

652

Wood

Screw

&quot;Wolverine

1 703

400

Wood.

Double screw gun vessel . . .

Wood-lark

663

160

Wood.

Screw . &quot;

Zealous

3 716

800

Armor-plated.

Screw

Zebra

951

200

Wood.

STEAMSHIP FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE COLONIES, BUILT IN GOVERNMENT DOCK YARD.

Screw

Nelson

2 736

500

Wood

List of screw steam gunboats from 212 to 273 tons.

BUILT IN GOVERNMENT DOCK YARDS.

Name.

Horse
power.

Name.

Horse
power.

Bruiser . .. . .......

Lark

Cherub

Croiner

Netley

Janus

Orwell

1 -,. &amp;gt;-. .J-^V ,;*

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.
No. I. List of steamships and vessels of the British navy Continued.

BUILT IX PRIVATE YARDS BY CONTRACT.

243

Description.

Name.

No. of
guns.

Tons.

Horse
power.

Of what built

Active

o 322

600

Paddle

Adder

241

100

Wood

1 794

400

Screw

6 621

1 350

Screw gun vessel
Paddle

Aljit rine

3
3

299
650

80
260

Wood.

Sail

Asia

2 289

Wood.

Paddle

Asn

112

Wood

Screw gun vessel

Assurance

681

200

Wood.

Double screw

3 774

800

Double screw

4G7

120

Paddle

267

Paddle ...

Black Ea fr lo

540

260

Wood.

Blick Print 1 1

6 109

1 250

Screw

Buffalo

440

Paddle

Bustler

217

100

Wood.

Paddle

319

150

Wood.

Double screw turret ship . . .
Paddle

Captain s..

6
2

4, 272
676

900
350

Armor-plated.

Screw

Chasseur

543

164

70
30

Iron.

Screw

1 296

250

Wood

Dart

428

&quot;Wood

Screw

3 720

600

Screw

Despatch

257
654

100

Wood.

Sail

Eagle

1 723

Wood

Screw

Eclipse

1 273

350

Wood

Sail

1 780

Wood

1 954

200

Paddle

165

Wood

Paddle

313

Sail

2 285

Wood

Paddle

Double screw

Grinder

332
464

150
120

Wood.

Paddle
Double screw

Harpy

Hart

. 1
4

344

464

200
120

Iron.
Composite gun vessel*

Paddle

Hearty

221

100

Wood

Screw

Hector

4 089

800

Iron armor-platod.

Screw

1 161

250

Wood

Screw i

Himalaya

3 453

700

Iron

Double screw

464

120

Double screw

Hotspur

2 637

600

Iron armor-plated ram.

Screw

638

Double screw ...

Invincible

3 774

800

Iron armor-plated.

Paddle

Jackal

340

150

Iron.

Screw gun vessel

Lee

431

Wood

Screw gun vessel

Leven

300

Wood.

Paddle .

387

180

Wood

Double screw

Screw

Lynx

4
13

464
1 034

120

200

Composite gun vessel.
Wood

Screw

Manilla

295

Iron

Paddlo

135-

Screw . ...

Me^aera

1 395

350

Iron.

Double screw

Midge

464

120

Composite gun vessel.

Screw

6 621

1 350

Screw

Minx

303

Iron.

Paddle

212

130

Wood

Screw gun vessel

Mullet

430

Wood.

6 621

1 350

Iron armor-plated*

Paddle

Oberon

*649

260

Iron.

Paddlo

Otter

237

120

Wood.

Screw

Polter

250

Wood.

Screw

Pembroke

1,758

200

Wood.

Screw gun vessel

Penguin

431

Wood.

Double screw

Pert

464

120

Composite gun vessel.

Double screw gun vessel

Philomel

664

160

Wood.

Paddlo

Pigmy

227

100

Wood.

Paddle

Pioneer

142

Wood.

Screw turret ship

Prince Albert

2,537

500

Armor-platod.

Paddlo

Princess Alice

270

120

Iron.

Paddle

590

160

Iron

Paddle

Red polo

360

160

Wood.

Screw

Resistance

3 710

600

Iron, armor-platod.

Double screw

Rocket

464

120

Composite gun vessel.

Screw turret ship

Scorpion

1 833

350

Iron, armor-plated.

Paddle...

Scotia...

268

114

Wood.

244 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. I. List of steamships and vessels of the British navy Continued.

BUILT IN PRIVATE YARDS BY CONTRACT.

Description.

Name.

No. of

guns.

Tons.

Horse
power.

Of what built.

Sail

Serin ^apatam . ...

1 152

Wood

Screw gun vessel

Serpent

G95

200

Wood

Sharpshooter

503

160

Paddle

Sheerness

233

114

Wood

Screw

Simoon

1 980

400

Screw gun vessel

Slaney

301

Wood

Screw gun vessel

Sparrow-hawk

676

200

Wood.

Paddle

Sprightly . .

234

100

Wood

Screw gun vessel

Star

695

200

Wood.

Screw (r un vessel

Steady .

431

Wood

Screw

Supply

633

Iron.

Screw

Swiftsure

3 893

800

Screw

Tamar

2. 812

500

Iron.

Double screw

Teazer

464

120

Screw

Terror

1 971

200

Iron armor-plated

Paddle

Thais

302

Screw

Thunder

1 4G9

150

Armor-plated

Screw

Thunderbolt

1 973

200

Screw gun vessel

Torch

423

Wood

Trincomaleo

1 OC6

Wood.

Paddle

Triton

654

260

Iron

Screw

Triumph . . .

3 893

800

Iron armor-plated.

Paddle

Trusty

319

150

Iron

Double screw

Turtle

Iron.

Screw

Urgent

1 981

400

Screw

Valiant

4 063

800

Iron

Double screw

3 774

800

Double screw gunboat

Viper

737

160

Iron armor-plated

Double screw gunboat

Vixen

754

160

Iron & wood armor-plated.

Screw

Vola^e

2 322

GOO

Iron cased with wood

Screw, hydraulic gunboat . .
Paddle

Waterwitch
Weser

777

167

Iron, armor-plated.
Wood

Paddle

Wildfire .

186

Wood.

Screw turret ship

Wivern

1,899

350

Iron, armor-plated.

Screw . .

Warrior .

6 109

1 250

Iron armor-plated.

INDIAN TROOP SHU S BUILT BY CONTRACT.

Screw

Crocodile .

4 173

700

Iron.

Sccew

Euphrates

4 173

700

Paddle

Hastv

120

Wood.

Screw

4 173

700

Screw

Malabar

4 173

700

Iron.

Paddle

Prompt

120

Wood.

Screw

Serapis

4 173

700

Iron

HER MAJESTY S SHIPS FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE COLONIES, BUILT BY CONTRACT.

Double screw turret ship .

Abysinnia

1 854

200

Iron armor-plated.

2 107

250

Double screw turret ship

Ma^dala ...

2 107

250

Iron armor-plated.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

245

No. I. List of screw steam gun-boats from 212 to 273 tons.

BUILT IN PRIVATE YARDS BY CONTRACT.

Name.

Horse
power.

Name.

Horse
power.

Albacoro

Magnet

Banterer

Onyx . .

Britomart

Pheasant

Bull fro &quot;

Bustard .......

Procris

Clinker..

Rainbow

Cockatrice

Cockchafer

Redwing

Dapper

Skipi ick

Doterel . ..

Skylark

Dove

Earnest

Earno

Spider

Fancy

Fervent

Staunch 200 tons

Ji^irm

Stork

forester ...

Surly

Thrasher

Grasshopper

Trinculo

Havock

Tyrian

Heron

Watchful

Hind

Weazel .

Hunter

Whiting

Hyena ... ...

Wizard

Jackdaw

Linnet

No. II. Statement of the number, names, tonnage, guns, and location of vessels belonging to
and connected icith the United States Navy on the 1st day of April, 1861.

Name.

&amp;lt;S

Where built.

When
built.

Situation.

Where.

6IHPS OF THE LINE.

1. Pennsylvania ..
2. Columbus
3. Ohio

120

3,241
2,480
2,757

Philadelphia
Washington
Brooklyn . . .

1837
1819
1820

In commission . .
In ordinary
In commission .

Receiving ship, Norfolk.
Norfolk.
Reccivin&quot; 1 ship, Boston.

4. North Carolina.

2,633

Philadelphia

1820

....do

Receiving ship, N. Ycrk.

5. Delaware

2 633

Gosport *

1820

In ordinary

Norfolk.

6 Vermont

2 633

1848

7. New Orleans . . .
8. Alabama

84
84

2, 805
2,633

Sackett s Harbor..
Kittery

1815

1818

On the stocks...
.do

Sackett s Hurbor.
Kittery.

9. Virginia

2 633

1818

Boston

10. New York

2,633

Gosport

1818

Norfolk.

FRIGATES.

1. Constitution ...
2. United States . .

1,607
1,607

Charlestown
Philadelphia

1797
1797

In ordinary
do

Annapolis.
Norfolk.

3. Potomac

726

Washington

1821

New York.

4. Brandy wine ....

,726

1825

. do

Do.

5 Columbia

r &amp;gt;0

,726

1836

Norfolk.

6. Congress

,8G7

Kittery

1841

In commission

Coast of Brazil.

7. Ran tan

,726

Philadelphia

1843

In ordinary

Norfolk.

8. St. Lawrence

,726

Gosport*

1847

.do &quot;.....

Philadelphia.

&amp;lt;i Santeo

726

Kittery

1855

Kittery.

iO. Sabine ..

,726

Brooklyn

1855

In commission

Off Pensacola.

SLOOPS OF WAR.

1. Cumberland.
2. Savannah ...

1,726
1, 726

Charlestown
Brooklyn

1842
1842

In commission . .
In ordinary

Hampton Roads.
New York.

3. Constellation
4. Macedonian .

22
09

1,452
1,341

Rebuilt, Gosport..
Gosport ....

1854
1836

In commission . .
. do

Coast of Africa.
In the Gulf.

5. Portsmouth .
6. Plymouth...
7. St. Mary s...
8. Jamestown..

22
22
22
99

1, 022
989
958
985

Kittery
Charlestown
Washington
Gosport

1843
1843
1844
1844

....do

In ordinary
In commission . .
In ordinary

Coast of Africa.
Norfolk.
Pacitic squadron.
Philadelphia.

9. Germantown

939

Philadelphia

1846

....do

Norfolk

246 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. II. Vessels belonging to and connected with the United States Navy, #c. Continued.

Name.

Tonnage.

&quot;Where built.

When
built.

Situation.

Where.

SLOOPS OF WAR
Continued.

10 Saratoga

882

Kittery

184

11. John Adams . . .

9,0

700

Rebuilt, Gosport

1831

East Indies

12. Viucennes

700

Brooklyn

1826

13. Vandalia

783

Philadelphia

1828

In commission

On way to East Indies

14. St. Louis

700

1828

Off Peusacola

15. Cyane

9,0

792

C harl e st own

1837

Pacific squadron

16. Levant

792

1837

17. Decatur]

566

1839

San Francisco

18. Marion

566

1839

Portsmouth N H

19. Dale

566

Philadelphia

1839

20. Preble

566

Kittery

1839

BRIGS.

1. Bainbridge
2. Perry

6
6

259

280

Charlestown
Gosport

1842
1843

In ordinary
..do

Boston.
New York.

3. Dolphin

224

Brooklyn

1836

Norfolk

STORE VESSELS.

1. Eelief

468

Philadelphia

1836

Coast of Africa

2. Supply

547

1846

In the Gulf

3. Release

327

1855

New York

PERMANENT STORE
AND RECEIVING
SHIPS.

1. Independence . .

2 257

1814

2 Alleghany

989

Pittsbur &amp;lt;r Penn

1847

3. Princeton . ...

900

Rebuilt Boston

1851

4. Warren

601

Charleston

1826

5. Fredonia

800

Purchased

1846

Store ship Valparaiso.

6, i almout h

703

1827

SCREW FRIGATES.

1. Niagara . .

4 580

1855

2. Roanoke

3 400

Gosport

1855

In ordinary

New York

3 Colorado

3 400

1855

4. Merriinack

3 200

C harle stown

1855

Norfolk

5 Minnesota

3 200

1855

6. Wabash

3 200

Philadelphia

1855

....do

New York.

7. Franklin

**)

3 680

Kiotery

1854

Unfinished

Portsmouth N. H.

1ST CLASS STEAM
SLOOPS.

Screw.
1. San Jacinto

1 446

Brooklyn

1850

In commission

Coast of Africa.

2. Lancaster

2 360

Philadelphia

1858

3 Pensacola

2 158

1858

Unfinished

4. Brooklyn

2,070

New York

1858

In commission . .

Off Pensacola.

5 Hartford

1 990

1858

6 Richmond

1 929

Norfolk

1858

Side-wheel.
1. Mississippi

1 692

Philadelphia......

1841

Repairing

Boston.

2. Susqnehanna. . .

2,450

1850

In commission . .

Mediterranean.

3. Powhatan

2,415

Gosport.

1850

New York.

4. Saranac

1 446

Kittery

1848

Pacific squadron

2D CLASS STEAM
SLOOPS.

Screw.
1. Mohican

994

Kittery . . .

1858

In commission . .

Coast of Africa.

2 Narra^ansett

804

Boston&quot;

1858

Pacific squadron

3. Iroqudis
4 Pawnee

1, 016
1 289

New York
Philadelphia

1858
1858

....do

Mediterranean.

5. Wyoming

997

1858

Pacific squadron.

6 Dacotah

998

1858

East Indies

7. Pocahontas
8. Seminole . . .

5
3

C94
801

Purchased
Peusacola . . .

1855

1858

....do

...do..,

Atlantic coast.
Brazilian squadron.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 247

No. II. Vessels belonging to and connected with the United States Navy, &amp;lt;fc. Continued.

Name.

Tonnage.

Where built.

When
built.

Situation.

Where.

3D CLASS STEAMERS.

Screw.
1 WVandotto

&amp;gt;

464

Purchased . ...

1858

In commission . .

Off Pensacola.

o Mohawk * . .

&amp;gt;

464

....do

1858

...do

In the Gulf.

3 Crusader

549

...do ...

1858

....do

Do.

*&amp;gt;

464

.. do

1858

...do ..

Coast of Africa.

5 Mystic

464

....do

1858

....do

Do.

Side-wheel.
1 &quot;Water Witch

378

Washington

1845

Propar g for sea

Philadelphia.

2 Michigan

582

Erie

1844

Winter quart rs

Erie, Pa.

3 Pulaski

395

Purchased . . .

1858

In commission .

Brazil snuadron.

4 Saginaw

453

San Francisco

1858

....do

East Indies.

STEAM TENDERS.
Screw*
1 John Hancock

382

Charlestown

1850

In ordinary

San Francisco.

217

Purchased

1858

In commission

Used as a transport.

New York

Unfinished.

RECAPITULATION.

Vessels .
Tonnage
Guns

118, 460
2,409

248

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

^ . &amp;gt;

I!!

-uoaaipoid
-uooo

enti)

f as CK *-* o o c&amp;gt; ?? ci cs t-

rHr-l ^i-&quot; rHl-l r-l Gi i-ICOC* r-l T-I Jl rHr-l -rH

8ai3SSS$@8$S$83$S333:j; ISSgggSSSg

BSjgiS&ssg^a^isasssis^iissgisgis

Or4 5 P e* ^55P P cDSoS ?J&amp;lt;5 go 55 e?a&amp;gt; N ^r r c-: is ^
ffc?xft~ ^9t fcffy *tft*fsft*ir*f*fe o cs&quot;r- t- &quot;i.rf ^f x&quot;o&quot;*r &quot;r-&quot; ?j &amp;lt;r

BSSHSKgg5s;^;4^^^l?^li3lsl: &quot;

-- ------ o ^&amp;lt;

s fc

sastUji

s.* s3 ^

I ilillllllllljIIISl

-^ -fc ^ &quot; &quot;&quot; 35&quot; 7-r nT of &quot;f af aT as&quot; of T aT
osje35Jcjoc;s;sjt)

.&quot;fl S o

^5.s

:.s Biil ^3

92a*a8BHSMa

o^^S^^wwc^co

131

5l5

V S

CrjOOOOCOOOOOC
&quot; i i - i

OOOOCCCOCOOOOCSCOCbOOOOO
tl U -C M iJC ci it t tJC tX. ii t tt if 5 c il. il tC - tt t i iJD

5*3

rov.?.r.r

^llls r ^IJ

^^^^js^d^o

&amp;gt;3

i^i i

.2 :

: :^S :3^ :
: :3 ;

:N U .

JfiiJ^JlslJsJjj

illl ^Sl^ll j i

3&quot;^ . L t&quot;, ^ ^ * -(,^2

M ^&quot;_r ^3 r \ r &quot;3 PH G f

1 i^ S S^^ :g^g .****$- %

& 55.is^fa^ ^liFfSS^Hsi
iB^J^I?

^ l^tnivi

; t -g&amp;gt;; e -g &amp;lt;H

li^.Ufi
*ip||t&i

b .3.= =.=.= =

iii4fa^i

c -5 b!3 c a &amp;gt;--a a &amp;gt;: ^ ^

!!l!lif!i:-l|

rH . T H ^5 r? s 2 *&quot;* &quot;2 G &quot;^

2 s E:

s-= s

1 &quot; s x

i SNSgSbgfi

,s:MSJ3S*

it 9 flJ9%Mi&amp;gt;n !

. ^ .. a - &quot; . s. n &quot; . ~ o G

Sl&ifiHfiiiMtl S

o !r*.3 H

53S

i 5 li|!

a Q H a i

.^Ii!I
^isSr-l

l^fcSSswsfc :gasi}flS{Sfl9i -tifisSfii?s

^ ^.&quot;S S &quot;S &quot;E &quot;E H &quot;H : r H S r S E r H f S H&quot;5 S H 2 ^ &quot;5 &quot;5 &quot;B &quot;E S &quot;S &quot;5 &quot;S

S : E r 5 r S&quot; E S r g E S g B S

rtcs iOiesSaelS^naateSi^fl

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

249

* -H eosjs*oicccoooci woi-^-ot-cj
T-I ci ^&amp;lt; ci n

SSBSSBIBiiBBBBHBBBIIB&

^Ift

fc ^5

3slP F &amp;gt;tfe s *s*3J

-&amp;lt;y c-^ fi&amp;lt; 3 o^&quot;2 ,

ijwiwj*l* ilft!!

53dh;c^^Hd^?

pd;4P-

-q&quot;o,cj

oo ct) au

T T 7 T T 7 7 T 7. I r 7

~ 2 2 g

; V. /- /.

fi }$

SCk

S3|

~*^ ^

: -c r B ^r - s

ilsg-sl^s

^^ rr y cj -T ,~

S^S 151H5 s&amp;gt;^ S-Si^-iK

5 .5 ^a ;^

S!!V&! ;:^;s

sg^gggg

r Se r H&quot; H&quot;c&quot; 5 r S r S H

K^ssrtrtTSesss
f^ &amp;gt;-. ^. &amp;gt;i &amp;gt;s &amp;gt;~. &amp;gt;. &amp;gt;. &amp;gt;-. O

&quot;

.11

a a 5

LOor*ooc5O^^ 7?rt ^ &amp;lt; **^f B ^cc: o &amp;lt; c? ro ^ 10 o
c; o o L-; ih S C -^ -^ - -^ ^ s^ - o i- i- t- i- i- t- i-

250

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

-uoo ai paid
-noao 9011,1,

rHOCO 00^

g&tftftf

sssssssss

8OT3T

8&quot;

h Brooklyn Works . . .
Py, Jones & Co ____
Pusey, Jones & Co
fioi Levy & Co .
an Iron Works .

p ;

; Ne
Vul

F. Z. Thcker ;
D. S. Mershon, j
C. H. & W. M. C
Hillraan & Stre
John J. Abraha

-i

dry

Foun
bold

; Conti

lton
Arc

land

ZenoSecor; Fu
Reaney, Son &
do
Thomas F. Rowl
Harrison Lorin
Donald McKav
A. & W. Denmead & Son
Reaney, Son & Archbold

^ a 3

|||

Reaney, Son & Archbold
William Pcrine
Reaney, Son & Archbold
James Felto

.-i -&amp;lt; f-i CJ (M 1-1 -i Cl CJ

III!

l H

llia

Tfffl? i-g !

Chester, Penn
Kew York
Chester, Penn
Boston

sun*)

sissl

o o o c* (7* o o ic o ro

CtGC O ^* S *O*~OOO
t^C^OOOOOOGOCiCSOCGOQO

: 3 J

rt C M 3

.s-Sl?

8sJgS3SIS888g 83S3

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

251

w n QO TH o

e*e ct d CM n

ggogog

1 1 E g P

s i s

&quot;SSSS^xf^fcfjRvf

William H. Web
Merrickds Sons

& Co

and N

ollin pa wort
wood

wift & Co.,

rrison Loring
& Co
o
o
n
Gr
nd
o

r
d
d
la
s
a
d

arl
ile
lex

TI
M
A

nowdo
ohn E

fcb ^ &amp;gt;&amp;gt; si ti-S

3 a a a^t

O^i^
COCX)C/jXJ

ilili

i i il

w York
do

Kfrf

i s i s 1!

: : a&quot;*

G^5 ^ &B

i i I a^

Hill Ji .212^*2^5 = -^

** a C^ C^^^cS &amp;lt;J^ E37B3BBfe3 ^* J ^

i .g I | I ilill t s SJl-iSfrSfial

252

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

norpiuie
-uoo iit paid
-UDOO

-T-IOOrHQOOaOinTHClG* H

Sgg;H38g!

WflSWsil;

r n of i-T ss eT co&quot; cf cT o&quot; i-~ in o

! I-H i~ oo oc QO cr. i-2 c: c p r; cp

g&quot;3?

iilili

i
I*

eun{)

&amp;lt;?i ui c* &amp;lt;N yi si ot a

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

253

3J? i ^

rHt~

22 a s

&quot;Tr--&quot; N T o&quot; ttfo

r tiff

m *

1 SJS

l||

&quot;

.s 1

K & |

I S 1

S I I I

W PH JJQ

&quot;E &quot;?

I 1 ?!
1 1 1 1

H 5
~ r*

i&quot;

t : :

3 8 S 3 2

35 oo oo oo oc

2-2

oo a

T* T-l tH tH 1-

1 1 1 &quot;|

s&amp;lt;&amp;lt;

J S

.s ^

B &amp;gt;

^ PH &amp;gt;

| |

I i

3 1

tf.

&quot;1

s &amp;gt;

a 1

g ^

-g

n 53

&quot;i

1 1

^ o _ r3

r^ fc

s ^

^H t&amp;gt; a b

5 ! i 1

h.|

S
|

1 1

g i g*

&amp;gt;

. H

5 01 OO

(NO

1 1

jjf

^ g

5 r- to oo co f

?S 3 8 S =

O TO

r
1

1 :

S &quot;

-i

r-i 2

if.

| & j 3

5 . ^ g b f f c

^Q LJ

s s , ^ ^ S 3ft

i| |

&amp;gt; -^ ^ t^ C^ jg (g C ^_

IS M I 1 II

I s II

rs &quot;if o or^
-i- r- - i- 1&quot;

254

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. IV. Statement of vessels sold by the Navy Department from April 1, 1861, to April 1.
1865, inclusive; also from May 1, 1868, to date.

Name of vessel.

Where sold.

When sold.

Amount re
ceived.

New Orleans

June 18G4

$14 r )GO 00

Ckotank

New York

1861

700 00

Key West

Nov 1864

Falmouth

Aspinwall, N. G-

Oct. 28 1863

............

Isilda

Key West

1863

&quot;Mohawk

Philadelphia

July 12* 1864

5 000 00

Boston Mass

Fob 20 1865

10 000 00

Patroon

Philadelphia

Dec 30 1862

11 200 00

Planter*

Sept 10 186

Pulaski

Montevideo . .

1863

.... iqgo

Aroostook .. - -

Honf Konf

Sept. 1869

16 094 74

Oct 21 1869

30 000 00

Norfolk

Sept 10 1868

5 250 00

Oct 28 1868

21 687 50

Atlanta&quot; ....

Philadelphia

May 4 1869

25 700 00

Augusta

New York

Dec. 1 1868

20 700 00

Philadelphia

Sept 1 1868

9 000 00

Buckthorn

Pensacola

Sept. 7 1869

3 000 00

Chenango
De Soto -

Philadelphia
New York

Oct. 28, 1868
Sept. 30 1868

21,687 50
47 600 00

Don

Au&quot; 1 29 1868

18 000 00

Florida

Philadelphia .

Dec 5 1868

19 200 00

Juno 4 1869

7 150 00

Grampus

Mound City

Sept. 1, 1868
June 26 I860

450 00
33 000 00

Now York

May 14 1860

13 200 00

Lenapco ......

Portsmouth

Au&quot;-. 26 1868

17 900 00

Now Orleans

Oct 12 1868

17 000 00

Maratanza .. .

Portsmouth

Au&amp;lt;*. 26, 1863

32 700 00

New York

Sept 30 1868

14 100 00

.. do

May 8 1869

55 300 00

Philadelphia

Oct 28 1868

21 687 50

Portsmouth ..... ..

June 17 1869

50 000 00

Mendota ...

Philadelphia

May 25, 1P63

18 750 00

W^ashiu ir ton

Sept. 1 1868

35 000 00

Pansy .... .. .... .

Mound City

Sept. 1, 1868

450 00

Portsmouth

Oct 19 1869

6 700 00

Peoria . ...

Aug. 26, 1868

6 900 00

New York

May 6 1869

7 700 00

July 7 1869

12 000 00

Philadelphia

Oct 28 1868

21 687 50

Norfolk .. . .

Sept. 10 1868

10 025 00

Shamokiu

Washington

Oct. 21, 1869

25 000 00

Philadelphia

Sept. 1 1868

19 700 00

Tacony

Portsmouth

Aug. 26, 1868

20 OCO 00

New York

Au&quot;-. 29 1868

24 500 00

Wlnnepec

Norfolk

June 17, 1869

50 000 00

W inooski

Portsmouth

Au&quot;-. 26 1868

19 ICO 00

YUCCA

. do

Aug. 26, 1868

9 500 00

Uuadiila

Nov. 9 1869

24 215 16

Total

853 934 90

* Sold to War Department, not paid for.

RECAPITULATION.

Total vessels sold from April, 1865, to May, 1868

Total vessels sold from May I, 1864, to April, 1865, and from April 1, 1865, to date

Total vessels sold by Navy Department, April 1, 1861, to date.

420
51

471

Amount received for vessels sold from April, 1865, to May, 1868 $9, 710, 575 55

Amount received from vessels sold from April 1, 1861, to April 1, 1865 41, 400 00

Amount received from May 1, 186, to date 812,534 90

Total 10,764,51045

NOTE, For the number and -names of vessels sold from close of war to May 1, 1368, see Ex. Doc. No.
^282, 2d session 40th Congress.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

GENERAL RECAPITULATION.

255

Guns.

Vessels in service April 1 1861

Bfi

IIP 460

2 409

Vessels built since April 1 1861

179

166 000

1 110

Whole number purchased since April 1 1861 or transferred to navy

497

171 837

Whole number sold

471

Total price paid 10,764,510 45

No. V. Number and tonnage of sailing and steam vessels built and first registered in the

United Kingdom.

Calendar years.

SAILING VESSELS.

STEAM VESSELS.

TOTAL.

Vessels.

Tons.

Vessels.

Tons.

Vessels.

Tons.

1850

621

594
608
645
628
865
921
1,050
847
789
818
774
827
881
867
922
969
915
787

119, 111
126, 914
136, 749
154, 956
132, 687
242, 182
187, 005
197, 554
154, 930
147, 967
158, 172
129, 970
164, 061
253, 036
272, 499
235, 555
207, 678
185, 771
237, 687

68
78
104
153
174
233
229
228
153
150
198
201
221
279
374
382
354
295
232

14, 584
22,723
30, 742
48, 215
64,255
81,018
57, 573
52, 918
53, 150
38, 003
53, 796
70, 869
77, 338
107, 951
159, 374
179, 643
133,511
97, 219
78, 510

689
672
712

798
802
1,098
1,150
1, 278
1,000
939
1,016
975
,048
,160
,241
,304
, 323
1,210
,019

133, 605
149, 637
1G7, 491
203, 171
196, 942
323, 200
244, 578
250, 472
208, 000
185, 970
211,968
200, 839
241, 399
360, 937
431, 873
415, 204
341, 189
282, 990
316, 197

1851

1852 ...

1853

1854 . -

1855

1856

1857

1858

1859

18GO

1861

1862

1863

1864

1865

1866

1867

1868

o&amp;gt; YI. Table showing the tonnage of United States and British registered vessels, employed
in the foreign trade of each country, during the years, respectively, 1830, 4840, 1850, and from
1860 to 1868, both inclusive.

UNITED STATES.

GREAT BRITAIN.*

Year.

In the foreign trade.

Partly in home and partly
in foreign trade.

Sail

Total

Sail.

Steam.

Total.

Sail.

Steam.

Total.

1 419

576 475

895 610

4 155

899 765

1850..

1,540 769

44, 429

1, 585, 198

2, 143, 234

45, 186

2, 188, 420

222, 341

5,298

227, 639

I860..
1861..
1862..
1863

2, 448, 941
2, 540, 020
2, 177, 253
1, 892, 899

97,296
102, 608
113, 998
133, 215

2, 546, 237
2, 642, 628
2,291,251
2,026,114

2, 804, 610
2, 866, 218
2, 993, 696
3, 24(i, TrJG

277, 437
313, 465
328, 310
371, 201

3, 082, 047
3, 179, 683
3, 322, 006
3, 617, 727

226, 5:&amp;gt;6
219, 522
246, 479
284, 413

29, 803
24, 924
29, 463
33, 547

256, .r&amp;gt;9
244, 446
275, 942
317, 960

1864..
1865..
1866..

1867

1,475,376
1, 504, 575
1, 294, 637
1, 369, 917

106, 519
98, 008
198, 289
199, 115

1, 581, 895
1, 602, 583
1, 492, 926
1, 568, 032

3, 532, 242
3, 629, 023
3, 612, 973
3, 641, 662

456,241
523, 698
553, 425
608, 232

3, 988, 483
4, 152, 721
4, 166, 398
4, 249, 894

268, 125

282, 295
278, 167
199, 846

36, 944
43, 225
47, 194
50,201

305, 069
3-25, 5-20
325, 361
250, 047

1868..

1, 343, 793

221, 939

1, 565, 732

3, 646, 150

619, 199

4, 265, 349

240, 921

52, 150

293, 071

* Thia table includes Channel Island vessels, but not those of the British plantations. The home trade
signifies on the coasts of the United Kingdom, or to ports between the limits of the river Elbe and
Brest. The foreign trade signifies to ports beyond such limits.

256 NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. VII. Total number and tonnage of vessels registered as belonging to the United Kingdom,
including Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man, at the end of each year.

Calendar years.

SAILING VESSELS.

STEAM VESSELS.

TOTAL.

Vessels.

Tons.

I
Vessels. Tons.

Vessels.

Tons.

1850 *

24, 707
24, 816
24, 814
25, 224
25,335
24, 274

3, 306, 659
3, 475, 657
3, 540, 968
3, 780, 092
3, 042, 513
3, 068, 600

1, 187 | 168, 474
1,227 186,637
1, 272 200, 310
1,385 ; 250,112
1,524 306,237
1,674 380,635
1,607 386,462
1, 824 417, 466
1,926 ; 452,463
1,018 1 436,836
2, 000 454, 327
2,133 506,308
2, 228 537, 801
2, 208 596, 856
2, 400 607, 281
2, 718 823, 533
2, 831 875, 685
2,031 901,062
2, 944 9C2, 297

25, 084
26, 043
26, 086
26, GOO
26, 850
25, 043
26, 177
27, 007
27, 541
27, 702
27, 663
23, 038
28, 440
28, 637
28, 632
28, 787
28, 071
28, 773
28, 444

3, 565, 133
3, 662, 344
3, 750, 273
4, 030, 204
4, 248, 750
4, 340, 334
4, 366, 05G
4, 558, 740
4, G57, 733
4, 663, 101
4, 658, 6S7
4, 806, 826
4, 034, 400
5, 328, 073
5, 627, 500
5, 760, 300
5, 770, 337
5, 753. 073
5, 780, 5. JO

1851 .

1852

1853

1854

1855

1856

24, 480
25,273

3, 080, 494
4,141,274

1857

1858

1859

25, 615
25, 784
25, 663
25, 005
26, 212
26, 3.10
26, 142

4, 205, 270
, 226, 355
, 204, 360
, 300, 518
, 306, 500
,731,217
, 930, 219

I860

ISfil

1862

1863

18G4

1865

26, 069
26, 140
25, R42
25^500

, 936, 776
, 003, 652
,852,911

, 878, 233

1866

1867 .

1868

No. VIII. Table showing the tonnage, respectively, of American, British, and French vessels
which entered and cleared at tlie ports of countries to which such vessels belonged in trade with
other countries.

Calendar year.

Entered inward.

Cleared out-ward.

American vessels
entering at Amer
ican from foreign
ports.

British vessels en
tering at ports of
Great Brit n from
foreign ports.

French vessels en
tering at ports of
Franco from for
eign ports.

American vessels
clearing from
American for for
eigu ports.

British ves sols
clcar g from ports
of Great Britain
for foreign ports.

Fi-eneh ves ls clear
ing from nort.s of
Franco lor for
eign ports.

1853

4, 004, 013
3, 752, 115
3, 861, 391
4^335, 484
4, 721, 370
4, 395, 642
5, 265, 643
5, 921, 285
5, 023, 917
5, 117, 685
4, 614, 698
3, 066, 434
2, 943, GG1
3, 372, 060
3, 455, 052
3, 550, 550

3, 363, 121
3, 313, 540
3, 633, 153
4, 433, 702
4, 772, 760
4, 506, 100
4, 603, 266
4, 778, 010
5, 410, 450
5, 526, 295
5, 866, 184
6, 4G2, 606
7, 022, 948
7, 980, 264
8, 706, 255
8, 721, 022

854, 029
921, ftC
1, 006, 419
1,191,424
1, 356, 687
1, 286, 870
1, 328, 322
1, 345, 396
1, 434, 778
1, 589, 763
1, 610, 347
1, G49, 518
1, 639, 994
1, 633, 296
1, 709, 703
1, 804, 021

3, 766, 789
3, Oil, 302
4, 068, 979
4, 538, 364
4, 580, 651
4, 400, 033
5, 297, 367
6, 165, 924
4, 889, 313
4, 961, 818
4, 447, 261
3, 090, 048
3, 025, 134
3, 383, 176
3, 410, 502
3, 717, 956

3, 457, 058
3, 362, 083
3, 882, 017
4, 521, 818
4, 630, 230
4, 367, 855
4, 631, G70
4, 801, 042
5, 182, 862
5, 546, 183
5, 722, 643
6, 460, 578
7, 116, 057
7, 895, 770
8, 388, 346
8, 603, G91

911,164

1,011,611
1, 042, 279
1,215,154
1, 375, 082
1, 274, 219
1,401, 164
1, 437, 893
1, 468, 461
1, 550, 886
1, 656, 777
1, 660, 640
1, 705, 334
1, GOO, 540
1, 392, 004
1, 834, 856

1854

1855 . - -

1856

],-&amp;lt;57

1853

1859

1HGO

IdOl

1862

163

1864

1363

1866

1867 .

Id63

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

257

No. IX. Table showing the licensed and enrolled tonnage of the United States engaged in
the coastwise trade, and the tonnage of the British registered vessels engaged in the home
trade, during the years, respectively, from 1850 to 1868, both inclusive.

Year

UNITED STATES.

* GREAT BRITAIN.

Year.

Licensed
andt-nroll-

ed sail.

Licensed
and
enrolled

strain.

Total
licensed
and

enrolled*

In the home trade.

Partly in the home and partly
in the foreign trade.

Total re

ed Hail.

ed strum.

gistered.

ed sail.

ed steam.

gistered.

1850..

, 468, 738

481, 005

1, 949, 743

666, 957

54, 196

721, 153

222,341

5,298

227, 639

1850

1851..

,524,915

521,217

2, 046, 132

685, 641

78, 820

764,461

242, 656

4, 926

247, 582

1851

m52..

, 675, 456

563, 536

2, 238, 992

701,803

66, 606

768, 409

147, 867

15, 244

163, 111

1852

1853..

, 789, 238

514, 098

2, 303, 336

689, 342

85,471

774, 813

156, 800

7,250

164,050

1853

1854..

,887,512

581,571

2, 469, 083

694, 712

54,002

748, 714

202. 124

19,135

221,259

1854

1855..

2, 021, 625

655, 24

2, 676, 865

691, 128

57,415

748, 543

210,114

12,562

222, 676

1855

1856..

1,796,888

583, 362

2, 380, 250

719,860

67,616

787, 476

162, 488

16,102

178, 590

1856

1857..

1, 857. 964

618,911

2, 476, 875

767, 925

92,481

860, 406

162,112

20, 859

182, 971

1857

1858..

2, 550, 067

651,363

3, 201, 430

788, 113

90, 739

878, 852

13d, 699

20,604

159,303

1858

1859..

1,961,631

676, 005

2, 637, 636

777, 422

90, 867

868, 289

132,768

21, 123

153, 89)

1859

I860..

2, 036, 990

770.641

2, 807, 631

821,079

92, 254

913,333

226, 556

29, 803

256, 359

1860

1861..

2, 122, 589

774, 596

2, 897, 185

832, 771

102, 795

935, 566

219, 522

24, 924

244, 446

1861

1862..

2, 224, 449

596, 465

2,820,914

771, 326

104, 020

875, 346

246, 479

29, 463

275, 942

1862

1863..

2,6611,212

439, 755

3, 099, 967

752, 589

107, 003

859, 592

284,413

33, 547

317,960

1863

1864..

2, 5*30, 690

853, 816

3, 404, 506

789, 108

125, 808

914,916

268, 125

36, 944

305, 069

1864

1865..

2, 505, 067

969, 131

3, 494, 198

795, 434

134,776

930,210

282, 295

43, 225

325, 520

1865

1866..

1, 932, 829

885, 023

2,817,852

813,909

147, 191

961, 103

278, 167

47, 194

325,361

1866

1867..

I, 742, 689

993, 765

2, 736, 454

839, 523

154, 244

993, 767

199, 846

50,201

250, 047

1867

1868..

1,808,550

977, 476

2, 786, 026

804, 749

153, 265

958, (X14

240, 921

52,150

293, 071

1868

* NOTE. This table includes Channel Islands vessels, but not those of the British plantations. The home
trade signifies on the coasts of the United Kingdom, or to ports between the limits of the River Elbe and
Brest. The foreign trade signifies to ports beyond such limits.

No. X. A comparative new of the tonnage of the United States from June 30, 1850, to June
30, 1869, showing, separately, the tonnage of sailing and steam vessels, and the yearly
increase or decrease of each class.

Fiscal years.

Total tonnage.

Tonnage em-
ploy d in steam
navigation.

Yearly increase
and decrease
of steam ton
nage.

Tonnage of sail
ing vessels, in
cluding barges
and canal -boats.

Yearly increase
and decrease ot
saili g tonnage.

1851

Tonsand95t/is.
3 77 439 43

Tons andVStfis.
583 607 05

Tons and 95tks.
*57 660 15

Tone and Qbths.
3 188 83 38

Tons andSSths.
*179 325 05

185

4 138 440 47

634 40 67

*50*633 6

3 504 199 80

*315 367 4

1853

4 407 Oil 43

514 097 87

tl20 142 80

3 89&amp;lt;&amp;gt; 913 56

*388 713 76

1854

4* 80 90 63

676 607 12

*16 0&amp;gt; 5!)9 25

4 16 295 51

*233 381 95

1855

5 212 001 10

770 285 12

*93 67^ 00

4 441 715 98

*315 420 47

1856

4 871 65 46

673 077 54

|97 OQ7 sg

4 198 574 9

|243 141 06

1857
1858

4, 940, 84.5. 04
5 049 808. 35

705, 784. 04
729 398. 41

*32, 706. 50
*23 614 37

4, 235, 059. 00
4 320 409 94

*36, 484. 08
*85 350. 94

1859

5 145 037 39

768 436 83

*39 038 4

4 376 600 56

*56 190 62

I860

5 353* 868. 42

867 937.49

*99 500.66

4 485 930 93

*109 330.37

1861

5 539 812 79

877 203 51

*9 266 02

66 609 28

*176 678 35

1862

5 112 164.48

710 462.33

t!66 741 18

401 702 15

t26H 907. 13.

1863

5 155 055 47

575 510 17

f!34 952 16

579 545 30

*177 843, 15

1864

4 986 399.79

978 177.74

*402 667 57

008 222 05

t571, 323* 25

1865:

5, 096, 781. 80

1,067, 139.91

*88, 962. 17

,029,641.89

*2l, 419, 84

1866t
1867:

4, 310, 775. 48
3,957,514.62

1,083,511.99
1, 122,979.61

* 16, 372. 08
*39, 467. 62

3, 227, 263. 49
2, 834, 535 01

1802, 373.-40
t392, 723. 48

1868:

4,318,309.50

1, 199 414. 89

*76 435.28

3 118 894.61

*284, 351*. 60

1869

4 144 640 76

1 103 568 38

|95 851 89

3 041 072 38

t77 822.61

* Increase. t Decrease.

1 For 1865, 1866, 1867, and 1868 the tonnage is partly &quot;old&quot; and partly &quot;new&quot; admeasurement.

17 N I

258

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XI. A statement exhibiting the amount of registered tonnage oftlie United States, steam
and sail, employed in navigation annually, from 1850 to 1869, inclusive, and the annual
increase or decrease of each class.

Year ending June 30

Total tonnage.

Registered sail
tonnage.

Annual increase
or decrease of
sail tonnage.

Registered
steam tonnage.

Annual increase
or decrease of
steam tonnage.

1850

1 585 198

1 540 769

*122 697

44 429

*23 J59

1851

1 726 307

1 663 917

*123 148

62 390

*17 961

1852

1 899 478

1 819 774

KJ55 gv7

79 704

*17 314

1853

2 103 674

2 013 154

*193 380

90 520

*10 816

1854

2 333*819

2 238 783

*225 629

95 036

*4 516

1855

2 555 136

2 440 091

*201 308

115 045

*20 009

1856

2 491 402

2 401 687

t 38 404

89 715

t 5 330

1857

2 463 967

o 377 094

t&amp;lt;&amp;gt;4 593

86 873

t2 842

1858

25/7 769

2 499 742

*122 648

78, 027

18 846

1859

2 507 402

2 414 654

t 85 088

92 748

*14 721

I860

2 546 237

2 448 941

*34 287

97, 296

*4 548

1861

2 642 68

2 540 00

*9l 079

102 608

*5 312

1862

2 291 251

2 177 253

t362 767

113, 998

*11 390

1863

2 026 114

1 89 899

t284 354

133 215

*19 217

1864

1 581*895

475 376

t417 523

106, 519

1 26, 696

1865

1 602 583

504 575

*29 199

98 008

t8 511

1866

1 492 926

294 637

1209 938

198, 289

*100 281

1867

1 568 032

369 917

*75 280

198 115

1 174

1868

1 565 732

,343 793

t26 124

221, 939

*23, 824

1869

1 566 421

353 169

*42 825

213 252

t8 687

Increase.

t Decrease.

No. XII. Table showing the tonnage of the United States, June 30, 1869.

TONNAGE.

Sailing ves
sels.

Steamers.

Total.

Registered vessels

1, 353, 169

213, 252

1,566 421

Licensed and enrolled, vessels

1 687 903

890 316

2 578 219

Total

3 041 072

1 103 568

4 144 640

No. XIII. Statement showing the number and class of vessels built, and the tonnage thereof, in
the several States and Territories of the United States from 1850 to 1869, inclusive.

CLASS OF

VESSELS.

Fiscal years.

Ships
and
barks.

Brigs.

Schooners.

Sloops and
canal-boats.

Steamers.

of vessels
built.

Total ton -
nage.

1850

247

117

547

290

259

1 460

272 218.54

1851

211

522

326

233

1 357

298 203 60

1852

255

584

267

259

1 444

351 493.41

1853

269

681

394

271

1,710

425, 571. 49

1854

334

112

661

386

281

1 774

535 616. 01

1855

381

126

605

669

253

2,034

583, 450. 04

1856

306

103

594

479

221

1,703

469, 393. 73

1857

251

504

258

263

1,334

378, 804. 70

1658

222

431

400

226

1,325

242, 286. 69

1859

297

284

172

870

156, 601. 33

1860

110

372

289

264 .

1,071

212, 892. 45

1861

360

371

264

1,143

233, 194. 35

1862

207

397

183

866

175, 075. 84

863

212

1, 113

367

1,823

310, 884. 34

1864

112

322

1 389

498

2,366

514, 740. 64

1865...

109

369

853

411

1,788

383, 805. 60

1866*

457

926

348

1,888

336, 146. 56

1867* .

517

657

180

1,519

303, 528. 66

1868*

590

848

236

1,802

285, 304. 73

1869*..

506

816

277

1, 726

275, 230. 05

New admeasurement.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

259

No. XIV. Total summary of tlic tonnage of the United States, June 30, 1869, as reported to

the Bureau of Statistics.

Class.

Vessels.

Tons.

Ships

537

Barks

818

Bri (T s - ... . .

607

10 870

Sloops

3 913

Tot il siiliuf vessels . .. . ...

16 745

o 074 gn 09

3,361

1 046 015 98

6 287

62 5 4 H

Total number of vessels permanently documented

26 393

3 744 ji&amp;lt;) 00

Total number of vessels temporarily documented

1 033

401 046 99

Total

27 426

4 145 366 08

No. XV. A table showing the amount of American and foreign tonnage entered the ports of the
United States from foreign countries in 1830, 1840, 1850, and from 1860 to 1869, both inclusive.

Fiscal years.

American ton
nage.

Foreign ton
nage.

American in ex
cess of foreign
tonnage.

For ii in excess
of American
tonnage.

1830

967,227

131, 900

835, 327

1840

1 576 946

712 363

864 583

1850

2 573 016

1, 775, 623

797, 393

1860

5 921 285

2 253 911

3 567 374

1861

5 023 U17

2, 217, 554

2 806 363

1862

5 117 685

2 245 278

2 872 407

1863

4 614 698

2 640 378

1 974 320

1864

3 066 434

3 471 219

404 785

1865 . . .

2,943 661

3 216 967

273 306

1866

3, 372, 060

4, 410, 424

1,038 364

1867

3, 455 052

4 318 673

863 621

1868

3, 550, 550

4, 495, 465

944 915

1869

3 402 668

5 347 694

1 945 026

No. XVI. Table showing the estimated value of American foreign carrying trade during the ten
years from 1860 to 1869, both inclusive.

sia&cs

Fiscal years.

Amount of
registered ton-
nageJune30.

timatcdspc
alue, per to

Aggregate
specie value of
tonnage.

llfll

%&amp;gt;

|Ps

1850

1 585 198

$38

$60 237 524

$20 079 175

2 546 237

104 395 717

34 798 r &amp;gt;72

1861

2 64 628

108 347 748

36 115 916

2 291 251

103 106 295

34 368 765

1863

2, 026, 114

91 175 130

30 391 710

1864

1 581 895

71 185 275

23 78 425

1, 602, 583

72 116 235

24 58 745

1866

1 492 926

67 181 670

2 393 890

1867

1 568,032

70 561 440

23 50 480

1868

1, 565, 732

70 457,940

23 485 980

1869

1 566 421

70 488 945

23 496 315

260

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XVII. Table showing the estimated value of American coastwise and inland carding
trade during the ten years from 1860 to 1869, both inclusive.

Fiscal years.

Amount of
licensed and
enrolled ton
nage on Juno
30.

Estimated specie
value, per ton.

Aggregate
specie value of
tonnage.

Estimated specie
value of gross
yearly earning,
being 33J per
cent, of value.

1850

1 949 743

$38

$74 090 234

$24 696 745

1860

2 807 631

115 112 871

38 370 957

1861

2 897 185

118 784 585

39 5&quot;D4 861

1862

2 820 914

126 941 130

42 313 710

1863 . .

3 099 967

139 498 515

46 490 505

1864

3 4D4 506

153 202 770

51 067 500

1865

3 494 1B8

157 238 910

52 412 970

1866

2 817 852

126 803 340

42 267 780

1867

2 736 454

123 140 430

41 046 810

1868

2 786 026

125 371 170

41 790 390

1869. ..

2, 578, 219

116 019 855

38 673 2S5

No. XVIII. Table showing the total foreign commerce of the United States during each year
from 1850 to 1869, inclusive.

Fiscal years.

Exports and im
ports in Ameri
can vessels.

Exports and im
ports 1 in foreign
vessels.

Total.

1850

$239 272 084

$90 764 954

$330 037 038

1851

316 107 232

lis 505* 711

434 612 943

1852

294 735 404

13 219 817

417 955 21

1853

346 717 127

152 237 677

498 954 804

1854

406 698 539

170 591, 875

577 290, 414

1855

405 485 462

131 139 90 -1

536 625 366

1856

482 268 274

159 336,570

641 604 850

1857

510 331 027

213 519 706

723 850 823

1858

447 191 304

160 066 267

607 257 571

1859

465 741 381

229 816 211

695 557 592

1860

507 247 757

255 040 793

762 288 550

1861

381, 516, 788

203, 478, 278

584, 995, 066

1862

217 695 418

218 015 296

435 710 714

1863

241, 872, 471

343, 056, 031

584, 928, 502

1864

184 061 486

485 793 543

669 855 034

1865

167, 402, 872

437, 010, 124

604,412,996

1866

325 711 861

685 226 691

1 010 938 552

1807

296 998 387

580, 022, 004

877 020 391

1868

297, 981, 573

550, 546, 074

848, 527, 647

1869

289 950 272

586, 492, 012

876, 442 284

Total

6 824 986 719

5,893 879,639

12 718, 866 358

No. XIX. Total exports of domestic and foreign merchandise combined.

Fiscal years.

American ves
sels.

Foreign ves
sels.

Total.

1850

$99, 615, 041

$52, 283, 679

$151, 898, 720

1851

152 456 689

65 931 322

218 388 Oil

1852

139, 476, 937

70, 181, 429

209, 658, 366

1853

155 028 802

75 947 355

230 976 157

1854

191, 322, 266

84, 474, 054

275, T. 6, 320

1855

203 250 562

71 906 284

275 156 846

1856

232, 295, 162

94, 669, 146

326, 964, 3 J8

1857

251, 214, 857

111, 745, 825

362, 960, 682

1858

243, 491 288

81, 153, 133

324, 644, 421

1859

249, 617, 953

107, 171, 509

356, 789, 462

1860 -*

279, 082, 902

121, 039, 394

400, 122, 296

1861 .

179, 972, 733

69, 372, 180

249, 344, 913

1862

125, 421, 318

104, 517, 667

229, 938, 985

1863 .

132, 127, 890

199, 880, 691

332, 003, 581

1864

102, 849, 409

237, 442, 730

340, 292, 139

1865

90, 017, 756

262, 839, 588

352, 857, 344

1866

213 671, 466

351,754,928

565, 426, 394

1667

179, 788, 851

279, 399, 969

459, 188, 820

1868

175, 016, 348

301, 886, 491

476, 902, 839

18G9

153, 148, 248

285, 979, 781

439, 128, 029

Total

3, 548, 866, 478

3,029,577,155

6, 573, 443, 633

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

261

No. XX. Table showing tlic amount of foreign merchandise imported into the United States
in American and foreign vessels, respectively, during the fiscal years from 1850 to 1869,
both inclusive. (Expressed in specie value at foreign ports of exportation.)

IMPORTS.

In American vessels.

In foreign vessels.

Total in American
and foreign vessels.

1850

$139 657 043

$38 481 275

$178 138 318

1851

163 650 543

52,574 389

216 224, 932

155 58 467

53 038 388

*21 945 442

1853

191 688 325

76 290 322

267, 978, 647

1854

215 376 273

86 117 821

*304 562 381

1855

202 234 900

59 233 620

261,468,520

1856

249 972 512

64 667 430

314 639 942

1857

5259-116 170

101 773 971

360, 890, 141

1858

203 700 016

78 913 134

282 613 150

1859

216 123 428

122 644 702

338, 768, 130

1860

228 164 855

134 001 399

362 166 254

1861 ... .

201 544 055

134 106 098

335, 650, 153

186

92 274 100

113 497 629

205 771 729

186;)

109*744 580

143, 175 340

252,919,920

1864

81 212 077

248 350 818

329 56-2 895

1865 ...

74 385 116

174 170 536

248, 555, 652

1866

112 040 395

333 471 763

445 512 158

1867

117 209 536

300 622 035

417,831,571

1868

122 965 225

248 659 583

371 624 808

1869

136 802 024

300 512 231

437, 314, 255

Total

3 273 119 640

2 864 302 484

6, 145, 138, 998

*In the year 1852 $4,648,587, and in 1854 $3,068,287, were imported into San Francisco; class of vessels in
which brought cannot be stated.

262

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XXI. Statement exhibiting the arrival and departure, at certain specified 2&amp;gt;orts, of
American and foreign vessels, in certain portions of the foreign trade of the United States,
1856 to I860, and 1865 to 1869, loth inclusive.

No. I. DISTRICT OF BOSTON.

District.
Boston

Total....
Boston

Total....

From 1856 to 1860 inclusive.

From 1865 to 1869 inclusive.

Countries.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

1
I

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

1
H

Number.

&amp;lt;o
H

403

67
20

21,992
319, 497
311
55, 924
15, 399

472
8,624

38
412
1

22,464
328, 121
311
56, 816
15, 524

18
123

12, 218
113, 858

12
63
3

7
12
1

6,207
50, 871
1, 538
6,008
5,601
757

30
186
3
32
17
1

18, 425
164, 729
1,538
29, 384

8 S?

Dutch E. Indies.
British E. Indies.
Australia.
Philippine Islands.
i China.
Japan.

France on Med.
Spain on Med.
Italy and Sicily.
Austria.
Turkey & Greece.

892
125

25
5

23, 376
2,709

528

413, 123

10, 113

540

423, 236

171

152, 161

70, 982

269

223, 143

49
45
203
5
102

16, 180
15, 943
81, 246
2,411
33, 310

23
27
131

&quot;~6

9,599
6,724
26,507

~i,&quot;645

72
72
334

108

25, 779
22,667
107, 753
2,411
34, 955J

11
33

184

5,010
10, 097
79, 124

18
23
76

6,949
3,851
28, 451

29
56
260

11, 959
13, 948
107, 575

11, 817

7,971

19, 788

404

149, 090

187

44, 4,75

591

193, 565

261

106, 048

142

47,222

403

153, 270

Boston

11, 518

1,912

13, 430

16, 184

2,030

18, 214

Dutch E. Indies.

206

133, 606

475

207

134, 081

86, 202

14, 763

110

100, 965

British E. Indies.

63, 618

1,545

65, 163

39, 437

20, 164

100

59, 601

Australia.

7,083

7 083

22,210

16, 603

3,976

&amp;lt;&amp;gt;6

20 579

China.

1 731

Total....

369

238, 035

3,932

376

241, 967

201

160, 157

40,933

264

201, 090

Boston

10, 661

2,016

12, 677

1,527

1,173

2,700

France on Med.

5,865

871

6,736

9,897

1,865

11, 762

Spain on Med.

8,680

3,281

11, 961

3, 105

919

4, 024

Italy and Sicily.

11,463

2,049

13, 512

384

211

595

Austria.

116

41, 912

2,266

120

44, 178

8,009

3,539

11, 548

Turkey &amp;lt;fc Greece.

Total ....

244

78, 581

10,4831 276

89, 064

22,922

7,707| 101

30, 629

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

263

No. XXI. Arrival and departure of American and foreign vessels, &amp;lt;fc. Continued.
No. H. DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.

Districts.

ENTERED.

*
Countries.

From 1856 to 1860 inclusive.

From 1865 to 1869 inclusive.

American.

Foreign.

Total

American.

Foreign.

Total

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

New York

Total....
Now York

Total....

28
136
13
67
234

14, 074
117, 768
5,196
67, 049
213, 958

25
1
4
16

360
14,238
250
2,790
8,868

29
161
14
71
250

14, 434
132, 006
5,446
69, 839
222, 826

58
4
60
64
11

7,335
54, 983
3, 178
63, 275
46,750
7,383

170
8
31
227
54

14, 535
141,010

3,818
24, 605
108, 821
23, 314

228
12
91
291
65

21, 870
195, 993
6,996
87, 880
155, 571
30, 697

Dutch East Indies.
British East Indies.
Australia.
Philippine Islands.
China,
Japan.

France on Medite n.
Spain on Medite n.
Italy and Sicily.
Austria.
Turkey and Greece.

478

418, 045

26,506

525

444, 551

207

182, 904

521

316, 103

57, 066
39, 000
198, 389
30, 999
13, 430

728

499, 007

117
209
335
20
25

56, 724
57, 904
145, 052

8,718
9,072

68
116
237
34
46

24, 867
22, 810
70, 534
11, 684
15, 397

185
325
572
54
71

81, 591
80, 714
215, 586
20,402
24, 469

88
252
2
6

26, 714
29,459
114, 855
949
2,150

131
141
480
76
55

185

229
732
78
61

83, 780
68, 459
313, 244
31, 948
15,580

706

277, 470

501

145, 292

1207

422, 762

402

174, 127

883

338, 884

1285

513, Oil

CLEARED.

New York

Total....
New York

Total....

30
56
186
2
145

20, 939
41, 617
179, 915
755
124, 818

2
31
22

849
17, 399
12(122

87
208
2

146

21, 788
59, 016
192, 037
755
125, 187

6
4
42
1

81
25

4,385
2,925
29, 872
729
71, 974
33, 270

10
24
109

6,631
14, 059
61, 512

28
151

130
31

11,016
16, 984
91, 381
729
108, 356
38,607

Dutch East Indies.
British East Indies.
Australia.
Philippine Islands.
China.
Japan.

France on Medite n.
Spain on Medite n.
Italy and Sicily.
Austria.
Turkey and Greece.

369

49
6

36,382
5,337

419

368, 044

30, 739

475

398, 783

159

143, 155

198

123, 921

357

267, 076

150
143
40
10
51

58,224
38, 548
12, 986
4,881
16, 713

45
60
14
13

9,421
13, 572
18, 979
5, 021
3,766

185
188
100
24
64

67, 645
52, 120
31, 965
9, 902
20, 479

134

68
69
2
16

56, 976
23, 434
37, 509
1,040
5,334

115
87
192
62
33

37, 357
24, 076
86, 840
18, 662
8,043

249
155
261
64
49

94,333
47, 510
124, 349
19,702
13, 377

394

131, 352

167

50, 759

561

182, 111

289

124, 293

489

174, 978

778

299,271

264

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XXT. Arrival and departure of American and foreign vessels, tfc. Continued.
No. m. DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA.

ENTERED.

District.

From 1856 to 1860, inclusive.

From 1865 to 1869, inclusive.

Countries.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

1
fc

Philadelp a
Total....
Philadelp a

Total....

11, 345

1,007

12, 352

2
1

736
421

2
1

736
421

Br. East Indies.
Australia.

11, 345

1,007 14, 12,352

1,157

1, 157

3
10
97

624

2,350
39, 393

3
13
71

706
3,032
22,201

6
23

168

1,330
5,382
61, 594

3
76

295
921
27, 099

4
5
90

933

891
25, 660

5
8
166

1, 228 Franco on Med n.
1, 812 Spain on Med n.
52, 759| Italy and Sicily.

55, 799

110

42,367

25, 939

197 68,306J 80

23, 315

27, 484

CLEARED.

Philadelp a

2 613

British E. Indies.

Australia.

847

Philippine Isla ds.

5 833

5 838

2,013

716

2,729

China.

338

Japan

Total

9,298

2,351

716

3,067

Philadelp a

1,705

3
9

619
326

2,324
326

36,206

6,670
1,500

113

42, 876
1,500

Franco on Med n.
Spain on Med n.

919

7,920

10, 402

18, 322

Italy and Sicily.

299

2,569

1,022

3,591

Austria.

248

190

438

Turkey & Greece.

Total....

2,004

1,864

3,868

125

46, 943

19, 784

191

66, 727

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 265

No. XXI. Arrival and departure of American and foreign vessels, $c, Continued.
No. IV. DISTRICT OF BALTIMORE.

District.

ENTERED.

Countries.

From 1856 to 1860, inclusive.

From 1865 to 1869, inclusive.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

Number.

M ; Number.

1
H

1
&

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Baltimore

781

Brit h East Indies.

France on Mcd n.
Spain on Med n.
Italy and Sicily.

Baltimore. .
Total.. A

4
9
46

2, 526
2,040
16, 043

2
8
22

498
1, 028
4, 252

6
17

3,024
3,068
20,295

4,&quot; 354
3,904

8
46

228
1,683
13, 026

1
13

228
6,037
16, 930

20, 609

5,778

91 26,387

8,258

14, 937

23, 195

CLEARED.

Baltimore

1 639

British East Ind s.

1,392

1 392

Australia.

910

Philippine Islands.

3,433

1,313

4,746

679

7 782

2
1

1,309
987

3
q

1,9?8
8 769

China.

Total....

5,735

2,952

8,687

8,461

2,296

10, 757

Baltimore..

22
6
4
f&amp;gt;

11, 746
2,116
1,013
2,246

2
1
4

337

189
659

24
7
8
5

12, 083
2,305
1, 672
2,246

7
5

2, 438
2, 121
1,383

2
7
6
1

1,627
1,031
1,156
246

14
11
1

4,065
3, 152
2,539
246

France on Med n.
Spain on Med n.
Italy and Sicily.
Austria.

Total....

17, 121

1,185

18,306

5,942

4,060

10,002

266

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XXI. Arrival and departure of American and foreign vessels, ^-c. Continued.
No. V. DISTRICTS OF RICHMOND AND CHARLESTON.

ENTERED.

Districts.

From 1856 to I860, inclusive.

From 1865 to 1869, inclusive.

Countries.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

Number.

1
fc

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

Richmond .
Charleston .
Charleston.

Total....

533

1
2

533

Spain on Med.
British E. Indies.

France on Med.
Spain on Med.
Italy.
Austria.
Turkey.

1,029

883

1,912

3
5

2,144
3,535

4
49
4

1,216

18, 986
1,982

533

967

6,212

23, 151

Richmond .
Richmond .

Total....
Charleston .
Charleston.

Total....

8
4
33

4,294

Australia.

Franco on Med.
Italy.
Austria.

China.

France on Mod.
Spain on Med.
Italy.
Austria.

&amp;lt;
ft

4,414
2,073
18, 310

4,414

2
5

672
3,143

6
38

2,745
21, 453

5
5

1,439
1,725

5
5

1,439
1,725

45 24,797

3,815

_ &quot;

28, 612

3,164

572

7
13
4
2

2,222
3,906
1,801
1,209

4
377

913

99, 993
290

235

9,333

9,138

382

101, 196

235

43J 9, 333

NAVIGATION INTERESTS. 267

No. XXI. Arrival and departure of American and foreign vessels, fc.- Continued.
No. VI. DISTRICT OF NEW ORLEANS.

District.

ENTERED.

Countries.

From 1856 to 1860, inclusive.

From 1865 to 1869, inclusive.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

1
ft

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

N. Orleans .
Total ....
N. Orleans .

Total....

7
1

6,909
997

2,673
1,207

10
2

9,582
2,204

1. 043

3,359

4.402

British E. Indies.
Australia.

Franco on Med.
Spain on Med.
Italy and Sicily.
Austria.
Turkey & Greece.

7,906

3,880

11, 786

39, 921
82, 544
113, 112
12, 031
6,990

1,043

3,359

4,402

30
42
107
12
5

30, 034
25,083
71, 762
11,483
5,418

21
129
115
1

9,887
57, 461
41, 350
548
1,572

51
171
222
13
7

5
12
12

3,009
8, 942
4,275

12
57

5,759
6,284
16, 626

18
24
69

8,708
15, 226
20, 901

196

143, 780

268

110, 818

464

254, 598

16, 226

28,669

111

44, 895

CLEARED.

N. Orleans .
Total....
N. Orleans .

2,253

British E. Indies.
Australia.

Franco on Med.
Spain on Med.
Italy and Sicily.
Austria.
Turkey & Greece.

68
28
140
40

2,253

34, 003
13, 607
91, 433
25, 440

28
443
53
13

11, 050
160, 454
19, 688
5,067

96
471
193
53

45, 053
174, 061
111, 121
30,507

3
5
10

1,261
1,960
4,606

4
194

919

58, 274
7,042

7
199
38

2,180
60,234
11, 648

360, 742

276

164, 483| 537

196,259

813

7,827

226

66,235

244

74,062

268

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XXI. Arrival and departure of American and foreign vessels, $ c. Continued.
No. VH. DISTRICTS OP SAN FRANCISCO AND PUGET SOUND.

District.

ENTERED.

Countries.

From 1855 to 1860, inclusive.

From 1865 to 1869, inclusive.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

American.

Foreign.

Total.

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

&amp;lt;o
to

Number.

Tonnage.

Number.

Tonnage.

S. Francisco

Total ....
S. Francisco
Total....
Puget So nd

Total....

12
8
32
12
107
8

4,998
5,006
14,910
5,363
90, 999
1,604

11
5

40
9
69
1

3,820
2,025
17, 436
2,827
35, 108
126

23
13
72
21
176
9

8,818
7,031
32, 346
8,190
126, 107
1,730

469

13
11

182
9
94
28

4,736
6,628
89, 651
7,236
63, 726
13,720

15
11

222
18
156
68

5,205
6,628
114, 306
13, 293
118, 807
91, 793

Dutch E. Indies.
British E. Indies.
Australia.
Philippine Islands.
China.
Japan.

France on Med.
Spain on Modite n.

Australia.
France on Mod.
China.
Japan.

40
9
62
40

24, 655
6,057
55, 081
78, 073

179

122,880

135

61, 342

314

184, 222

153

164, 335

337

185, 697

2, 821
989

490

350, 032

6
1

2,132
369

6
3

2,132
830

6
3

2, 821
989

3,810

461

2,501

2,962

3,810

532

2
1

961
424
273

3
1

1, 493
424
273

336

3,469
449

6
1

6,517
650

11
2

9,986
1,099

532

1,658

2,190

3,918

7,503

11, 421

S. Francisco

Total ....
S. Francisco
Pugot So nd

Total ....

8
56
70
41
204
10

4,571
59, 319
43, 644
37, 000
213, 841
2,281

8
11
74
5

3,458
4,668
32, 140
1,835
38, 835

16
67
144

46
282
10

8,029
63, 987
75, 784
38, 835
252, 676
2,281

6
23
11
92
35

164
5,994
12, 190
10, 979
88, 503
79,690

5
6
156
5
83
6

2,067
2,861
64, 596
1,745
50,782
1,735

6
12
179
16
175
41

2,231

8,855
76, 786
12, 724
139, 285
81,425

Dutch E. Indies.
British E-. Indies.
Australia.
Philippine Islands.
China.
Japan.

Franco on Med.

British E. Indies.
Australia.
China.
Philippine Islands

389

360, 656

176

80,936

565

441, 592

168197,520

261

&quot; ^

123, 786

429

321, 306

1,016

4
21
24

1,734

12, 855
17,839

4
34
32
1

1,734

21, 484
22,569
738

5,837
3,026

3,302
3,104

14
15

9,139
6,130

13
8
1

8,629
4,730
,738

~~29

8,863

6,406

15, 269

14, 097

32,428

46,525

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

269

00 _

to
siv

l c

H-

2^
3-2

c^cTf T irff^

CO i-H O (?&amp;lt; T (

-H-Od%H-,-r:

eTw

3 g S U 3 I? 5 i 2 ~,: ( o ?i 15 3 5 5 5 1; ^ P r? g i 3 - ^ -3

^i-ooiooc&amp;gt;^ioirto-ox)Cit-oXi.T)(?tc^Or-r5: : 5-5?5oTf ^5j f3
f LO&quot; o&quot; tn f --o .TO&quot; ci&quot; T&quot; r-&quot; in&quot; of ^H&quot; cf o&quot; o&quot; of r-* o&quot; o&quot; o

iSaS$ls p Igsa s^^g 3010 ^^

3-2

2 I

rf * n

Cf 0&quot;-T tM&quot; * 9? r*

iJ ci ocT
~ n &quot;

OIO

o e

- _- _-r ^&quot; ^r- r r . -f * .r _- - _* ^

-2.2

i in

Ilil(ll31(SSSlllJISSBSSlllll^l(5S*l

270

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

1 ^SSS3wSS2&amp;gt;eSw

a -a

sasasssasassss

TH&amp;lt;?ao:omr-ioco .oiot-sji-o

o t- c?5 i

O O O

O ? O 7&amp;lt; -t

^^T-icic*

^H 00 CO O l~- rH 3O
COCO GOt- &amp;lt;Mr1rH

o&quot; uf co&quot; i--&quot; QO&quot; &quot; cT ro~ *&quot; *&quot; cT so&quot; t^&quot; co&quot; o&quot; *&quot; cT

^&amp;lt; C3COft- i 9 f oo&quot;&quot;5r-cx)r-r^(MT-i-H

g.a
ll

r-T TH&quot; co

:S :

-PN

NAVIGATION - INTERESTS.

271

No. XXIII. Statement of steamers making regular trips between ports of the United States
and foreign ports, in 1860 and in 1869.

TABLE A.

STEAMSHIP LIKES FROM NEW YORK TO FOREIGN PORTS. 1860.

Name of lino and port of des
tination.

Names of steamers.

&quot;3
2

Total tonnage
each line.

Pacific Mail Steamship Line

Atlantic

2 846

Wood

5 569

From New York to Aspin-

Baltic

2 723

wall.
Atlantic Mail Steamship Line

Ariel

1 295

&quot;Wood

6 074

From New York to Aspin-
wall.

North Star....*
Northern Light

1,868
1,768

.do...
do .

. . .do.
do

From Now York to Havana

Quaker City

1 143

North Atlantic Mail Steam

Adriatic

4 145

Wood

9 630

ship Line. From New York

Illinois

2, 124

.do...

...do.

to Havre

Vanderbilt

3 361

Havre Steam Navigation Com

Arago

*2 240

Wood

4 548

pany. From New York to

Fulton ...

*2 308

Havre.
North German Lloyds. From

Bremen

2 398

Iron . .

German

4 764

New York to Bremen via

New York

2366

Southampton.
Hamhurgand American Steam

Hammonia

*2 964

Iron.

German

9 359

Packet* Company. From

*2 133

New York to Hamburg.

Bavaria

*2* 235

Teutonia

* 027

do.

British and North American

Africa

2 087

Wood

British

25 744

Royal Mail Steamship Com
pany. From New York to

Asia
Arabia

2,051
2 286

..do...
Iron. .

....do.
...do.

Liverpool.

Australasian

2 663

Balbec

940

Etna

1 968

Wood

Java

*2 781

Iron

do.

Jura

2 045

Kedar

*1 825

do.

Persia

3 688

Wood

Damascus

1,116

..do...

...do.

2 294

Liverpool, New York, and

City of Baltimore

*2, 323

Iron - .

British

13, 372

Philadelphia SteamshipCom-

City of Washington

*2 386

do.

pany, &quot;Inman Line.&quot; From

City of Manchester

*1, 895

..do...

. . . .do.

New York to Liverpool, via

City of Edinburgh

2 188

do.

Queenstown.

Glasgow

1,649

..do...

....do.

Kangaroo

Vijro . . .

1,516
1,415

..do...
do...

...do.
....do.

Anchor Line From New

John Bell

1 103

British

3 392

York to Glasgow.

United Kingdom
United States

1,155
1,134

..do...
.do .

... do.
. . . .do.

Galway Line From Now

Prince Albert

431

British

7 082

York to Galway.

Parana

2 570

do.

Golden Fleece

2 328

....do.

Circassian

li753

..do..

....do.

Tonnage under new admeasurement.

NOTE. It may be proper to state that there may have been other vessels belonging to the above linea
in 1860 ; if so, they did not come to this port in that year.

272

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XXin. Statement of steamers making regular trips between ports of the United States
and foreign ports, in 1860 and in 1869 Continued.

STEAMSHIP LINES FROM PORT OF NEW YORK TO FOREIGN PORTS, JANUARY 1, 1870.

Name of line and port of des
tination.

Names of steamers.

Tonnage.

Material.

Total tonnage
each line.

New York and Mexican Steam

City of Mexico screw

1,200

Wood.

American

2,325

ship Line From New York

Cleopatra do

1 125

..do.

to Vera Cruz and Sisal, via
Havana.

Atlantic Mail Steamship Line.

Moro Castle side-wheel.

1,680
1 385

Wood,
do

American
do

5,216

Columbia . do . .
Missouri screw

l f 271
1 180

.do...
do...

...do.
. . .do.

Pacific Mail Steamship Line.
From New York to Aspin-
wall

Henry Chauncey ..side-wheel.
Arizona do..
Alaska . . . do

2,556
2,740
4 Oil

Wood,
.do...
do ..

American
...do.
...do.

12, 034

United States and Brazil Mail

Rising Star do..
Merrimack screw .

2,727
2,031

.do...
Iron . .

. . .do.
American

6,166

Steamship Lino. From New
York to Rio de Janeiro, via

South America side-wheel.
North America. ........ screw .

2,050
2,085

Wood,
.do...

...do.
...do.

the West Indies.
New York and Bermuda Steam

Fah Kee ... ... screw

601

Wood.

American

601

ship Line. From New York
to Bermuda.

City of Port au Prince screw

371

Iron . .

American ....

371

British and North American

Russia . . screw.

3 013

Iron

British . . .

42 038

Royal Mail Steamship Line.

Scotia side-wheel.

3,865

..do.

. . . .do.

From New York to Liver

China . screw

2 661

do.

pool

Cuba do..

2,781

...do.

Java do

2 781

...do.

Tarifa do .

2, 118

....do.

Siberia do

2 538

. do.

Aleppo do.

2, 103

do .

. do.

Samaria do .

2,605

..do..

....do.

Tripoli do.

2 059

do .

....do.

Palmyra do

1 389

. .do.

Atlas * do.

1,650

. . . .do.

Kedar do .

1, 825

..do..

....do.

Malta do.

2 206

. . . .do.

Marathon do .

1,819

..do..

....do.

Ol vmpus* do .

1,219

....do.

Palestine* do.
Sidon* do.

1,468
1,703

..do..
..do..

. . .do.
....do.

Batavia do .

2,235

..do..

....do.

City of Paris screw

2 646

British

26 814

Philadelphia &quot;Dale Line&quot;

City of Antwerp do

2 400

.. do.

From New York to Liver
pool.

City of London do.
City of Dublin do.

2,807
1,997

..do..
..do..

....do.
....do.

City of Baltimore do .

2,323

do .

...do.

City of Washington do

2 386

..do.

City of Manchester do.
City of Limerick do .
City of Brooklyn do.

1, 895
1,604
2,974

..do..
..do.,
do

. . . .do.
. . . .do.
...do.

City of New York do.
City of Cork do.

2,094
1,540

..do.,
do .

. . . .do.
...do.

Etna do

2 208

do.

Liverpool and Great Western

Manhattan screw

2 965

British

18, 594

Steamship Line. From New

Minnesota do

2 965

...do.

York to Liverpool.

Nebraska do .
Nevada do.

3,392
3 125

..do.,
do

....do.
...do.

Colorado do.
Idaho... ...do.

3,015
3.132

..do..
..do..

....do.
...do.

* Made no trip in 1869.

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

273

No. XXIII. Statement of steamers making regular trips between ports of the United States
and foreign -ports, in 1860 and 18G9 Continued.

STEAMSHIP LINES FROM POUT OF NEW YOUK TO FOREIGN PORTS, JANUARY 1, 1870.

Name of line and port of des
tination.

Names of steamers.

Tonnage.

Material.

Total tonnage
each line.

Anchor Line. From New
York to Glasgow, via Lon
donderry and Liverpool.

[A part of this lino during a
portion of the year runs to
Mediterranean ports.]

London and New York Steam
ship Line. From New York
to London, via Brest.

National Steamship Line.
From New York to Liver
pool.

General Transatlantic Com
pany. From New York to
Havre, via Brest.

New York and Bremen Steam
ship Line. From New York
to Bremen.

North German Lloyds. From
New York to Bremen.

Hamburg and American Steam
Packet Company. From
New York to Hamhurg.

Columbia screw.

1,716
1,418
1,418
1, 039

Iron . .
..do...
do

British

24, 640

5,948
23,301

9,518

1,797
25, 947

26,681

Caledonia do..

....do.
do.

Britannia do

Daoian do..

..do...

....do.

Iowa do..

2,030

..do...

...do.

Dacian do - .

1,030
1,747
2, 141
1,039

..do...
..do...
..do...
..do...

....do.
....do.
....do.
. . .do.

Cfimhria do . .

T yrian do . .

Siibriua -do .

2,538
2, 1GG
915

..do...
..do...
do .

. . . .do.
....do.
....do.

India do..

Iloxanna do

Palm yra do . .

717
862
755

..do...

...do.

Statira do

. do

do.

Acadia . do..

..do...

....do.

Noi thumbria do . .
An^lia do

900

2, 200

2,110
1,845

do.

..do...

....do.

Atlanta screw

Iron . .
..do...

British . . .

Bellona do . .

. . .do.

Cell a do

1,993

3,441

3,560
3,327
3, 178

..do...

Iron..
..do...
do

....do.

British . . .
....do.
do.

England screw

The Queen do

Denmark do

..do...

....do.

Erin do..
Pennsylvania do

3, 336

2,873
3,586

1,929
1,809
2,048

..do...
..do...
..do...

Iron..
..do...
..do...

....do.
....do.
. . . .do.

French
....do.
...do.

Franco do..

Europe side-wheel

St. Laurent . . do

Ville de Paris do. .

1,809
1,923

1,797

2,614
2,747
2,870
2,009
2,881
2,871
3,019
3,018
3,018

2,133
2 591

..do...
..do...

Iron..

Iron . .
..do...
..do...
..do...
..do-.,
do

....do.
....do.

North German

North German
....do.
....do.
....do.
. . . .do.
do

Lafavetto ...side-wheel

Smidt screw

America screw

Herman .. do . .

Union do

Hansa . do..

Deutchland do . .

Khino do

..do...
..do-..
..do...

Iron.,
do

. . . .do.
. . . .do.
....do.

North German
do

Main do .

Doran do . .

Borussia screw

Hammonia do..

2,064
2 620

..do...
..do...

. . .do.
....do.

2,235
2, 027
2,964
3, 026
3, 054
3,067

do.

..do...
..do...
..do...

....do.
. . . .do.
...do.

Cimbria do..

Holsatia do

&quot;Westphalia do. .

Silesia do

..do...
..do...

....do.
. . . .do.

NOTE. Some of the above lines have spare steamers, not in use at present, and not included In fore
going list.

18 N I

274

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

fl.3
B 1 ^

S 8 8

cT cf

o i-T c

8553S

3VSS5SZS3 8S9S

S88SSS

ill!

&amp;lt;yfcfcfcf

sSSIilII| Sill

issgs^

-3

....

1 : : : : :

^
2

g^c^o^o

ocoooooco ccoo

i o o c o o

Wood or

fl :::::::: :| a |

^rS^^^pi ^^2 r2 , K. g K.

M r^t-^r^

Name of ca

steamer.

ill!

; PS . * .1 ; . ; i
frjsilgjJljajSjIl ^S4^

If i d.^ 1

1131s!

f route.

In foreign
countries.

a
o

| |

In the United
States.

03 02

a H
o o

^ 125

i .

I
f.

I I

belonging.

S
1 I

BALTIMORE.

North German Lloyd Company
Total to Baltimore. . .

p
|q

jj ]

SAN FRANCISCO.

Pacific Mail Steamship Company

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

275

5 a S s 2

i 1 i s s

to n ct rn- 3

^&quot; s

SS3S

sis

SIS!

!r e

: : : : : : : : : :

^^^^ 0000 00
w ^ C &quot;w ^ w ^3 T3 w ^

a : M : :
3 ; 5 : ; _i

i=l fig! II
Jill 111 II

Hong Kong.

wenty-four tripj

North Pacific Transportation Company. .
D..

8
1

276

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

No. XXV. Statement of American steam lines making regular trips between ports of \hc
United States and foreign ports.

Name of line.

To what foreign port.

When estab
lished.

STnmber of
steamers.

Number
of trips.

Tonnage.

PORTLAND.

Portland and Halifax

1 Halifax, 1 St. Johns..

Charlotte Town
St. Johns

18G7

1868
1866

1, 096. 71

BOSTON.

Nickerson & Co. s lino

3
1

About 38
About 40

1, 840. 36
449. 27

3, 067. 34

I. Gr. Hall & Co s lino

International Steamship Co.,
(owned in Portland)

Boston and Portland

Total Boston

5, 356. 97

NEW YORK.

New York and Mexican Mail
Steamship Co
Xew York and Bermuda Steam
ship Lino

Vera Cruz

Bermuda

Havana

1868
1868

1
4

18 .
20

2, 141. 23

601. 00
5, 544. 16
12, 034. 00

6, 435. 17
490. 00

Atlantic Mail Steamship Co ...
Pacific Mail Steamship Co
United States and Brazil Mail
Steamship Co .

Aspiuwall
Rio de Janeiro

1849
1865

4
3
1

26
12
12

New York and Port au Prince
Lino

Port au Prince

1864

Total New York

27, 245. 56

NEW ORLEANS.

Alliance Line

1866

1, 676. 09

SAN FRANCISCO.

Pacific Mail Steamship Co
Pacific Mail Steamship Co
North Paci fie Transportation Co
North Pacific Transportation Co
North Pacific Transportation Co

Total San Francisco . . .

Panama

1849

4
4

24
12

18, 023. 50
16, 3G9. 67
3, 620. 25
2, 883. 50
1, 077. 13

Hong Kong

Victoria

1867

Mazatlan

Honolulu

41, 974. 14

Total

77, 351. 47

No. XXVI. Comparative statement of English steamers entered and cleared at Portland.
Maine, dining the fiscal year 1360, and during the fiscal near 1869, for transatlantic ports.

Names of steamers.

Tonnage.

Class.

Names of steamers.

Tonnage.

Class.

1860.
1 Hungarian

487

1869.

2 G50

2. Aulo-Saxon

165

Iron screw

2 Prussian

3 056

Iron screw

3. Nova Scotian

2 266

Iron, screw.

3. Nova Scotian

2, 2G5

Iron, screw.

4. North American

816

Iron screw

4 Moravian

2 241

Iron screw

5. North Briton

,487

Iron, screw.

5. North American

1,816

Iron, screw.

6. Bohemian

483

Iron screw

6. Nestorian

2 665

Iron screw

7. Canadian

,310

Iron, screw

7. Peruvian

2,566

Iron, screw.

8. Australasian

1 512

8 Hibernian

2 444

Iron screw

St Andrew s

1 345

Total tonnage

12 531

10 Damascus

1, 359

Iron scrt w

11. Scandinavian

3, 400

Iron, screw.

Total tonnage

25, 807

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

277

No. XXVII. Steamship lines.
RECAPITULATION.

Number of
vessels.

s5
1
H

American line steamers trading with foreign ports, not transatlantic, January 1, 1870 . .
American lino steamers tradin&quot;&quot; with forei&quot;u ports, not transatlantic 1SGO

15
G

27, 013
11,643

Increase in American tonnage since I860

15, 370

American lino steamers trading with transatlantic ports, in I860

None.

14,178
None.

American lino steamers trading with transatlantic ports January 1, 1870

14, 178

British lino steamers trading with transatlantic ports, January 1, 1870

ill, :&amp;lt;::.
51, 610

British line steamers tradin&quot;* with transatlantic ports in 1860

Increase in British tonnage since I860

89, 783

German lino steamers trading with transatlantic ports, January 1, 1870

20
6

54, 425
14, 123

German lino steamers tradin T with transatlantic ports in I860 ...

Increase in German tonnage since 18GO

40, 302

French line steamers tradin&quot; 1 with transatlantic ports January 1 1870

None.

9,518
None.

French line steamers tradin&quot; 1 with transatlantic ports in I860

Increase in French tonnage since I860

9,518

Total number of steamers and tonnage coming to New York from transatlantic ports

89
32

205, 338
65,733

Total number of steamers anil tonnage coming to New York from transatlantic ports
under ibreiTi fla&amp;lt; r s in 1860

Total increase of forci^Ti tonnage since 1860

139, G05

Total number of steamers and tonnage coming to Baltimore from transatlantic ports
under foreign fla&amp;lt; r s, January 1, 1870

4
None.

9, 249
None.

Total number of steamers and tonnage coming to Baltimore from transatlantic ports

Total increase of foreign tonnage since 1860 .

9, 249

Total number of steamers and tonnage coming to Portland from transatlantic ports

25,807
12,531

Total number of steamers and tonnage coming to Portland from transatlantic ports

13, 276

Total number of steamers and tonnage coming to New Orleans from transatlantic ports
nnder foreign flags January 1870

9
None.

10, 417

None.

Total number of steamers and tonnage coming to New Orleans from transatlantic ports
under foreign fla^s January 1860

Increase of foreign tonnage since I860

10, 417

1,678
None.

Number of American steamers and tonnage trading between New Orleans and foreign
ports not transatlantic January 1870

None.

Number of American steamers arid tonnage trading between New Orleans and foreign
ports not transatlantic January 1860

Increase of American tonnage since 1860 .. .

1,678

Number of American steamers and tonnage running between San Francisco and foreign

17
6

41, 974
18, 023

Number of American steamers arid tonnage running between San Francisco and foreign

23, 951

73
19

172, 547

26, 821

Net increase of American tonnage since 1860

278

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

o o 3b TH t-

-H i- n&amp;lt; o co s&amp;lt; n o o t- o i- o M TH ci i- i- o ci
efri&quot; TH&quot;&quot; cicf eft-&quot; rfrf cffff cT

&amp;lt;s

-T-IO?OCOC&amp;lt; O

ocTi-Ti-rcrrrr

i- T is o ci o TH i- es cs TH J 3 TTI TH t- CM i- H L- -? r^ ~&quot; i

o aoaotocJ-H** 1 o n OO -S-HO c? -* 1 ?-&amp;lt; M is ro i. s x o ao -o c? - o
QO Ciro^J^o*^ ^ T i Ct^or5^ cooO ^o-^^:c;*r^;Oi^-c?ctrc
OOCl^OOO Ci ^ rHOOO^t- Or5S5S5O^S}O&amp;gt;OlOOQO l 9&amp;lt;

*&quot;co&quot; o&quot;-&amp;lt;j&amp;lt;&quot;cf co&quot;cf-

g g^og^;

o 3 L-S i- 2 i - o co -j ci * ro -? ro s r- -H i-^ o o ci f

^COTH^THCl^Cl^^^Cl^cl 10

Sri
a as

&amp;gt; O Tf -H CO Hj* CO Ci LO I tH 71 H* rH CO O CM O -* CO C? CO i^- ^ d O O C; O

) oo -* oo TT&amp;gt; &amp;lt;?i o co COJM-HO-H S-HgogiNwg^ocyir-i^oiios

&quot;ro r^ i&amp;lt; fffi.rr T-T L^O&quot; cT-o i f *&quot;^ cTo&quot; ^ &amp;lt; &quot;-H&quot;crr-&quot;-H&quot;7fcrTH&quot;i 5&quot;croo&quot;i.-r^&quot;cr

st ro o cs 71 o L^ L-S co T o -o o ;-5 x 5 1 ! T JT ! &quot; &quot; - &quot;** ^5 ro

JO * r-l &amp;lt; T-&amp;lt; ?0 CO * ^-( r-tUr-iCi

o&quot;o&quot; co&quot;o&quot;f&quot;&quot;cTr-&quot;cf cT i.-f rfttfaS tffvS o&quot;o&quot;ro&quot;o&quot;o&quot;7f~rcT7fcrrx : &quot;i-f T-ns?-*?

TH O CI Ci -* 1 CT5 i 71 CO O Cl 7? -T i- &amp;lt; O / &quot;O O --S ( r -- r. - -. CV O O O

Ci ** ro O O -O O iO C* O O O O 71 LO, OO O CO I- O O -V -CO I- -o i.O O -* 1 71 O Tf

co&quot; o&quot; o&quot;^&quot;^&quot;cfo&quot;

ro o -^ -5 &amp;gt;co o S Ci i- i- .o ro i.- t- ~ o L-; r? aj -r 7) ro -i -nr- 7J &amp;lt;
Oi iicio o o rHoooTit coooci *7*c5c s o^rocrioc; ^ i c;r-

ci o oo TC o o o cl T 1 L-O do o a) o o 5) d aO ** d O co TH &amp;lt;%T-I QD IA i

LO ?o T* r- c

oo co ci o
Po cTco&quot; T-&quot;

5o S5oc?o co o t^^co?-? c!coc?c?o?-o3o?Joooo6?o

ci oo o co 7* o o o co ci ci TH t ci ^ ^ t ci ci c? cc LO c; ci T i oo i cc co ci ^*

o&quot;co~ trfo&quot;o~t--&quot;cr-^&amp;lt;&quot; i.-o&quot; ^~ TH&quot;I-&quot; Lo&quot;ao~ m rfi^ si t^c?n$ *&amp;lt;?* ^&quot;cf cf rTrrTo cM&quot;

OClC^ -iL-i TH OCi rHTt&amp;lt; (M (Jl THC&amp;lt; J CO C1C1 Ci

.2 :

T3 .

Illilli illiUUniMi:

p$da

- --r .. : o H

Plliillll! 1 llU

M ^ ^

lail

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

279

& a

co cT

* %

52 =5
S 55 It-

.s&

^S 73

II s

m gss p_i s i Irfrpiippiipp ii s

^ ill III I&quot; i ill s asliil&quot;SSSlslll l&quot;s

ofr-T ,-T

ci ci o 3 oo OO^H
ci co t- oo ci co LO ci

3 S23 S3&quot;

lllslSISsEi8 li

m us g3 s i BBiaaKiiisiKiss &

SciScoo 3S:o?jr-c rororV-fi^S co&quot;

2,. s$ sSl

il ill Sjii i 1 Sills SSliSSIilSlll

fftf 3f?&quot;-&quot; ^y** tf =T o&quot;-fi.-fr-rr r ~ ^&amp;lt;&quot;3p&quot;o&quot;Qi irrTf-o ofc

rH t-

?3~

(O t- Ot iH 8 ClO

if^T co o o &amp;gt;.^ ^H o ci ci o *o o r^ *f 1^*0 ci ^ r* ci r- oo t* of

s gs33 IsJsliiSSSSIPSlil 51

II Sli Sis c? sSSil ilS^Silis

SP S3S So S gf Sf f?fS123&quot; K&quot;g&quot;^S&quot;^g&quot;$fSfi&quot;Sf2?2

Cl r-l Cl * O O ^ CO rH rH rH i- CO rH O Cl CO I- C&amp;lt; rH 4 1 O rH O ~? rH ?

ocj
cf T

rrio

-fin oococ* ot-ci o

CO rH CJ O Cl CO TO O Cl

I- O t- I- O *9&amp;lt; t- X) C5

rfs cfsrf gfs&quot;5

CO &quot;!&amp;lt; CJ OJ O IO i TO O O CJ i.O O Cl I Cl Cl O f OJ

I f 00 rH -H 7? -T* O X 7MO O T C: ^^ M O &amp;lt;- 7* O CO

i QO O C5 O 00 CO -* M 00 O C t- O t- 30 -O * f&quot; ^ C&amp;lt;

&quot;co co&quot; oo&quot;Tf o&quot;of ro &quot;To&quot;--r-o&quot;-^ro~c- -fo -of &quot;faf co&quot;co-

i-H l~Ot-Cl&amp;gt;.O

SSS^S

OO rHCO^f Cli&quot;*

^r+ f-*o co

I 1.1 iij

R o i &quot;3 :

&amp;lt;1 r3 *M

^ ; S 3,^

:cS :

280

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

L*f^&quot;*i&quot;o&quot;ar

S2SSS

C5 &amp;lt;M Tf t-

foT in&quot;

(M CJ C* f

SSSS

M M CO

c r- o aj i.o

33,

Great Britain
West Indies
East Indies
China and Japan
South America

C* t- t- r-l CO

i-l t- 00 1.1 t-

Cl CO CC CO CO

S88

CO TH I- O CO

BSSgfS

CO rH ^ O C

GO l^* r-f H C^

gss&quot;s

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

281

No. XXX. Amounts paid to American and foreign steamships for the sea conveyance of
United States mails from I860 to 1869, inclusive.

Fiscal year ending

Vessels.

Paid to vessels
under contract.

Postages paid
as compensa
tion for the
sea convey
ance of mails.

Total amounts
paid.

June 30 I860

American

$426, 635 95

$280 712 53

$707 348 48

June 30 18l!0

Forci Ti

147 085 34

Juno 30 1661

American

306 970 70

306 ( )70 70

June 30 1861

Foreign

235 713 54

Juno 30 1862

American

90 303 77}

&amp;lt;IO 303 77J

June 30 1862

28 r &amp;gt; 884 3}

285 884 23

June 30 1803

American

55 663 13

June 30 1863

Foreign

332 184 80

June 30 1804

American

Juno 30 18G4

Foreign

371 740 43

June 30 18Gf&amp;gt;

65 555 52

Juno 30 18G5

Foreign

405 479 56

465 479 56

June 30 1 SCO

American

112, 500 00

136 089 33

248 589 33

June 30 18G6

464 978 60

465 978 60

Juno 30 li=67

American

233, 333 33

181 522 74

414 856 07

June 30, 1867

Foreign

455,049 32

455, 049 32

June 30. 18G8
Juno 30, 18G8
June 30 1869

American
Foreign

497, 916 66
683 333 33

132, 095 09
387, 304 35
82 178 54

630,011 75
387, 304 35
765 511 87

June 30 18G9

Forein

336, 163 24

Total

1 953 719 27

4 536 220 31

6 7G2 039 58

RECAPITULATION. Sum total paid to American and foreign ships, as compensation for the sea con
veyance of mails, from I860 to 1869 inclusive, $6, 762, 039 58.

No. XXXI.-*-lafemen of the rates of duty upon the descriptions of iron most used in ship
building under various tariff s.

[Submitted by FRANKLIN SMITH, of Atlantic Iron Works, Boston, October 21, 1869.]

. ..

~ -

-d

&amp;gt;, - &quot;3

S&quot;||

-If

25 a

c &amp;lt;| j *

jif.

llll

j-i O u

||C|f

Description.

** a

5 r g r&amp;gt; s

^^ .a e)

fc &amp;lt; _ &amp;lt;N * .

o ^V

_o ^

_c ^&quot;c5 &quot;^

^* o o ^

j^-

_- .- ^

^^-o o&quot;

3 &amp;gt; ** **

&quot;o P&amp;lt; w ci

5 s

ls5S

pi 111

Plates, (most used in ship-building)

$43 80

24 per ct.

$20 00 or 46

$33 60 or 77

per cent.

Common rounds and squares, f inch

29 93

24 per ct.

15 CO or 50

33 60 or 112

50 40 or 168

per ceiit.

per cent.

Common rounds and squares, 11-16 inch..

29 93 24 per ct.

15 00 or 50

33 60 or] 12

33 60 or 112

per cent.

Commonronnds and squares, J to 2 inches.

29 93

24 per ct.

15 00 or 50

22 40 or 75

per cent.

Common rounds and squares, 2 to 3 inches.

29 93

24 per ct.

15 00 or 50

33 60 or 112

per cent.

Flats, H to 6 inches wide ; i to 5-16 thick.

29 93

24perct.

15 00 or 50

33 60 or 112

per cer t.

per cent.

Refined of ordinary sizes, rounds and

34 80

24 per ct.

15 00 or 43

33 60 or 97

50 40 or 145

squares, J, 9-16, and f inch.

per cent.

282

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

T ro&quot; acT cT

cj-OJ-t

&quot; irf oc&quot; i.-f o&quot; i rf cT -r&quot; T
r^-r-Hi-n&amp;lt;^

O (M O J CO tS rH CO C5 00 O Ci l.t t

~ *

O CO C*2 O3 ^f

O t- i.~. TJ. O I

THrHOOroCCCJCC

rHrfaomoi-ieieiocr-CTWMoo
o e; c-. -~ / -- &quot;. r -z -f TO o c 1-1 Tt&amp;lt;
i-oceoociO&quot;a-i.Tir:oi-^-5&amp;lt;C5

&quot; TjJ&quot; of p? in *f eo&quot; of n s f n of in&quot; *&quot; rf&quot; cf

i C? C2 T*I CO O d O
. . . . . . . O O O t- r-( -^ O) C3

!!! !! I co&quot;cf&quot;co&quot; w&quot;^&quot; rjTfff

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

233

oo r- o do ^

sses

=-. 05 SI f

siS

rican v
sels.

5 oo m ooo

O Ci -H /, -^
5 CO T TO CX&amp;gt;

2 3 ^ S !?

C5 10 C&amp;lt; l-

rican ves
sels.

IS :i

rfffi-~t--cTi

iisiil

rHVr-ri-facTcr

an ves
ls.

vs i- o

t- rH CO

&quot; CT !3 1 rf&quot; CO&quot;
i O TU I -

GO -V O5 O

rH 00 t-

^t 1 -H -H rH &amp;gt;^ rH

CO ^ i&quot;- J^* CO O J^-

T CO t- rH C CO

rH C5 O

^SJ3

cToTr-T

CJ *
Of rf

O 00 Cl 00 1&amp;gt; C*

&amp;gt;; re 71 i- 11 o
oo T o o i- o

1 &quot;icf

rt ef

05 o

Ic^r^Cli

I :

Sifeii I

111 I at H

mill

284

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

iiiiiss

38lill

LO o o oo co o

CO&quot; cfr-T

CJ I- O&quot;^ rH&quot;^&quot;cO&quot;

J 4

Cf (Crf

LOO

O Cl I- T-I CO *}&amp;lt; CO

* co oo oo co c&amp;gt; T.

5 ^JJ-

3 o i-o c: co LO m

tO C5 CO t- T-I Ct IT5

I- t- CO CO OD

oS 1 ^lo

^i L

f tf .

e- ^

Foreign vessels.

C5 ^ O 00 LO X) O

Tf CO C5 O CO C5
IO CO !- C3 O CO

co&quot;

O QO O

fe ^&quot;ss

co o*

American ves
sels.

1, 820, 135

Illllll

i-llii

^&quot; ofi-T

S rtTr

!Sls

O t^- 00 -? ?J O C5
CO C5 O&amp;lt; CO CO t- Ol

2SiiE

S^I S SSI

m T-I

s sri&quot;

C-i
H

cico t^^SSo

i i

1 1

||g|||g

lllgli

&amp;gt;

1 1

&quot;

CO CO O 00 IO O ^

cs 1-1 to co 1-1 01

O CO M Cl CO -V

LT ^H r- . i- 10 co

SSSSSI

Foreign ve

- S8S

CO&quot;

cfcit- r- ofi. j

S ffl 5S

cocf

American ves
sels.

IPJi

o co o i - o co oo
of oo&quot; *&quot; oo&quot; i-T co&quot; o&quot;

I- O tN C5 t- O C&amp;lt;

co&quot;ofoo&quot; co&quot;cf

oc&quot;co&quot;co&quot; co&quot;o&quot;

S^ ^S

3 = =

S ::::&

H :;:::::

3 i ::::::

&amp;lt; 3 : :
3|S :

11 i

H :

a ;3

B i = i i i =|

-i ^

EAST INI

Australia
British East ID

ilJlf

lllllSS

|l {

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

285

ss&quot;

&quot;rf7o o&quot;
c i : S 8

llSil

Ess*

lllSS

o LO ao S n &quot;

3 ?: xl

I-&quot; TH-CO&quot;

oo 7&amp;lt; t- -o co

O f O

e! o

o cs c* rH r- &quot;* c?

I&quot; -H IO T3 -O 1- ^H

O O C5 n 1 Ci O O

-*--

&amp;lt;*&quot; a r-

O 00 t*
O &amp;lt;M fO

Tf^-^TtD QO cr

SSSSc?

8 SS

*&quot;

o&quot; cf

T -o o r- GO rs

co ij * 3 55 TP

&quot;

co aj au ad

iWi

ii s^sass-g

r-l CJ CO I- -f

co&quot; cTT-Ti-T

o 1 1 ?i - -o ci -C

^S^SSS

&quot;rt &amp;lt;N

SO CO ^O ?
O 30 LO O

gsgfsfsjf

O OD O *&quot;
7f VD T!
000 Cl&amp;gt;0

O 00 -^f rH (^ rH

r o&quot;&quot;

- gf

Ill^iW

r-r co~ T-T

til

^ : H

11 S
IS

3 S

I! I

; .S a -S

23 u

rH *** tn

286

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

* C5 i?5 C5 O rH O

iSiilS

liSIl

iiicsi

Foreign ves

plflsa

/,
K

|||S&quot;

SS1-S

American ves
sels.

j &quot; S- s

9, 558, 487

n 53 ? IQ -* o

CO L-5 ~&amp;gt; CM rH rH

o-^r-To oo-

SL&quot;f
C*3

oc&quot;

Slill

oo&quot;

00&quot;

Foreign vessels.

SB}

-f

|li|i |

1&quot;

111|

III S

s
1

American ves
sels.

g 5 S

&amp;lt;& w&amp;lt; * 1

i isl

|pK-

Foreign vessels.

ililiw

IHIII

J.
g&quot;

00&quot;

cf n

a iSPli

00 CO Cl C*5 O p
C-J OO GO Tf rH O

Sllll

ffi

1NI11

American
sels.

i 3 P!

Cf rH-

W&quot; rH~&quot;

Foreign vessels.

Sli

oo&quot;

O I- TC CS O

OrH J5?510
cTfff O&quot;T-H

t-
i-

1
oo-

lliSlii

ellspg

85IS3

Iglll

American
sels.

o o &quot;^ i&quot;- i CJ r^-

O ^* r- Ci 00

r -

oo * * o to
cf

CO&quot; OO-rH-

00~

|.j j i j j j j

....

:AN TRADE.

lljll

i i

^ r^

ilfiili

(^(i^ccSpqM^

EUROPEAN ATL

England
Scotland
Ireland
Franco
Spain
Portugal

MEDITEBBAN1

Franco
Spain

Italy and Sicily
Austria

Turkey and Greece

EAST INDIj&amp;lt;

China
Japan
Australia

British East Indies ....
Dutch East Indies

5 &quot; o i- A o 5

C&quot;5 1- O rH *f rH Si

Tf t- O 00 J~ O -H
O t- T ~U O O *

O Ift S5

otfofi-T
L ~

fJII

T-TOD t^ rH l. il^l

00 ^r oo -r r- .
.- ci o a oo Tf

Cf Or--

o oo i- -

tfg

* F-

silllll

TH O &amp;lt;Jl QO TO IO 1&amp;gt;
O ft^ &quot;^ dj tO O rH
O IT5 rH C t- C5 00

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

287

3 t- 3 GO

o~ t-~ eo eo cf

Sllill

Sg33;

-3&amp;lt; rH TJ&amp;lt; CJ Tf t- i
r-Tcf r-T

3SS5S2P

* * t- o o o n

ailSSS

sl !iii

s-o.sgcj^t 3 feS&artp

2*a - tiS a SH * i rr^r^i 1 -^- 1

re o ~v o o C5

lliilS

o oo r- ci

C3 O - ifj

o ei ^ ci

i S S

oo r- o o o ^

00 iH C3 -r TH i

assess

T&amp;gt;&amp;lt; rH O C5 C5 O

000

SIS

cTi^ ^J

0&quot; rH-

o ci

CO C5 O 00 P5

&quot;0&quot; r-~
rH

rH i^ O

j O^

SIS

fW3

288

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

&quot;&quot;cT
S

r.&quot;

IlilS
1III&

QO-H CD -O 5O r^ C5

irasl&iS

Sc2g&quot;Sf^

co 01 co n e&amp;gt; co

, 408, 979

co o Ci ^ ci t^ -f

CJ S J^ -vj ^ o ,-.

L-5 rf CJ I- C-.

|
1

lissi

t- C M CO C5 t- GO

33S3

lllllig

American
sols.

lliiS

wft-rcfw Vf

i_;

00 GO ?3 S 00 ?? O

^r go

S&quot;

t-&quot; cT -v&quot; cf

S22
SS :

eo ci co c o o
^ssss?;

Tf a ro cv -o ci

gi^s^gjg

&amp;lt;?

S&quot; gf :

sss^sss

cd&quot;t&amp;lt; i-- o t-

i-H O CM O (7&amp;lt; &quot;3&amp;lt;

55
n

Tf CJ CJ C5

slsi

2SS?2?^3

I- O I- n C3 GO T

illlil

e&amp;gt;

gss^

&quot;

M rH CO 1- CO rH r&amp;lt;

i-i T co t- co

1 ~&quot;~

sfg ^s sf

O3 r-i

^ O p p C5

5?coo?

^K^3Bg

C5 c: o r- -q- IH TH

!S82sSS

V CJ &amp;lt;3 t- J-

&amp;gt;

a
fee

|
|

|^2SS

SSSSS^S

07 CO r-l r&amp;lt;

eo&quot; ci&quot;

t^ 1

sssssss

CN CC Ci TJ- C* C5 00
rn-of T-H&quot;

r-&quot;

(M CO &quot;9 O *

?- c ^&amp;gt; --; i
w r? w * 55

Tt*

^SSS^^

TJ* rH ^ Ci CC O Ci

sssssss

o ro rr S t- co oo

American
sels.

irf

o ci ro ci co

OtT (M~

iiisss a

co&quot; cfsf

o&amp;gt;

LO&quot; o&quot; o&quot; *&quot; o&quot; i . f ei

SSS8SSS5

ef CO&quot; r-T rH&quot;

J^. ,H IO i-t *#

ssggg

lllllsl

*&quot; I- Ct -l O O
8SS83

I-

Foreign ves

MO^SiO
Qtfrt &quot;&quot;

o&quot;

c3^?^P:^2

CJ O O rH r- -V ^&amp;lt;

T-T maf

-r

sssssgg

ofr^ cf

Cl O

&amp;lt; -

1- ( O CO *H

*^ ^- &amp;lt;O O H

O rH (7-1 C&quot;5 CO

JS?2R!-?3SS

C&amp;lt; CJ Tl O CM O Tf

o o co cc co i- t~

CO -H C^ ^ CO ^y CD
O C3 ^H OO O O C5

i
II

CO&quot;T}.~
.^

&oo

g i

O t- {- 1&amp;lt; O

^&amp;lt; -* 1 ro c
ot- coco

cfr-T

=
of

jtftfssr^5&quot;3

CO C&amp;lt; T O C5 CO

rf gf rf

:-.

-r

t- f GO 11 Cl C OO

S^So1
co&quot; o&quot; cf i-T

(

MEDITERRANEAN TRADE Con
Turkey and Greece

EAST INDIA TRADE.

China
Japan
Australia
British East Indies :
Dutch East Indies

1
S

WEST INDIA TRADE.

Danish West Indies
Dutch West Indies
British West Indies
French West Indies
Cuba
Porto Kico
Hayti

H ;::;;;

S ! ! I j

f ij lil

* 5 5Ii.

|JgE3i

^t&amp;gt;pqpMOPs

&quot;3

N INTERESTS.

FS SfsftTj

-i Ci O C* I

ofefcf Vi-T

o&quot; co&quot; cf co&quot; co&quot; 10&quot;

SSSP8S

C&amp;lt;3 CO O T-* C&amp;gt; *-&quot;

I- C5

es&quot; of V i.-;&quot; &quot; i.-T
55 wi ot

is?

S P o S n

O CO Tf OJrH

&quot; w&quot; ao&quot; r-&quot; op&quot; jo&quot; &amp;gt;&quot;

,
78,
35,

r-T Cf

r- i OD o cs n
d 10 oo oo ^f aj
I- o r-4t~ o W

t-&quot; ITS&quot; ocf ro&quot; V o&quot;

OO CO 1 1 CO M r-H

oo oi d d

00 $1 f
OO I- i-H CO

OOCfef

IS :8

- : cTef I ocT

&amp;gt;o m o

&quot;

i-T o&quot; cT o&quot; V

CS CO O 00 13 O5

o i r* o co oo

lil

s ; Mlis

IHii! ll| Jill r lilHii

iiislii giftllfi lH l4g&amp;lt;s willla

lliiaisi

19 N I

290

NAVIGATION INTERESTS.

American
sels.

afetg* $}#?*

n ro x 1 co o i-i r-

O O i-l O tf5 00 V

W O O (?

?O CO CO 1- O C:

Illllli

ro o n o
c; co o ^

1-* ^ O O Cl

in oo &amp;lt;M r- n co &amp;lt;

s 2:5

lift.

-5

CM
O

&quot;3
n

a
|

&amp;gt;.

n QO i- ^H QO

: : :

, : :

. .

. ;

Imports into the United States, (specie value) . . .

Imports into United Kingdom, (specie value)...

Exports from the United States :
Domestic exports, (mixed gold and currency value)
Foreign produce re-exported, (mixed gold and currency value) .
Total United States, (mixed gold and currency value) ..

Exports from the United Kingdom :
Domestic exports, (specie value) . .

Foreign and colonial produce re-exported, (specie value)
Total United Kin trdom. (specie value) ...

INDEX.

TESTIMONY.

Name.

Subject.

Boole, L. H

Brett, Gustavus A

Buck, R.P

Clark, Captain J. S ...

Cobb, Francis...
Cope, Francis R

Coyle, J.B

Cramp, Charles H

Curtis, Paul

Davis, Captain Charles

Derby, E. H

Dyer, Joseph W

Edmunds, Henry R

Elwell, James TV&quot;

Everman, John W

Fitzpatrick, Philip
Foulke, &quot;William...*....
Gibbons, William G ...

Hall, Andrew T

Hall, Samuel

Harlan, Samuel, (Har-
lan and Hollings-
worth.)

Hayden, John

Hichborn, N. G

Hincken, Edward

Hoffmire, John E

House, Eben...
House, Osborn.

Howland, Mr. (Howland

and Frothiughani.)
Loring, Giles

Loring, Harrison

Low, A. A

McKay, Nathaniel

Medara, Lewis C

Nelson, William, jr

Nesmith, Mr

Nickerson, Theodore. . .

American ship-builders could compete with remission of duties to aid

them. Canadian vessels cost about 40 per cent, less than ours.
Offers letter of J. T. Woodberry favoring abrogation of navigation

laws. Cheap ships is the needed remedy.
Registration of foreign ships would destroy all ship-building interests

and the coasting trade. Favors drawbacks.
Thought labor cheaper hero than abroad, as more work was done.

Urged the use of ship stores free of duty.

Wages of ship-carpenters. Cost of building ships per ton

Competition with our ship-building interests. Reduction of tariff

necessary.
Onerous taxes imposed on coasting steamers. Opposed to appeal of

navigation laws.
English marine superiority duo to their building best engines in the

world. High tariff on ship materials injurious. American labor

best.
Rates of labor. Cost of materials. Price of ships. With drawback

could compete in wooden ships. Doubtful about iron.
American seamen not deteriorating. No demand for ships because

of high prices. Cause of decline in navigation interests. Quality

of provincial ships. Favors drawback.
Decline of our commerce. Its causes. Effect of tariffs. Favors

remission of duties and a partial admission of foreign-built ships

to registration. Argues for subsidies.

Rates of wages in Maine. Cost of ships now and before the war

Coastwise trade, ship-building and owning injuriously affected by

high tariff and taxes.

Does not favor present repeal of navigation laws. Favors drawback.
Presented the compulsory pilotage, harbor dues, &e., as abuses bear
ing heavily on coasting trade.
If cost of sliip-building could bo reduced it would revive. Favors

drawback.
Letter of New York ship-builders and ship mechanics. Ship-building.

almost gone, but can bo revived.
Cost of iron ship-building. Character of ships built at Wilmington,

Del. High rates of wages and duties. Superior quality of Ameri
can iron. Favors a drawback.
A drawback would bo of material help to ship-building. Opposes

bounties.
Admit British ships to registration and American ship-building

would cease. Present condition of business. Favors drawback.
Letter giving present condition of iron ship-building interest. Causes

of depression and remedies.

Urges the remission of duties in interest of ship-builders

Favors drawbacks. Urges the value of efficient mercantile marine. .

Favors free trade in ships as speediest means of reviving commerce. .

Letter setting forth depressed condition of ship-building in New
York, &c.

Statement with regard to underwriting. Favors remission of duties

With drawback Americans could compete in ship-building and run
ning.

Favor of remitting all duties on ship-building materials

Where the ownership of vessels built in Maine usually belongs. Co
operation. Favors drawbacks.

Against a rapid contraction of tho currency. Reduction of interest
and duties necessary to revive commerce.

Favors homo ship-building. Great decrease of our commerce. Urges
drawbacks and subsidies.

Submits letter on cost of ship-building materials. Cost of iron ships
here and in England. Depressing effect of high tariff.

Charterer of vessels. Thought the eight-hour law injuriously affect
ing cost of repairs and building.

Only remedies for improving carrying trade arc cheap ships, good
insurance system, and power to borrow on this security.

American wooden ships can bo built as cheap as English with draw
back, but not iron. Specification of iron sailing ship. Rates on
iron. Underwriters dealt unfairly by our builders.

Ability to build iron ships would decide whether wo could maintain
a commercial marine. Opposes repeal of navigation laws.

292

INDEX.

Testimo ny C ontinued .

Name.

Subject.

Page.

Nickerson, F.

Rebate on coal demanded by steam navigation interest

119
56

52
183

176
25,166
167

167
126

138

147
31

125
3,7

167
19

1:50
160

156
167

121

37
40, 167

14
68
32

152, 154

167

Opdvke Georce

Favors a drawback. Proposes gradual abandonment of protective
system.
A drawback on imported materials demanded. Free trade in ships
would not enable us to compete with England.
Present condition United States Navy. Cost during the war. Value
of swift mail steamers for defense. Necessity as a war measure
of aiding our mercantile marine.
Decrease of our carrying trade. Opposes admission of foreign ships.
Favors drawback. Subsidies to mail steamers and bounties.
Superior character of American iron and labor. With drawback
American ships can be built as cheap as British.
Believed the day of wooden ships was not over. Something more
than a drawback was needed to revive our business.
Letter of New York ship-builders and ship-mechanics

Poillon Mr

Porter, Yice-Admiral
D.D.

Roach, John

Rowland T F

Rowland, William
Russell, Robert A

Ryan, Captain Wash
ington.

Sargent, Cyrus F

Asks a thorough revision of laws relating to merchant seamen and
officers. Our marine deteriorating. Opposes repeal of navigation
laws and favors drawbacks.
Wooden ships could be built and sold with a drawback. Opposes
repeal of navigation laws. Ship-building not paying enough to in
duce capital to enter into it.
Cost of materials now and in 1860. Rates of wages. With protection
Americans can build iron ships.
Superiority of American iron. A drawback would relieve ship
building.
Asks for a remission of duties on imported iron, &c

Simpson, James E
Smith, L. A

Smith, Franklin W . . . .
Snow, Ambrose

Spofford Paul M

Free trade would revive the carrying trade. A drawback would
help ship-building.
Favors admission of foreign vessels to American registration, except
coasting^ trade. Also drawbacks and subsidies to mail steamships.
Letter of New York ship-builders and ship-mechanics
Iron ships could be built as cheaply as in Great Britain with a draw
back on imported material. Superiority of American models.

Stark, Thomas
Stimers, A. C . .

Sturdivant, Captain
Cyrus.
Stump, John F

Depreciation of currency chief cause of depression in navigation
interests.
On British policy with regard to our commerce. Favors a drawback . .
Letter of New York ship-builders and ship-mechanics

Tatum Henry

Taff, David J

Taylor John

Depressed condition of ship-building in Massachusetts. Rates of
wages. Opposes repeal of navigation laws. Favors drawbacks.
American commerce could be revived if government aided, as was
the case in Great Britain and elsewhere. Favors drawbacks and
subsidies. Advantage to the West.
Declares New York ship-owners opposed to registering foreign-built
ships. Favors remission of duties and taxes.
Ship-builders have neglected their interests. Iron must be used.
Favors drawback. Private yards best for building naval vessels.
Urged the granting of subsidies to ocean mail steamers

Tobey E S

Webb, William H

Westervelt D D

Wetmore, Prosper M . .
Whitlock, William
Williams, Mr. (Wil-
liams & Guion.)
Windsor, Henry

Wilson, Allston

Change in motive-power. Substitution of steam for sail

Change from wood to iron caused depression in shipping interests.
Steamships profitable without subsidies.
Believed iron vessels could be built for commercial use in peace, and
naval purposes in war. Steam navigation has affected the use of
American ships. Demands a drawback.
Recommends repeal of laws requiring crews and officers to be mainly
American. Free ships and tree sailors.
Letter of New York ship-builders and ship-mechanics . . ...

Youngs, Joshua

INDEX. 293

LETTERS FROM AMERICAN SHIP-BUILDERS AND OWNERS.

Name and residence.

Subject.

Bailey, John H., Ports
mouth, N. H.

Brewster, John, Cape
Nedick, Me.

Buck. R. P.,& Co., Now
York.

Day, Joseph, Damaris-
cotta, Me.

Egan, &quot;Wiley M., Chi
cago.

Forbes, R. B., Boston. .

Gibbons, Wm. G., &quot;Wil
mington, Del.

Gillan, N. M., (attorney
for W. H. Webb,)
New York.

Huston Caleb S., East-
port, Me.

McKay, Donald, East
Boston.

Metealf, B. D., Au
gusta, Me.

Metzgar, C., (as attor
ney for W. H. Webb,)
New York.

Neal, Mathews &
Brooks, Kittery, Me.

Perew, Frank, Buffalo. .

Player, John. Phila
delphia.

Simpson, Jas. E., New
York.

Taylor, Isaac, Boston . .

Thayer & Lincoln,

Boston.
Tucker, Joseph, Wis-

casset, Me.
Upton, George B.,

Boston.
Wales, Thomas B., &

Co., Boston.
Webb, Wm. H., New

York.

Cost of ships, rates of wages, &c

Cost of ship-building in 1860- G9 ,

Letter and tables giving costs of running ships of various burdens . .

Cost of ship-building in 18GO- 69

Cost of ship-building on the lakes

Wages

English and rebel causes affecting our commercial marine.

building of swift steamers, &c.
Cost of building iron ships

On composite ships

Letter relating to ship-building, rates of wages, decline of business.

Duties on ship-building materials

Cost of ship-building in 1854- 60- 69

Letter on composite ships

Letter on cost of ship-building in 1860- G9. Rates of wages, &amp;lt;fec

Cost of building ships now ; in!860- 69 ,

Capacity of western rivers for iron ship-building

High price of materials and labor

Letter favoring drawbacks and free trade in raw materials ; also favor
ing subsidies.

Letter on remedies needed. Drawbacks. Change of laws relating to
seamen, &c.

Letter showing great decline of shipping interests, &c

Two letters and petition, relating to causes of decay of commerce. . .

Letters -urging free ships, drawbacks, and free ship stores ,

Letter from San Francisco on composite ships

LETTERS FROM UNITED STATES CONSULS.

Name and consulate.

Subject.

Dudley, Thomas H.,
Liverpool.

Hana, S. B., Kingston,
Ontario.

Hanson, R. M., Bremen.

Jackson, M. M., Hali
fax, Nova Scotia.

Meetscher, L., (vice-
consul,) Copenhagen.

Morse, Freeman H.,
London.
Do...

Robinson, Charles, Que
bec.

Scammon, E. Parker,
Prince Edward Island

Tato, Alexandra, Hay ti

Warner, D. B., St. John,
New Brunswick.

Webster, William P.,
Frankfort-on-the-M n

Cost of ships in Great Britain, wages of seamen, &o ,

Ship-building, cost, wages, condition of trade

German laws affecting navigation interests

Condition of ship-building

Condition of Danish ship-building. Laws relating thereto

Condition of the English navy ship-building. Mail steamship service.

Causes of American decadence, &c.
On composite ships ; and inclosing letters on price of ships, &amp;lt;tc., at

London and Sunderland, England.
Condition of ship-building, rates of wages, cost of vessels, &c

Cost of ships. Condition of trade

Condition of American commerce in the West Indies

Cost of ships, condition of trade, &c. ; also rates of insurance at

Lloyds .
Conditi

.on of German main, naval and commercial, with tables .

294

INDEX.

STATISTICAL TABLES.

Number.

Subject

m..
rv..
v...

VI..

vn.

vm.

IX.

x..

XI.

xn..
xm.

XIV
XV..

XVI...

xvn..

XVIII.

XIX.

xx..

XXI.

xxn..
TTKTTT

XXV.
XXVI.

xxvn..
xxvin.

xxxn.

xxxm

XXXIV.

British navy, armament and tonnage

Number, names, toimage, location, &c., of vessels connected with

United States Navy.
Vessels built for United States Navy from April 1, 1861

Vessels sold by Navy from 1861 to 1865, and from May 1, 1868

Number and tonnage of vessels built and registered in Great Britain .

United States and British registered vessels employed in foreign trade.

Total number and tonnage of vessels registered as belonging to the
United Kingdom, including Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man,
at the end of each year.

Table showing the tonnage, respectively, of American, British, and
French vessels which entered and cleared at the ports of countries
to which such vessels belonged in trade with other countries.

Table showing the licensed and enrolled tonnage of the United States

. engaged in the coastwise trade, and the tonnage of the British reg
istered vessels engaged in -Mie home trade, during the years, respect
ively, from 1850 to 1888, both inclusive.

A comparative view of the tonnage of the United States from June
30, 1850, to June 30, 1869, showing, separately, the tonnage of sailing
and steam vessels, and the yearly increase or decrease of each class.

A statement exhibiting the amount of registered tonnage of the Uni
ted States, steam and sail, employed in navigation annually, from
1850 to 1869, inclusive, and the annual increase or decrease of each
class.

Table showing the tonnage of the United States, June 30, 1869

Statement showing the number and class of vessels built, and the
tonnage thereof, in the several States and Territories of the United
States from 1850 to 1869, inclusive.

Total summary of the tonnage of the United States, Juno 30, 1869, as
reported to the Bureau of Statistics.

A table showing the amount of American and foreign tonnage entered
the ports of the United States from foreign countries in 1830, 1840,
1850, and from 1860 to 1869, both inclusive.

Table showing the estimated value of American foreign carrying
trade during years from 1860 to 18G9, both inclusive.

Table showing the estimated value of American coastwise and inland
carrying trade during the ten years from 1860 to 1869, both inclusive.

Table showing the total foreign commerce of the United States during
each year from 1850 to 1869, inclusive.

Total exports of domestic and foreign merchandise combined

Table showing the amount of foreign merchandise imported into the
United States in American and foreign vessels, respectively, during
the fiscal years from 1850 to 18C9, both inclusive. (Expressed in
specie value at foreign ports of exportation.)

Statement exhibiting the arrival and departure, at certain specified
ports, of American and foreign vessels, in certain portions of the
foreign trade of the United States, 1856 to 1860, and 1865 to 1869,
both inclusive.

Statement exhibiting the entrances and clearances of vessels from
and to each principal foreign country for the two periods, 1850 to
1859, and 1860 to 1869, all inclusive.

Statement of steamers making regular trips between ports of the
United States and .foreign ports, in 1860 and in 1869.

Steamship lines from various ports of the United States to foreign
ports.

Statement of American steam lines making regular trips between
ports of the United States and foreign ports.

Comparative statement of English steamers entered and cleared at
Portland, Maine, during the fiscal year I860, and during the fiscal
year 1869, for transatlantic ports.

Steamship lines

Statement exhibiting the value of total trade of the United States
with foreign countries, as divided between American and foreign

Imports, exports, and re-exports, 1850 to 1859, inclusive; imports,
exports, and re-exports 1860 to 1869.

Amounts paid to American and foreign steamships for the sea con
veyance of United States mails from 1860 to 1869, inclusive.

Statement of the rates of duty upon the descriptions of iron most
used for ship-building under various tariffs.

Table showing the number and tonnage of sailing and steam vessels
built and registered at ports in the British possessions, (exclusive
of the United Kingdom,) in each of the years from 1853 to 1868,
both inclusive.

Table showing the imports, domestic exports and foreign re-exports
of the United States in American and foreign vessels, and the
same combined, showing the total value of the foreign carrying
trade of tho United States, in American and foreign vessels, dur
ing the fiscal years 1860, 1866, 1867, 1668, and 1869.

Comparative table showing the value of imports into, and exports
from, the United States and Great Britain, respectively, during the
years 1867 and 1868.

THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW

AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS

WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN
THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY
WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH
DAY AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY
OVERDUE.

i :

: S&ty^g f

10Jan 49f\*

^B 10 1949

CHARGE

1989

REC

LD 21-100m-7, 40 (6936s)

1 Ooirtiitte

1 &quot;trie&quot; Ye]fn

roan

ft-*&quot;pj i^-fi-f^r- --s

? tlie r ecluctii

XI Of

...*./JI V iCv. &quot; .

i;&amp;gt; *

&amp;lt;i&amp;lt; ^rw-