History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 4 (of 4)Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
History
History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 4 (of 4)
Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
Commerce -- History; Shipping -- History; Steam navigation -- History
“The average weight of the iron steam vessels is about 6 cwt. per
register ton; a wooden one will weigh about 20 cwt. and upwards.”—(See
evidence of C. W. Williams, Appendix to Report of the above Committee,
p. 43.) See _note_, Appendix No. 5, p. 599.
[123] The greatest number of years originally allowed by “Lloyd’s
Register” for the classification of any vessel built of wood to remain
on the first class, was from four to sixteen years, but seldom more
than twelve from the date of construction; they might be renewed, but
the original term never exceeded the periods I have named.
[124] Captain (now Admiral Sir) W. H. Hall, R.N., in his evidence
before Lord Seymour’s (now the Duke of Somerset) Committee on Navy
Estimates which sat in 1848, stated (p. 648) that, when he commanded
the _Nemesis_, an iron vessel engaged in the Chinese war, she was in
one action struck fourteen times by the shot of the enemy; “one shot
went in at one side and came out at the other, it went right through
the vessel;” there were “no splinters;” “it went through just as if
you put your finger through a piece of paper.” “I had,” he added,
“a favourable opinion of it” (iron). “Several wooden steamers,”
he continues, “were employed upon the same service, and they were
invariably obliged to lie up for repairs, whilst I could repair the
_Nemesis_ in twenty-four hours and have her always ready for service;
indeed, many steamers were obliged to leave the coast of China and go
to Bombay for repairs. Repairs which would have taken in a wooden ship
several days, would take in ours as many hours only.”
Captain E. F. Charlwood, who had served in iron vessels “about four
or five years,” stated, in his evidence before the same Committee,
that the _Guadaloupe_, which he commanded, had been repeatedly struck
by shot, and that “the damage was considerably less than is usually
suffered by a wooden vessel,” and that “there was nothing like the
number of splinters which are generally forced out by shot sent through
a wooden vessel’s side.” He added that the shot went clean through (the
holes being plugged by the engineer at the time), and did not otherwise
injure the plates or leave a rent or displace any of the rivets.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account