VOYAGES
Twelve voyages to the Mediterranean; the furthest points reached being Constantinople, 1874 and 1878; Cyprus, 1878; Egypt, 1882.
Three circumnavigations of Great Britain.
One circumnavigation of Great Britain and the Shetland Islands, in 1881.
Two circumnavigations of Ireland.
Cruises with the fleets during manœuvres, in 1885, 1888, and 1889.
Voyages to Norway, in 1856, 1874, and 1885. In the latter year Mr. Gladstone and his family were honoured and charming guests.
Voyages to Holland, in 1858 and 1863.
Round the World, 1876-77.
India, Straits Settlements, Borneo, Macassar, Australia, Cape of Good Hope, 1886-87.
England to Calcutta, 1893.
Two voyages to the West Indies, 1883 and 1892, the latter including visits to the Chesapeake and Washington.
'Sunbeam,' R.Y.S. (Lord Brassey).
Canada and the United States, 1872.
The Baltic, 1860.
In 1889 the 'Sunbeam' was lent to Lord Tennyson, for a short cruise in the Channel. The owner deeply regrets that he was prevented by Parliamentary duties from taking charge of his vessel with a passenger so illustrious on board.
The distances covered in the course of the various cruises enumerated may be approximately given:—
Distances sailed: compiled from Log Books
| Year | Knots | Year | Knots | Year | Knots | Year | Knots |
| 1854 | 150 | 1864 | 1,000 | 1874 | 12,747 | 1884 | 3,087 |
| 1855 | 250 | 1865 | 2,626 | 1875 | 4,370 | 1885 | 6,344 |
| 1856 | 2,000 | 1866 | 4,400 | 1876 | 37,000 | 1886 | 36,466 |
| 1857 | 1,500 | 1867 | 3,000 | 1877 | 1887 | ||
| 1858 | 2,500 | 1868 | 1,000 | 1878 | 9,038 | 1888 | 1,175 |
| 1859 | 2,300 | 1869 | 1,900 | 1879 | 5,627 | 1889 | 8,785 |
| 1860 | 1,000 | 1870 | 1,400 | 1880 | 5,415 | 1890 | 8,287 |
| 1861 | 800 | 1871 | 5,234 | 1881 | 5,435 | 1891 | 1,133 |
| 1862 | 3,200 | 1872 | 9,152 | 1882 | 3,345 | 1892 | 11,992 |
| 1863 | 900 | 1873 | 2,079 | 1883 | 13,545 | 1893 | 8,500 |
Total, 1854-1893, 228,682 knots.
I turn from the voyages to the yachts in which they were performed, observing that no later possession filled its owner with more pride than was felt in the smart little 8-tonner which heads the list.
| Date | Name of yacht | Rig | Tonnage | — |
| 1854-58 | Spray of the Ocean | Cutter | 8 | — |
| 1853 | Cymba (winner of Queen's Cup in the Mersey, 1857) | " | 50 | Fife of Fairlie's favourite |
| 1859-60 | Albatross | 118 | — | |
| 1863-71 | Meteor | Auxiliary schooner | 164 | — |
| 1871-72 | Muriel | Cutter | 60 | Dan Hatcher's favourite |
| 1872 | Eothen | S.S. | 340 | — |
| 1874-93 | Sunbeam | Auxiliary schooner | 532 | — |
| 1882-83 | Norman | Cutter | 40 | Dan Hatcher |
| 1891 | Lorna | " | 90 | Camper and Nicholson (1881) |
| 1892-93 | Zarita | Yawl | 115 | Fife of Fairlie (1875) |
| Yachts hired | ||||
| 1885 | Lillah | Cutter | 20 | — |
| 1863 | Eulalie | " | 18 | — |
| 1873 | Livonia | Schooner | 240 | Ratsey (1871) |
The variety of craft in the foregoing list naturally affords opportunity for comparison. I shall be glad if such practical lessons as I have learned can be of service to my brother yachtsmen. And, first, as to the class of vessel suitable for ocean cruising. As might be expected, our home-keeping craft are generally too small for long voyages. Rajah Brooke did some memorable work in the 'Royalist' schooner, 45 tons; but a vessel of 400 tons is not too large to keep the sea and to make a fair passage in all weathers, while giving space enough for privacy and comfort to the owner, his friends, and the crew. Such vessels as the truly noble 'St. George,' 871 tons, the 'Valhalla,' 1,400 tons, and Mr. Vanderbilt's 'Valiant,' of 2,350 tons (Mr. St. Clare Byrne's latest production), cannot be discussed as examples of a type which can be repeated in ordinary practice. Yachtsmen have been deterred from going to sufficient tonnage by considerations of expense. When providing a floating home of possibly many years, first cost is a less serious question than the annual outlay in maintaining and working.
A cruise on the eastern seaboard of North America, where the business of coasting has been brought to the highest perfection, would materially alter the prevailing view as to the complements necessary for handling a schooner of the tonnage recommended. The coasting trade of the United States is carried on in large schooners, rigged with three to five masts. All the sails are fore and aft. In tacking, a couple of hands attend the headsheets, and these, with a man at the wheel, are sufficient to do the work of a watch, even in narrow channels, working short boards. The anchor is weighed and the large sails are hoisted by steam-power. The crews of the American fore-and-aft schooners scarcely exceed the proportion of one man to every hundred tons of cargo carried. For a three-masted schooner of 400 tons, a crew of twelve working hands would be ample, even where the requirements of a yacht have to be provided for. In point of safety, comfort, speed in blowing weather, and general ability to keep the sea and make passages, the 400-ton schooner would offer most desirable advantages over schooner yachts of half the tonnage, although manned with the same number of hands.
It is not within the scope of my present remarks to treat of naval architecture. The volumes will contain contributions from such able men as Messrs. G. L. Watson, who designed the 'Britannia' and 'Valkyrie,' and Lewis Herreshoff, whose 'Navahoe' and 'Vigilant' have recently attracted so much attention. I may, however, say that my personal experience leads me to admire the American models, in which broad beam and good sheer are always found. In 1886, I had the opportunity of seeing the International Race for the America Cup, when the English cutter 'Galatea' (Lieut. Henn, R.N.), with a sail-area of 7,146 feet, and 81 tons of ballast, sailed against the American sloop 'Puritan,' with 9,000 square feet of sail-area and 48 tons of ballast. On this occasion, the advantages of great beam, combined with a shallow middle body and a deep keel, were conspicuously illustrated. The Americans, while satisfied with their type, do not consider their sloops as seaworthy as our cutters. The development which seems desirable in our English building was indicated in a letter addressed to the 'Times' from Chicago in September 1886:—
Avoiding exaggerations on both sides, we may build up on the solid keel of an English cutter a hull not widely differing in form from that of the typical American sloop. It can be done, and pride and prejudice should not be suffered to bar the way of improvement. The yachtsmen of a past generation, led by Mr. Weld of Lulworth, the owner of the famous 'Alarm,' were not slow to learn a lesson from the contests with the 'America' in 1851. We may improve our cutters, as we formerly improved our schooners, by adaptations and modifications, which need not be servile imitations of the fine sloops our champion vessels have encountered on the other side of the Atlantic.
After the lapse of seven years, we find ourselves, in 1893, at the termination of a very remarkable year's yachting. The new construction has included H.R.H. the Prince of Wales's yacht, the 'Britannia,' with 23 feet beam, Lord Dunraven's 'Valkyrie,' Mr. Clarke's 'Satanita,' and the Clyde champion 'Calluna,' all conspicuous for development of beam, combined with the deep, fine keel which is our English substitute for the American centreboard. These vessels have proved doughty antagonists of the 'Navahoe,' brought over by that spirited yacht-owner, Mr. Caryll, to challenge all comers in British waters.
Thus far as to sailing yachts. Though the fashion of the hour has set strongly towards steam-propelled vessels, the beautiful white canvas, and the easy motion when under sail, will long retain their fascination for all pleasure voyaging. It is pleasant to be free from the thud of engines, the smell of oil, and the horrors of the inevitable coaling. Owners who have no love for sailing, and to whom a yacht is essentially a means of conveyance from port to port and a floating home, do well to go for steam. The most efficient and cheapest steam yacht is one in which the masts are reduced to two signal-poles, on which jib-headed trysails may be set to prevent rolling. As to tonnage, the remarks already offered on the advantages of large size apply to steamers even more than to sailing yachts. When space must be given to machinery, boilers, and bunkers, the tonnage must be ample to give the required accommodation. The cost of building and manning, and the horse-power of the engines, do not increase in proportion to the increase of size. The building of steamers for the work of tramps has now been brought down to 7l. per ton. I would strongly urge yacht-owners contemplating ocean cruising to build vessels of not less than 600 tons. Let the fittings be as simple and inexpensive as possible, but let the tonnage be large enough to secure a powerful sea-boat, with coal endurance equal to 3,000 knots, at ten knots, capable of keeping up a fair speed against a stiff head wind, and habitable and secure in all weathers.
Deck-houses are a great amenity at sea, but the conventional yacht skipper loves a roomy deck, white as snow, truly a marvel of scrubbing. Considerations of habitability at sea are totally disregarded by one who feels no need for an airy place of retirement for reading and writing. The owner, seeking to make life afloat pass pleasantly, will consider deck cabins indispensable.
There remains a third and very important type for ocean cruising, that of the sailing yacht with auxiliary steam-power. The 'Firefly,' owned by Sir Henry Oglander, the pioneer in this class, suggested to the present writer a debased imitation in the 'Meteor,' 164 tons. About the same date somewhat similar vessels were brought out, amongst others by Lord Dufferin, whose earliest experiences under sail had been given to the world in 'Letters from High Latitudes.' All will remember the never-varying announcement by a not too cheering steward, on calling his owner, in response to the inquiry, 'How is the wind?' 'Dead ahead, my lord, dead ahead!'
'Sunbeam'—midship section.
The 'Sunbeam' was launched in 1874; following in her wake, the 'Chazalie,' 1875, 'Czarina,' 1877, and the 'Lancashire Witch,' 1878, appeared in rapid succession. The 'Lancashire Witch' was bought by the Admiralty for a surveying vessel, as being especially adapted to the requirements of that particular service. The 'St. George,' 831 tons, launched 1890, is an enlargement and improvement on her predecessors already named. She does credit to her owner, Mr. Wythes; the designer, Mr. Storey; and the builders, Messrs. Ramage. The 'Sunbeam,' as the first of this class, has been a great success. She was designed by Mr. St. Clare Byrne, M.I.N.A., as a composite three-masted topsail-yard screw schooner, constructed at Birkenhead, and launched in 1874. The following table gives the leading details:—
Dimensions of Spars
| — | Length | Diam. |
| Fore | ft. | in. |
| Foremast, from deck to masthead | 69½ | — |
| Below deck | 14½ | — |
| Total | 84 | 19½ |
| Top and topgallant-mast | 45 | 12 |
| Fore-yard | 50½ | 12 |
| Topsail-yard | 42½ | 9 |
| Topgallant-yard | 33 | 7 |
| Fore-gaff | 29½ | 7 |
| Fore-boom | 33¾ | 9 |
| Main | ||
| Mainmast from deck to masthead | 74 | — |
| Below deck | 14½ | — |
| Total | 88½ | 19 |
| Main-topmast | 422/3 | 9½ |
| Main-gaff | 29¾ | 7½ |
| Main-boom | 35½ | 8¾ |
| Mizen | ||
| Mizenmast from deck to masthead | 78½ | — |
| Below deck | 7½ | — |
| Total | 86 | 18½ |
| Mizen-topmast | 43½ | 9½ |
| Mizen-gaff | 33 | 9 |
| Mizen-boom | 52¾ | 13½ |
| Jibboom, length 49 ft. 9 in., diameter 9½ inches | ||
| Bowsprit " 21 ft. 9 in." 17½ inches (outside knighthead) | ||
It may be interesting to give some general account of the 'Sunbeam's' performances at sea.
In making the voyage round the world in 1876-77 the total distances covered were 15,000 knots under sail and 12,800 knots under steam. The best run under steam alone was 230 knots. The most successful continuous performance was on the passage from Penang to Galle, when 1,451 knots were steamed in a week, with a daily consumption of 4-¼ tons of coal. The best runs under sail, from noon to noon, were 298 and 299 knots respectively. The first was on the passage from Honolulu to Yokohama, sailing along the 16th parallel of north latitude, and between 163° and 168° 15' east. The second was in the Formosa Channel. The highest speed ever attained under sail was 15 knots, in a squall in the North Pacific. On 28 days the distance under sail alone has exceeded, and often considerably exceeded, 200 knots. The best consecutive runs under sail only were:—
1. Week ending August 13, South Atlantic, in the south-east trades, wind abeam, force 5, 1,456 knots.
2. Week ending November 19, South Pacific, south-east trades, wind aft, force 5, 1,360 knots.
3. Four days, January 15 to 18, North Pacific, north-east trades, wind on the quarter, force 5 to 9, 1,027 knots. The average speed in this case was 10.7 knots an hour.
The following were the average speeds of the longer passages:—
| —— | Days at sea | Total Distance | Distance under steam | Daily average |
| miles | miles | miles | ||
| 1. Cape Verdes to Rio | 18 | 3,336 | 689 | 185 |
| 2. Valparaiso to Yokohama | 72 | 12,333 | 2,108 | 171 |
| 3. Simonosaki to Aden | 37 | 6,93 | 4,577 | 187 |
On a later voyage to Australia, the total distance covered was 36,709 knots, 25,808 under sail and 10,901 under steam. The runs under sail included thirty-nine days over 200 knots, fifteen days over 240, seven days over 260, and three days over 270. The best day was 282 knots. Between Port Darwin and the Cape the distance covered was 1,047 knots under steam, and 5,622 knots under sail. The average speed under steam and sail was exactly eight knots. In the fortnight, October 13 to 27, 1887, 3,073 knots, giving an average speed of nine knots an hour, were covered under sail alone, with winds of moderate strength. Balloon canvas was freely used.
On returning from the voyage just referred to, the boilers of the 'Sunbeam' (which are still at work, after nineteen years' service) required such extensive repairs that it was recommended to remove them and to replace with new. Hesitating to take this step, we went through two seasons under sail alone, the propeller being temporarily removed and the aperture closed. In 1889 a voyage was accomplished to the Mediterranean under these conditions. Making the passage from Portsmouth to Naples, in the month of February, we covered a total distance of 2,303 miles from port to port in ten days and four hours. The same good luck with the winds followed us in subsequent passages to Messina, Zante, Patras, and Brindisi, during which we steadily maintained the high average of ten knots. On the return voyage down the Mediterranean, the results were very different. As this novel experiment in running an auxiliary steam yacht under sail alone may be of interest, a few further details may be added.
The average rate of speed for the distance sailed through the water was approximately 6.4 knots. The total number of days at sea was 44. On 23 days the winds were contrary. On 21 days favourable winds were experienced. With much contrary wind and frequent calms the distances made good on the shortest route from port to port averaged 123 miles per day.
For the total distance of 3,020 miles from Portsmouth to Brindisi, touching at Naples, Messina, Taormina, Zante, and Patras, with fresh and favourable breezes, the distances made good on the shortest route averaged 201 miles per day.
On the passage down the Mediterranean, from Brindisi to Gibraltar, calling at Palermo and Cagliari, against persistent head winds, and with 60 hours of calm, the distance made good from port to port was reduced to 67 miles a day.
Homewards, from Gibraltar, against a fresh Portuguese trade, the distance made good rose to an average of 122 miles through the water per day, the average rate of sailing being 6-¼ knots. From a position 230 miles nearly due west of Cape St. Vincent to Spithead, the 'Sunbeam' covered the distance of 990 miles in six days, being for the most part close-hauled.
| —— | Total distances port to port | Distances sailed | Time under way | Fair winds | Calms | ||
| miles | miles | days | hrs. | days | hrs. | hours | |
| Portsmouth to Naples | 2,200 | 2,303 | 10 | 4 | 9 | 0 | 11 |
| Naples to Brindisi (calling at Messina, Taormina, Zante, and Patras) | 820 | 841 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 16 |
| Brindisi to Palermo | 400 | 638 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 7 | 13 |
| Palermo to Cagliari | 224 | 353 | 3 | 19 | — | 11 | |
| Cagliari to Gibraltar | 730 | 1,188 | 10 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 37 |
| Gibraltar to Portsmouth | 1,175 | 1,457 | 9 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 8 |
| Total | 5,549 | 6,780 | 44 | 2 | 21 | 9 | 96 |
In the course of the voyage numerous gales of wind were experienced, viz.: on February 12, a severe mistral, on the passage from Minorca towards Naples; March 28, heavy gale from westward off Stromboli; April 9 and 10, gale from S.W. at the mouth of the Adriatic; April 17, gale from S., off south coast of Sardinia; April 29 and 30, gale from W., off Almeria.
On the days of light winds and calms, balloon topmast staysails, a jib-topsail, and an extra large lower studsail, were found most valuable in maintaining the rate of sailing.
In ordinary cruising I find that, as a general rule, one-third of the distance is covered under steam, and that upon the average we make passages at the rate of 1,000 miles a week. The consumption of coal is very moderate. For a voyage round the world, of 36,000 miles, the coal consumed was only 325 tons.
'Sunbeam,' R.Y.S. Designed by St. Clare Byrne, 1874.
If I were dealing with the question of rig, with the long experience gained on the 'Sunbeam,' I should decidedly adopt the barque rig. In confirmation of this opinion, it may be interesting to note that when H.M. brig 'Beagle' was under the command of Captain FitzRoy, R.N., for a lengthened service in the Straits of Magellan and the coasts of South America, the mizenmast was stuck through the skylight of the captain's cabin, an arrangement which, while of service to the ship, was not unnaturally a source of discomfort to the captain. In making passages in the Trades, with light winds on the quarter and the usual swell, fore-and-aft sails are constantly lifting, while sails set on fixed yards keep asleep. They draw better, and there is no chafe. I have found great advantage from the use of large studding-sails, made of light duck. This material was highly esteemed when it was first brought out. In modern practice a combination of silk and hemp furnishes a greatly superior material for the huge spinnakers, of 4,000 square feet, carried by the 'Navahoe' and 'Valkyrie.' The new balloon sails can no longer be called canvas. They may more accurately be described as muslin.
I will not attempt a recital of nautical adventures in the present chapter; but a few experiences may be briefly described. The worst passage I ever made was in the 'Eothen,' s.s., 340 tons, in 1872, from Queenstown to Quebec, touching at St. John's, Newfoundland. On August 14 we put to sea deeply laden, with bunkers full, and 15 tons of coal in bags on deck. In this condition we had 2 ft. 9 in. of freeboard. On the second day out we encountered a summer gale. Shortly after it came on, we shipped a sea, which broke over the bow and filled us up to the rail. At the same time the engineer put his head above the engine-room hatch, and announced that, the bearings having become heated, he must stop the engines. For a short time we were in danger of falling off into the trough of the sea. It was a great relief when the engines once more slowly turned ahead. In the mid-Atlantic, we encountered a cyclone, passing through the calm but ominous centre into a violent gale from the north-west, which lasted twenty-four hours. We were battened down and suffered considerable discomfort. Fortunately, no heavy sea broke on board as we lay to under double-reefed main storm-trysail, the engines slowly turning ahead. Two days later we encountered another sharp gale, in which the barometer fell to 29.14°. Happily it soon passed over. After this third gale we had a change of wind to the eastward, and, pushing on, with all sail set, we reached St. John's in thirteen days from Queenstown, with four inches of water in the tanks, two tons of coal in the bunkers, the decks leaking in every seam, cabins in utter disarray, and a perfect wreck aloft and on deck. After leaving St. John's, where we had confidently hoped that the worst was over, we encountered a hurricane off Cape Race, which exceeded in violence anything that had been experienced in these waters for many years. We lay to for three days, and when the storm abated put into the French island St. Pierre, almost exhausted. It was an unspeakable relief when we entered the St. Lawrence.
The lesson to be drawn from my voyage in the 'Eothen' is obvious. It is a great mistake to attempt to cross the stormiest ocean in the world in a steam yacht of such small size. For ocean steaming much more tonnage and power are necessary.
The heaviest gale ever experienced by the 'Sunbeam' was off Flamborough Head, in 1881. I embarked at Middlesbrough on the evening of October 13, intending to sail for Portsmouth at daybreak on the following morning; but, finding the wind from the south and the barometer depressed, our departure was deferred. At 9 a.m. the barometer had fallen to 28.87°, but as the wind had changed to W.N.W., and was off shore from a favourable quarter, I determined to proceed to sea. We were towed down the Tees, and as we descended the river I conferred with the pilot as to what we might anticipate from the remarkable depression in the barometer. He was of opinion that a severe gale was at hand, that it would blow from the north-west, and that there was no reason for remaining in port. The tug was accordingly cast off at the mouth of the Tees, and we made sail. Foreseeing a storm, topmasts were housed, boats were secured on deck, and we kept under close-reefed canvas, setting the main and mizen jib-headed trysails, double-reefed foresail and forestay-sail, and reefed standing jib. As the day advanced no change took place in the weather. The wind blew strongly, but not with the force of a gale, and the sea was comparatively smooth. Meanwhile the barometer continued to descend rapidly, and at 2 p.m. had fallen to 28.45°. As nothing had yet occurred to account for this depression, my sailing-master remarked that it must have been caused by the heavy showers of rain which had fallen in the course of the morning. I knew from former experiences that it was not the rain, but the coming storm, that was indicated by the barometer. It had needed some resolution to quit the mouth of the Tees in the morning, and at mid-day, when we were off Whitby, a still greater effort was required to resist the temptation to make for a harbour. No further incidents occurred until 3 p.m., when we were nearing Flamborough Head. Here we were at last overtaken by the long impending storm. Looking back to the north-west, over the starboard quarter, we saw that the sea had suddenly been lashed into a mass of white foam. The hurricane was rushing forward with a velocity and a force which must have seemed terrible to the fleet of coasting vessels around us. Before the gale struck the 'Sunbeam' our canvas had been reduced to main and mizen trysails and reefed standing-jib; but even with the small spread of sail, and luffed up close to the wind, our powerful little vessel careened over to the fury of the blast until the lee-rail completely disappeared under water—an incident which had never previously occurred during all the extensive voyages we had undertaken. Such was the force of the wind that a sailing vessel near us lost all her sails, and our large gig was stove in from the tremendous pressure of the gunwale against the davits. We took in the jib and the mizen-trysail, and, with our canvas reduced to a jib-headed main-trysail, were soon relieved of water on deck. For an hour and a half we lay-to on the starboard tack, standing in for the land below Burlington Bay. We were battened down, and felt ourselves secure from all risks except collision. The fury of the wind so filled the air with spoon-drift that we could not see a ship's length ahead, and in such crowded waters a collision was a far from impossible contingency. At 6 p.m. we thought it prudent to wear, so as to gain an offing during the night, and gradually drew out of the line of traffic along the coast. At 9 p.m. the extreme violence of the hurricane had abated, and we could see, through occasional openings in the mist, the masthead lights of several steamers standing, like ourselves, off the land for the night. At midnight the barometer was rising rapidly, and the wind gradually settled down into a clear hard gale, accompanied by a heavy sea, running down the coast from the north.
At 6 a.m. we carefully examined the dead reckoning, and, having fixed on an approximate position, we determined to bear away, steering to pass in mid-channel between the Outer Dowsing and the Dudgeon, through a passage about ten miles in width. We were under easy sail; but, under the main-trysail, double-reefed foresail, staysail, fore-topsail, and reefed jib, we scudded at the rate of eleven knots. A constant look-out had been kept from aloft, and at 10 a.m., having nearly run the distance down from our assumed position when we bore away to the north end of the Outer Dowsing, I established myself in the crosstrees until we should succeed in making something. After a short interval we saw broken water nearly ahead on the port bow. We at once hauled to the wind, steering to the south-west, and set the mizen-trysail. The lead showed a depth of three fathoms, and we were therefore assured that we had been standing too near to the Outer Dowsing. The indications afforded by the lead were confirmed by sights, somewhat roughly taken, and by the circumstance of our having shortly before passed through a fleet of trawlers evidently making for the Spurn. In less than an hour after we had hauled to the wind we found ourselves in the track of several steamers. At 3 p.m. we made the land near Cromer, and at 5.30 we brought up in the Yarmouth Roads, thankful to have gained a secure shelter from the gale.
In connection with this experience, it may be remarked that, as a general rule, our pleasure fleet is over-masted. We are advised in these matters by sailmakers, who look to the Solent and its sheltered water as the normal condition with which yachtsmen have to deal. When we venture forth from that smooth and too-much frequented arm of the sea into open waters, our vessels have to pass a far more severe ordeal, and they do not always come out of it to our satisfaction. Many are compelled to stay in harbour when a passage might have been made in a snugly rigged yacht.
One of the longest gales experienced in the 'Sunbeam' was on the passage from Nassau to Bermuda, in November 1883. The gale struck us south of Cape Hatteras, on November 25, in latitude 31.54° N. The north-east wind gradually subsided, and we pushed on, under steam, for Bermuda at 7 knots. The head sea increased, but no change took place in the force or direction of the wind from 8 p.m. on the 25th till 4 a.m. on the 27th. Meanwhile, the barometer had gradually fallen to 29.82°, giving warning for a heavy gale, which commenced at north-by-east, and ended on November 30, at 4 p.m., with the wind at north-west. We lay-to on the 27th, under treble-reefed foresail and double-reefed mainsail, shipping no water, but driving to the south-east at the rate of at least one knot an hour. On the 28th we decided to try the 'Sunbeam' under treble-reefed foresail and mainsail, double-reefed fore-staysail and reefed mizen-trysail. With this increased spread of canvas we were able to make two knots an hour on the direct course to Bermuda, and to keep sufficient steerage way to luff up to an ugly sea. The behaviour of the vessel elicited the unqualified approval of our most experienced hands. Bad weather quickly brings out the qualities of seamen. Our four best men relieved each other at the wheel, and it was due in no small degree to their skill that, in a gale lasting three days, no heavy sea broke on board. I need not say that all deck openings were secured, especially at night, by means of planks and canvas. Our situation might perhaps excite sympathy, but we had no cause to complain. Meals could not be served in the usual manner, but by placing every movable thing on the floor of the cabins and on the lee side, and by fixing ourselves against supports, or in a recumbent position, we were secured against any further effects of the force of gravity, and did our best to enjoy the novelty of the situation. On the 30th the wind veered to the north-west, and the weather rapidly improved. The sea turned gradually with the wind, but for many hours we met a heavy swell from the north-east.
An acquaintance with the law of storms had proved invaluable on this occasion. There is no situation in which knowledge is more truly power, none in which, under a due sense of the providential care of Heaven, it gives a nobler confidence to man, than at sea, amid the raging of a hurricane. Mr. Emerson has truly said, 'They can conquer who believe they can. The sailor loses fear as fast as he acquires command of sails, and spars, and steam. To the sailor's experience, every new circumstance suggests what he must do. The terrific chances which make the hours and minutes long to the mere passenger, he whiles away by incessant application of expedients and repairs. To him a leak, a hurricane, a waterspout, is so much work, and no more. Courage is equality to the problem, in affairs, in science, in trade, in council, or in action. Courage consists in the conviction that the agents with which you contend are not superior in strength, or resources, or spirit, to you.'
As a specimen of a dirty night at sea, I give another extract from the log-book. During our voyage round the world in 1876-77, after leaving Honolulu for Japan, as we approached Osima, on January 26, we were struck by a tremendous squall of wind and rain. We at once took in the flying square-sail, stowed the topgallant-sail and topsail, reefed the foresail and mizen, and set mainsail. At 6 p.m., the wind still blowing a moderate gale, the mizen was double-reefed. We pursued our way through a confused sea, but without shipping any water. All seemed to be going well, when, at 8 p.m., shortly after I had taken the wheel, a sudden squall heeled us over to the starboard side, where the gig was hung from the davits outboard. At the same time a long mountainous wave, rolling up from the leeward, struck the keel of the gig and lifted it up, unshipping the fore davit, and causing the boat to fall into the boiling sea, which threatened at every instant to dash it to pieces. We at once brought to. A brave fellow jumped into the boat and secured a tackle to the bows, and the gig was hoisted on board and secured on deck intact. It was a very seaman-like achievement. A heavy gale continued during the night, and at 2 a.m., on the 27th, we met with another accident. The boatswain, a man of great skill and experience, was at the wheel, when a steep wave suddenly engulfed the jibboom, and the 'Sunbeam,' gallantly springing up, as if to leap over instead of cleaving through the wave, carried away the spar at the cap. This brought down the topgallant-mast. The jibboom was a splendid Oregon spar, 54 feet long, projecting 28 feet beyond the bowsprit. It was rigged with wire rope, and the martingale was sawn through with the greatest difficulty.
The record of personal experiences must not be further prolonged. To the writer yachting has been to some extent part of a public life, mainly devoted to the maritime interests of the country. To conduct the navigation and pilotage of his vessel seemed fitting and even necessary, if the voyages undertaken were to be regarded in any sense as professional. There is something pleasant in any work which affords the opportunity for encountering and overcoming difficulties. It is satisfactory to make a headland or a light with precision after a long run across the ocean, diversified perhaps by a heavy gale. To be able to thread the channels of the West Coast of Scotland, the Straits of Magellan, the Eastern Archipelago, the labyrinths of the Malawalle Channel of North-East Borneo, or the Great Barrier Reef of Australia, without a pilot is an accomplishment in which an amateur may perhaps take legitimate pleasure.
To the yachtsman who truly loves the sea, it will never be satisfactory to remain ignorant of navigation. Practice of the art is not a relaxation. It demands constant attention, and is an interruption to regular reading. It may imply a considerable amount of night-work. On the other hand, the owner who is a navigator can take his proper place as the commander of his own ship. All that goes on around him when at sea becomes more interesting. He is better able to appreciate the professional skill of others. The confidence which grows with experience cannot be expected in the beginning. The writer first took charge of navigation in 1866, on a voyage up the Baltic. It was a chequered experiment. In the Great Belt we ran ashore twice in one day. In making Stockholm we had to appeal to a Swedish frigate, which most kindly clewed up her sails, and answered our anxious enquiries by writing the course on a black-board. On the return voyage to England we struck the coast some sixty miles north of our reckoning. Such a history does not repeat itself now.
It is not in books or at the library table that the art of the seaman can be acquired. Quickness of eye, nerve, promptitude of judgment, are the indispensable gifts, which must be gained by long and varied experience at sea. The seamanship required in a gale of wind on the open ocean, the seamanship displayed in sailing matches in over-sparred yachts, sailed mainly in smooth waters, and the seamanship called for in pilotage waters not previously visited, and especially at night, are different branches of a wide profession. There is a skill of a very high order in docking an Atlantic liner at Liverpool. There is a skill of a different but equally high order in knocking huge ironclads about in fleet-exercising at sea. There is a skill in bringing the Channel steamers alongside the pier at Dover. The skill of every description of nautical specialist will never be combined in one individual. There is some risk that the more careful the navigator, the less dashing the same man may be as a seaman.
I must not conclude without some reference to the most attractive cruising grounds. To begin near home, the Seine, the Meuse, the coast of Holland, the Baltic, the coast of Norway, the grand West Coast of Scotland, the East Coast of England (a cruising ground too much neglected by yachtsmen), and the Channel are all favourite haunts of mine. Going further afield, in my own case nothing was more satisfactory than a voyage along the East Coast of North America, in which every river was ascended to the head of the navigation for sea-going vessels. Certain parts of the Mediterranean offer a perfect cruising ground for the winter months. Most suitable waters for yachting are those bounded by the Straits of Gibraltar on the west and the Balearic Islands on the north-east. Here the mistral of the Gulf of Lyons is not felt. The Spanish coast offers many places of shelter and many points of interest. In westerly winds keep to the eastward of Cape de Gata; in north-easterly winds to the westward. There is another charming cruising ground between Corsica and the Italian coast, as far north as Spezia, and south down to Civita Vecchia. Sicily is admirable for yachting. A weather shore can be always made upon its beautiful coasts. In the spring or autumn the Archipelago and eastern side of the Adriatic can be confidently recommended. In the winter months the West Indies are a most perfect cruising ground. It will be well to make Barbados the landfall, then run to Trinidad, proceeding thence to Grenada, and following on from island to island down to Jamaica. The return voyage should be by Havana, and thence to a port in the United States, and by an ocean liner home, or by the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Azores to England. The Pacific, Japan and Eastern Archipelago will well repay those who can give the time required for such distant voyages.
Lastly, let no yachtsman speak contemptuously of the Solent. It is no exaggeration to say that if the splendid natural breakwater of the Isle of Wight were removed, half the tonnage of yachts under the British flag would disappear. The Solent offers a sufficient space of sheltered water for all but the very largest yachts to manœuvre in conveniently. Breezes are seldom wanting, and the shores of the Wight are most pleasing. In this miniature ocean many have formed tastes for the sea which have led to more ambitious voyages. The estuary of the Clyde merits equally high praise, but the puffs off Bute are less gentle than those off the Wight, and the racing partakes of a hard-weather character, with streaks of calm.
In the preceding observations it has been assumed that I have been addressing readers who love the sea in all those varying phases which have given inspiration to some of the finest creations of poetic genius. The Greeks were lovers of the sea. We have been reminded of their admirable descriptions by Mr. Froude, in a brilliant passage:—
The days pass, and our ship flies past upon her way.
γλαυκὸν ὑπὲρ οἶδμα κυανὁχροἁ τε κυμἁτων
ῥὁθια πολιὰ θαλἁσσας.
How perfect the description! How exactly in those eight words Euripides draws the picture of the ocean; the long grey heaving swell, the darker steel-grey on the shadowed slope of the waves, and the foam on their breaking crests. Our thoughts flow back as we gaze to the times long ago, when the earth belonged to other races, as it now belongs to us. The ocean is the same as it was. Their eyes saw it as we see it.
Time writes no wrinkle on that azure brow.
Nor is the ocean alone the same. Human nature is still vexed with the same problems, mocked with the same hopes, wandering after the same illusions. The sea affected the Greeks as it affects us, and was equally dear to them. It was a Greek who said: 'The sea washes off all the ills of men,' the 'stainless one,' as Æschylus called it, the eternally pure.
The Romans had in Virgil a poet of the sea, who could attune his lyre to perfect harmony, alike with freshening or subsiding breeze:—
Vela dabant læti et spumas salis ære ruebant.
.........
ferunt ipsa æquora classem,
Æquatæ spirant auræ, datur hora quieti.
The sea has been the favoured theme of our English poets. There has been none in any language who has excelled our own Byron:—
Oft had he ridden on that wingèd wave,
And loved its roughness for the speed it gave.
For me, the sea was a dream in my earliest years. I have spent upon its waters some of the brightest, and, alas! some of the saddest of my days; and now, in the autumn of my life, the unforgotten past, and the aims and work of the present, are more than ever bound up with the sea.
Our hearts, our hopes, are all with thee;
Our hearts, our hopes, our prayers, our tears,
Our faith, triumphant o'er our fears,
Are all with thee—are all with thee.
CHAPTER III
CORINTHIAN DEEP-SEA CRUISING
By C. E. Seth-Smith, C.B.[1]
(Late commanding London Brigade Royal Naval Volunteers)
The record of Corinthian sailing would not be complete without some account of deep-sea voyages in yachts manned by amateur seamen. The cruises of Corinthian yachtsmen are naturally chiefly confined to the estuaries of rivers and the seas immediately adjacent, and, as a rule, are within sight of the coast. Considerations of time and expense are generally sufficient to impose these limits. That the dangers of the sea and the difficulty of navigation are no impediments is amply proved by the records of more extended voyages in craft of all sizes, made public from time to time. There are, however, certain other difficulties which, as a rule, stand in the way of Corinthian seamen extending their experience of the sea still further. For an ocean voyage of any extent a craft of some size is necessary, and it must be manned by a crew of considerable number. Amateur yachtsmen are scattered, and find it difficult to take their cruises together in any large numbers. The yacht-owner, who wished to man his yacht for an ocean voyage solely or mainly with Corinthian seamen, would not find it easy to obtain a sufficient number to make up his complement. A movement was made some twenty years ago to develop and utilise for the national defence the seafaring instincts and tastes latent in many of our young countrymen, and until it was abandoned in 1892[2] provided a body of men, Corinthian yachtsmen and others possessing seafaring capacities, and formed an exceptional reservoir on which yacht-owners could draw who desired to give opportunities of more extended seafaring to the amateur seaman. The more extended voyages of the schooner 'Hornet' were undertaken to give a pleasurable holiday to the members of the corps and to increase their efficiency as Naval Volunteers. The 'Hornet' was a powerful yacht of 101 tons register and about 140 tons Thames measurement, she was 85 feet on the water-line and nearly 20 feet beam, and drew about 10 feet of water in sea-going trim. She was built at Cowes, and was rigged as a topsail-yard schooner, carrying in addition to her ordinary fore and aft sails a square foresail, a fore-topsail and topgallant-sail, and fore-topmast and lower studding-sails.
All her gear was fitted as far as possible in man-of-war fashion, and both on deck and below she was arranged as one of the small old-fashioned vessels of Her Majesty's service. A wardroom and four separate sleeping cabins for her officers were arranged aft, and a very large forecastle gave ample lower deck accommodation for some thirty-five or forty petty officers and men.
The majority of the 'Hornet's' voyages were restricted by the limited holidays of her amateur crew, but she was occasionally manned by crews not tied in such a degree by business engagements, and during the summers of 1879, 1880 and 1881 sailed round the coast of Ireland, visited the Cattegat Sound and Danish Islands, Christiania and some other Norwegian ports, the coasts of Spain and Portugal, and Gibraltar, and made a short trip down the coast of Morocco. The latter terminated in an exciting passage home from Lisbon in stormy weather, during which the Corinthians were for upwards of three weeks out of sight of land on a strictly limited scale of provisions, hove to in a gale of wind for some days, and driven into the vicinity of the Azores. Since the present chapter is concerned solely with Corinthian yachting on the ocean, nothing need be said about the many short cruises round and about the English and French coasts and up and down the Channel, during which the 'Hornet's' ever-varying crew were gaining some practical knowledge of seamanship and testing their individual fitness for their voluntary duties.
About the end of June 1879 the 'Hornet' sailed from the Thames, manned by thirty-five amateurs, Mr. Edward Dodd, who was rated as boatswain, and the galley staff being the only professional seamen on board. Mr. Samuel Brooks (recently thrice mayor of Redhill) acted as chief petty officer, chief quartermaster and occasional watch-keeper, and Mr. R. T. Pritchett was borne on the books and drew rations as the 'staff officer,' the guide, philosopher and friend of the whole ship's company. The weather of the summer of 1879 is notorious, and the 'Hornet's' first ocean cruise was a trying one for her Corinthian crew, who experienced to the full the miseries of a month at sea in bad weather. From the day she left Dartmouth in June to her arrival in the Solent in July her log-book records no single fine day. The afternoon of Friday, July 17 (the ship having left Queenstown July 16) is the only day on which 'light airs and sunshine' are entered even for a few hours.
Nevertheless the crew expressed themselves as thoroughly delighted with the experiences of their month's cruise. Some account of this trip appeared in the 'Graphic' of October 18, 1879, with illustrations by the Staff Officer, of which the principal represented 'stowing the foresail off the Longships at midnight in a gale, June 30, 1879.' On this occasion the 'Hornet' was compelled by a heavy gale from the south-west to force a passage round the Land's End, and make for the Bristol Channel, running up to the Mumbles. As the author remarks, such weather on a dark night was a severe trial for the practical seamanship of gentlemen sailors, but they proved themselves equal to it, and were afterwards complimented on their efficiency by the Admiral, Sir William Dowell, on arrival at Queenstown.
The following year—1880—a much longer and most enjoyable cruise of six weeks was undertaken on which the Captain, Mr. C. E. Seth-Smith, was assisted by Messrs. A. B. Woodd and E. Graham as lieutenants. The crew numbered twenty-five all told; Mr. Dodd again acted as boatswain, and Mr. Brooks as chief petty officer. The 'Hornet' reached Copenhagen on July 10, and after cruising among the lovely Danish islands for some days, her officers and crew were hospitably entertained by the Royal Danish Yacht Club, then holding their annual regatta at Svendborg. From Denmark she passed to Christiania, and on July 25 the ship's company landed in Norway and enjoyed a cariole trip of two days across the country to the Falls of Hönefos. After cruising for two or three days along the southern coasts and up the Fjords the 'Hornet' left Norway and returned to England, arriving at Greenhithe on August 4 after a well-managed and most successful expedition. She was the largest vessel, manned entirely by amateur sailors, that had appeared in those seas.
The account from which the above particulars are taken appeared in the 'Illustrated London News' for February 12, 1881, and was accompanied by illustrations from photographs by Mr. Henry Denison Pender, son of Mr. (now Sir John) Pender, M.P., who was a member of the crew and an enthusiastic Royal Naval Artillery Volunteer, and whose lamented death soon after was the occasion of much grief to his many friends.
The following year—1881—a cruise of even more extended scope was undertaken. The 'Hornet' left Dover on May 20, and proceeded down Channel to Dartmouth under the command of Mr. C. E. Seth-Smith, assisted by Mr. A. B. Woodd, Mr. Dodd again acting as boatswain and Mr. Brooks at his old post. At Dartmouth all hands signed articles. On Tuesday, May 24, the steam launch and boiler having been got on board, the 'Hornet' left England for the South at 9 a.m. and lost sight of the English coast at 11.15 a.m., Prawl Point being her point of departure. The weather on her passage out was on the whole favourable, and on Tuesday, May 31, the Burlings, fifty miles west of Lisbon, was sighted, the ship's run from noon of the 30th to noon of the 31st having been 218 knots. On June 3, after a period of light winds and calm, the ship being about 120 miles west of Gibraltar, it came on to blow from the eastward, and the square fore-topsail was got in for the first time since leaving Dartmouth. On June 4, the wind increasing to a whole gale from the east with heavy sea, they stood in shore to south of Cape Spartel and lay to 'up and down' in Spartel Bay all night. Next day, the weather moderating, the 'Hornet' stood over to the Spanish coast and sighted Gibraltar Rock at 6.15 p.m., for which she stood steadily in; but at midnight, being becalmed, she was towed in by the gig, and at 2.30 a.m. the anchor was dropped in six fathoms off the Ragged Staff in Gibraltar Bay, after a passage from Dartmouth of thirteen days. The interval between June 6 and 11 was spent at Gibraltar in necessary cleaning and repairs, in exploring the Rock and its neighbourhood, and in giving and receiving hospitalities; and at noon on June 11 a start was made for Tangier, where the 'Hornet' arrived at 5 a.m. There she remained until the afternoon of June 12, when, the sights of the old Moorish town having been seen and various Oriental purchases made, the anchor was weighed for Cadiz. At 4 a.m. next day Cadiz was sighted, a pilot taken on board, and at 9.30 a.m. the anchor was let go in Cadiz Bay. At Cadiz a halt was made until June 17, employed by the ship's company in excursions to Seville and Jerez, and in seeing at Cadiz the procession of Corpus Christi and a bull-fight, distinguished on this occasion by the bull-ring taking fire. At 11.30 on the 17th a start was made for Lisbon. From Cadiz to Cape St. Vincent was a beat to windward, until on the 20th they were becalmed off the Cape. A breeze springing up in the afternoon, Cape Epischol was sighted, and at 9 a.m. on the 22nd a pilot was taken on board for Lisbon, and the 'Hornet' sailed in with a light breeze by the south channel, and let go her anchor between Belem and Lisbon at 2 p.m.
The voyage home was destined to prove a much less agreeable experience. Anchor was weighed at 4 p.m. on June 24, wind blowing strong from the north-east, which continued next day with a heavy sea. Standing out to sea some fifty miles, the 'Hornet' was put on the port tack and sighted the Burlings Light at 8.30 p.m., when she was again put about for sea room. On the 26th the ship was under three-reefed mainsail, reefed foresail, staysail, and jib, and on the 27th she was hove to under three-reefed mainsail and reefed foresail to a strong north-east gale. The 28th, still hove to, the gale blowing furiously, with tremendous seas, the mainsail and fore-staysail were taken in, and the ship put under fore-trysail alone. On the 29th the gale appeared to be moderating, but at 8 a.m. it was found that the rudder-head had started, the steering-wheel and gear had to be unshipped, and the tiller shipped, tended constantly by two helmsmen. A jib-headed trysail was set on the mainsail to ease the steering gear. On the 30th the mainsail was again set, and, the stores having been overhauled, everyone was put on rations, which were further reduced next day. The weakness of the rudder-head rendered the most careful steering necessary, which, during the rest of the voyage, threw more work on the experienced hands. On July 3 she was again close hauled to a strong breeze from the north-east, which continued all day, the ship being under three-reefed mainsail and reefed foresail, and so continued through the whole of the 4th; but on the 5th the wind shifted to the north-west and moderated. All available sail was gradually made, and by noon of that day, the position having been verified by observation, under square foresail, topsail, and topmast stun'sails, topgallant-sail, and main topmast skysail, the course was set for home. Next day the wind again shifted, and all hands were called in the morning watch to reduce sail. Their misfortunes had not ended, for on July 8 it was discovered that the fore-masthead was sprung, and the cap and crosstrees damaged. A lashing was, however, put round the heel of the fore-topmast, and the fore-masthead, and all the rigging and gear carefully overhauled and made good where possible. The rations, also, were still further reduced. However, on the 9th, having again got sights, the commander decided to bear up for the Channel, and at 10.30 sighted Ushant. A fair wind then sprang up, and the ship ran along gaily at an average of eight knots. On the 10th, and at 5.45 a.m., the English coast near Plymouth was sighted, the Start at 6.30, Portland at 2 p.m., and the Wight at 7. At 6 a.m. next day the anchor was dropped in Shanklin Bay, but permission to land being refused by the Customs authorities, sail was again set for Ryde, where the 'Hornet' arrived at 7.30 p.m., thus terminating an eventful cruise. Although its unexpected prolongation had been rather trying for some of the ship's company, and their experience had been of a nature to try severely the physique and capacity of amateur sailors, they seem to have gone through it well.
Several other yachts, among which may be mentioned the 'Titania,' belonging to the Marquis of Ailsa, the 'Dawn,' to Mr. Klein, and 'Diligent,' to Mr. C. E. Chadwick Healey and Mr. Sydney Hoare, have been manned by Naval Volunteers.
It now only remains to add a few considerations on the advantages and disadvantages of Corinthian crews for ocean-going yachts.
First, then, as to expense: the owner does not save anything by shipping an amateur crew. It is true he pays no wages to his Corinthian deck hands, but he must be prepared to incur a considerable outlay in alterations to the internal arrangements of the vessel, to buy new bedding and mess traps, and to provide a better class of ship's cooks and a more numerous galley staff. Good temper will not prevail, nor can discipline be easily maintained, unless Corinthian Jack is well fed. If, as is sometimes the case, the amateur crew arrange to cater for themselves, the owner and captain must occasionally add to the luxuries of the lower deck mess. Some expense is also unavoidable from the extra wear and tear arising from the want of skill of novices who have not yet learned to handle sails and gear with a view to their preservation.
The safety and comfort of one's ship's company, too, is a double source of anxiety when some or the whole are not seafaring by profession. For it must not be forgotten even in the finest weather that there is no such thing as 'playing at sailors' when at sea. The risk involved is not appreciably increased by manning the vessel with amateurs, if the officer in command will take certain precautions; and this view was endorsed by the insurance companies, who in no instance increased the premium on the 'Hornet.' The owner must insist on shipping a due proportion of old hands in each crew, and take care to train them as helmsmen and leadsmen. He should relieve the 'wheel' and 'look-out' as often as practicable. Above all, he should be careful to shorten sail in good time, and always at dusk, until he can depend upon his crew. Active and courageous as the amateur seaman invariably is, he has not the practice aloft of the professional, he cannot shorten sail so rapidly, nor does his knowledge of the lead of the ropes enable him to identify them so readily in the dark. The services of a good professional boatswain, with an enthusiastic love for his profession and a cheery sympathetic manner as an instructor, are absolutely essential for the proper working of a Corinthian ship. A minute and careful observation of the barometer, and constant verifying of position by reckoning and by observation, are the duties of the officer rather than the crew. Unless the yacht-owner be an enthusiastic navigator, delighting in his sextant and mathematical formulæ as well as a keen sailor-man, he had better not attempt this exacting if fascinating method of sailing his ship.
On the other hand, the Corinthian crew is a cheery one, well mannered and enthusiastic, grateful for any instruction which is given them, and happy in an exceptional and delightful holiday.
As a Corinthian crew is in general more numerous than one composed of professional sailors, when they have learnt their stations and become accustomed to the work, the vessel may be handled with that old-fashioned man-of-war smartness which is so attractive.
In conclusion, the national aquatic instinct, fostered as it is by the healthy sea-breezy tone prevailing in so much of our boyhood's literature, can only be cultivated by the majority of us as Corinthian seamen. Love for shipping and boats is not necessarily love for the sea and seafaring. Those who take to the sea as a profession are not always constant in their love. A voyage in a passenger ship, or even a trip as an honoured guest on board one of the floating batteries of Her Majesty's Navy, quite satisfies the still keen boyish aspiration. It is only as one of the crew of a large yacht on a deep-sea voyage that the amateur can personally experience that 'life at sea' which has so fascinated his imagination. Though I dare not advise all yacht-owners to man their ships with their friends, I should hail with pleasure an opportunity of sailing again with some of my old shipmates.
CHAPTER IV
THE EVOLUTION OF THE MODERN RACING YACHT
By G. L. Watson
Seven years ago the task of describing the form of racing yachts would have been a much simpler one than it is to-day. Then even the cruising vessels were more or less under the influence of the old tonnage rule, or of its later modification, and big and little were pretty much of a type;—a model of, say, a 'forty,' representing with sufficient accuracy a 'ninety,' or a 'five,' if we supposed the scale changed; and the individual yachts in each class, while presenting differences to the eye of the amateur, were not to be distinguished apart by the general yachting public, except perhaps by the racing flag.
Under the present length and sail-area rule, the variety of type is enormous. Broad, narrow, deep, and shallow; boats with centreboards and boats without; single boats and double boats; plain keel, fin keel, and bulb keel, have all their representatives, and each has had its successes. But few of these types could have been successful under the old tonnage rule, and few of them may be successful under rules yet to come. Any history, therefore, of the development of the form of racing yachts would fail did it not take account of, and run parallel to, the history of the tonnage rule of the time.
'BRITANNIA'
R.Y.S. 151-rater.
Designed by G. L. Watson, 1893.
Winner of R. Victoria Gold Cup, September 1893.
Throughout the modern story of yachting the tonnage question has been the all-absorbing one. Looking back, through the pages of those sporting papers and periodicals which forty years ago devoted a meagre portion of their space to yachting, one is struck by the same feature that shows prominently in the 'Field' or 'Yachtsman' of to-day. For one letter on any other subject, there are a dozen on the measurement question, and the writers handled their pens in much the same energetic way then as now, in abuse of rival theorists; but, more merciful than the moderns, spared us their elaborate formulæ. These controversies happily have served the useful purpose of preserving for the historian of to-day a good many facts which might otherwise have been lost; for our dear old friend 'Hunt's Magazine,' in his flowery youth, is fonder of treating us to an 'Ode to the Yachtsman's Bride,' or a relation of 'How Miss Delany married an Officer,' than to facts regarding measurement, or time allowances, and these are only to be picked up incidentally as it were from the correspondence of the quarrelsome gentlemen aforesaid. It is to be hoped that the yachting historian of the twentieth century may reap a like benefit from our controversialists of to-day, and that those mathematicians who now brandish their tonnage formulæ to the terror of all quietly disposed yachtsmen will find a reader in the searcher after facts of 1950.
Yachting, then, may be said to have begun with this century; for although, as is shown elsewhere in these volumes, yachts are mentioned long before that date, it was hardly until the century opened, or indeed until after the Crimean War, that yachting as a sport became fairly established in this country.
The yachts of those days were round-headed things, of about three beams in length, in most cases innocent of metal ballast, and kept on their feet by gravel or by iron ore. What little racing there might have been was confined to scratch matches between the owners, and time allowance for tonnage was not thought of, though doubtless the tonnage rule as then used for the merchant shipping of the country was recognised as a useful measure for the purchase and sale of these vessels. Racing became commoner; soon more than two yachts came together to try conclusions, and it was presently discovered by some astute yachtsman that a good big ship, other things being the same, was faster than a good little ship, and therefore, where their purses admitted of it, owners built yachts as large as could be handled. 'Arrow,' 84 tons; 'Lulworth,' 82 tons; 'Alarm,' 193 tons; and 'Louisa,' 180 tons, were the crack cutters on the Solent about forty-five years ago, and, as may be well understood, little boats had a very poor chance with these giants, except perhaps in light and fluky weather. Mr. Holland-Ackers called attention to this fact, and proposed a table of time allowances between large and smaller yachts based on the length of the course and the difference of size between the vessels. The measure of this size was the tonnage, as ascertained by the then tonnage law of the land, which had been in force since 1794, or rather a slight modification of this rule, adapted to the peculiar form of yachts. In this, 'the old 94 rule,' as it was called, only length of keel and breadth were taken into account, the depth being assumed as half the breadth. Breadth was thus penalised twice over in the formula, and perhaps the most extraordinary fact in connection with this rule is, that it was in force for years before it seems to have occurred to our yacht-builders that a success was to be made by increasing those dimensions which were untaxed, or only moderately taxed, and reducing the beam which was taxed twice over. This is all the more remarkable, as builders of the mercantile marine seem to have caught this point much earlier, and were building vessels with enormously increased depth and reduced beam, though it is true the slowness of these ships did not invite imitation, as the American clipper ships, built under a fairer tonnage law, were rapidly sailing them off the seas. Happily, in 1854 the law was changed for the present method of measurement by internal cubic capacity, and the genius of our shipbuilders, thus left unfettered, was equal to the task of regaining our supremacy on the ocean.
But among the yachts the old L - B × B × (½B)/94 prevailed, and gradually builders discovered that, by increasing draft and amount of ballast, beam could be pared down, and a boat of nominally the same tonnage made longer and to carry more sail than her predecessor. Lead ballast was slowly introduced, despite all sorts of adverse prophecies from old salts that it would strain the ship and would cause her to plunge so heavily as to go under; and presently, when some unknown genius first put lead outside, and from a timid hundredweight or two this increased to tons, the veterans gave the new type up altogether as past praying for, and left them to their well-merited fate. I have been unable to get any definite information as to the first application of outside ballasts, but in 1834 Messrs. Steele built the 'Wave' for Mr. John Cross Buchanan, and on this vessel a metal keel was fixed. There may, however, have been earlier instances of this in the South. But Providence was on the side of the heavy lead keels, and each year yachts got longer, and deeper, and narrower, and had more and more lead outside, until there was none left inside at all, while they more and more nearly approached Euclid's definition of a line as having length but no breadth. A propos of these proportions, a good, and it may possibly be true, story is told of an enthusiastic cutter-man on the other side of the Atlantic, who, intensely prejudiced against the fine broad ships of America, asked a friend here to buy, and have sent across to him, a typical British 5-ton cutter, stipulating only that she should be fast, and at least as narrow as anything of her class. The little craft was safely brought across and put in the water in New York Bay, and after a trial sail the owner invited one or two friends to come off for a day's pleasuring in the new ship, with the object of showing the advantages of five feet of beam against ten. But, on coming alongside, the first to get out of the dinghy took hold of the runner, and taking a nice wide step, so as to get well into the centre of the boat, stepped clean into the water on the other side.
But long before the advantage of substituting untaxed depth for the heavily taxed beam was discovered, and about 1850 Mr. Wanhill, of Poole, introduced the raking sternpost, thus getting, on a given length of keel, a much longer water-line. But even this device was used in moderation, 50° to 60° being the utmost rake given, with the sternpost showing at the water-line, and such vessels as our modern cutaway fives, tens, twenties, or forties, with the keel a fourth of their over-all length, were as yet unthought of, though the direct inducement to build them was far stronger then than now.
'Cygnet' cutter, 35 tons.
Built by Wanhill, of Poole, in 1846.
Midship section.
I may cite an exception to this, however, in a vessel called the 'Problem,' built at Kirkcaldy about 1850 or 1851, and described in 'Hunt's Magazine' of August 1852. The 'Problem' presented a similar profile to that of our fashionable fives or 2½ of three or four years back, the stem and sternpost sloping down and meeting in a point as in the 'Lily,' 2½-rater; 'Natica,' 5-rater; and 'Varuna,' 40-rater. But the vessel was built without any idea of racing, she having three masts, square-rigged on each mast, and whatever advantages she may have possessed seem to have escaped the notice of the regular yacht-builders. A much likelier idea was struck by 'Vanderdecken,' in a letter to 'Bell's Life' in 1852, where he proposes a 'tonnage cheater,' in which he had got the sternpost pretty nearly amidships, with the profile resembling in an exact degree that of our most modern small craft. But though, if properly designed otherwise, the proposed vessel would have been a certain success, the jump was too big a one for our yacht-builders, and 'Vanderdecken's' idea lay on the shelf for many years.
'VARUNA'
40-rater (Capt. J. Towers-Clarke).
Designed by G. L. Watson, 1892.
'Problem,' 1852.
Deck plan of 'Problem'.
Profile of the 'Varuna,' 1892.
The evasion of length by this method, however, raised a terrible storm of discussion. 'Bell's Life' and 'Hunt's Magazine' were inundated with indignant letters on the subject, until, in 1854, the Royal London Yacht Club, followed by the Royal Thames, arranged to measure the length on deck, subtracting from this length the whole beam, instead of three-fifths of the beam, so as not to dis-class those vessels with excessive rake already built. This rule, under the name of the 'Thames Rule,' became the recognised method of measuring yachts, and, indeed, still remains the standard measurement for rates for buying, selling, and hiring.
Vanderdecken's tonnage cheater.
Slowly at first, but steadily, yachts became longer, narrower, and deeper; the crack yacht of one year being displaced the next by something with more length, less beam, and more ballast. Here and there, it is true, an occasional vessel of exceptional excellence held her own for a year or two with the newer ones; but what looked for a little like high water was but the mark of an exceptional wave which in its turn was covered, and the true flood seen to be a bit away yet.
To check the growing tendency towards length and depth at the expense of beam, the New Thames Yacht Club, at a meeting on March 12, 1874, adopted the following rule:—
The length shall be the distance from the fore part of the main stem to the after part of the main sternpost measured in a straight line along the deck.
The breadth shall be the distance between the outsides of the outside planks or wales, measured where that distance is largest.
The depth shall be the distance between the top of the covering board and the bottom of the keel at the middle point of the length.
The product of the length, the breadth, and the depth, divided by 200, shall be taken as the tonnage of the yacht.
But the influence of this rule was not far-reaching, and confined to the New Thames Club, and (in a slightly modified form) to the Queenstown Model Yacht Club; few yachts were built under it, and these were not conspicuously successful. Nor was the reason of this very far to seek. The tax on depth induced builders to cut down freeboard, and, so far as might be, draft, while to make up for this latter deficiency the amidships draft was carried well forward and aft, and only little rake given to the post, with the result that the few boats built under this rule carried an extremely awkward sail-plan, and were abnormally slow in stays.
The great general effect of the 94, or Thames Rule, has been described; but among its minor influences may be mentioned the inducement to have the utmost water-line length on a given deck or measurement length. One obvious manner of attaining this was by keeping the sternpost upright or nearly so; while the writer, in a little cutter called the 'Peg Woffington,' built for himself in 1871, took a farther advantage of the rule by putting a ram bow on her, thus getting the water-line even longer than the measurement on deck. An additional interest attaches to this yacht as being the earliest sailing yacht, so far as I have been able to ascertain, which had all her ballast outside.
Dog-legged sternpost.
In 1873 Mr. James Reid, of Port Glasgow, just then beginning to make his mark as a yacht designer, devised what was called the 'dog-legged' sternpost, fitting one in the 10-tonner 'Merle.' This, as will be seen from the sketch, retained all the advantages of a raked sternpost, and yet gave as long a water-line length as the length on deck; but the device had but a short life, as in the spring of 1877 the Yacht Racing Association, which had been formed the previous year, decreed that the length should be measured to the fore side of the rudder stock.
This regulation, made so late in the building season, somewhat unjustly threw out three yachts built under the existing rule. Unfortunately, a policy of procrastination seems to have haunted the Yacht Racing Association since its inception, as in most instances where the building rules have been changed, these changes have been decided on so close to the coming season that builders have been unfairly pushed in the designing and getting ready new vessels.
I would venture to suggest to that body, and this in the interests of yacht-owners quite as much as of builders, that no rule affecting the construction of racing yachts should be considered after the end of October.
Immersed counter of 'Quiraing,' 1877.
In the fall of 1877, in designing 'Quiraing,' and with the same end in view, I got the water-line the same length as the length for measurement by immersing the counter as in the sketch.
'DORA'
10-rater, centreboard (R. G. Allan, Esq.) Designed by G. L. Watson, 1891.
In 1878 the Yacht Racing Association recognised the right of builders to have the same length on load-water-line as that for which they were taxed on deck, and that without forcing them into adopting abnormal shapes, and therefore determined that the length should be measured on the load-water-line. Though it was at once pointed out that this would lead to overhang, so strong was prejudice in favour of the old-fashioned straight stem, that no advantage was taken of this until the advent of the 10-ton 'Buttercup' in 1880, and in her the outreach was extremely moderate. Indeed, it was impossible, with the deep, narrow style of yacht produced by the 94 rule, to use overhang to excess, this device only becoming objectionable when used in combination with a flat, shallow section. 'Buttercup' made a most excellent record; and though this was from causes quite apart from her clipper stem, yet she marks a stage as being the first cutter to reintroduce this adornment. 'Buttercup' was the work of an amateur, Mr. Robert Hewitt, and the following particulars of her may be of interest:—
'Buttercup,' launched from yard at Barking, September 1880
| L.W.L. | 42 | ft. 3 in. | |
| Extreme beam | 7 | ft. 4 in. | |
| Draught | 8 | feet | |
| Least freeboard | 2 | ft. 9 in. | |
| Displacement | 22 | tons | |
| Lead | 14 | " | |
| Ship and gear | 8 | " | |
| Sail-area | 2,580 | feet |
First match, May 9, 1881; sailed 20 starts in 1881, won 15 firsts, 2 seconds; designed, owned, and sailed by Robert Hewitt, Esq., R.T.Y.C, now commodore.
I may mention that the first design for the 90-ton 'Vanduara' was drawn with a clipper or out-reaching stem; but I had not the heart to disfigure the boat (as I then considered I should be doing) by building her in this fashion. The rising generation of yachtsmen, however, is entirely reconciled to the clipper bow on a cutter-rigged yacht, and may eventually (though this seems improbable) look with complacency on such cutwaters as 'Dora's' or 'Britannia's.'
About this date—1875—builders were becoming more and more impressed with the value of a low centre of gravity got by outside lead, which, in combination with increased displacement, allowed of beam being reduced and length added almost indefinitely. Indeed, Mr. Dixon Kemp, probably the best authority on the subject in this country, declared somewhat later that there was no limit to this process of drawing out; and though I never could quite agree with him on that point, the beginning of the end was approaching, and yachts, more especially in the smaller classes, were getting most uncomfortably narrow. The older men, however, were naturally timid about the introduction of external ballast, and it was left to 'the boys,' with the happy audacity and confidence of youth, to design 100-tonners with 70-ton keels, which, perhaps fortunately, did not get beyond the length of paper. But fives, tens, and twenties were built with nearly all their lead outside, and did not from that fact tear themselves asunder. Mr. James Reid, of Port Glasgow, designer of the beautiful 10-tonner 'Florence' and many other fast boats, closely followed by Mr. John Inglis, of Pointhouse, and later by the writer, put all or nearly all of the ballast outside, and the practice in a few years became general.
'Britannia,' 1893.
'Thistle,' 1887.
Sketch of cutwaters.
Length and displacement went merrily on, as will be seen from the following tables and diagrams:—
Elements of 5-Tonners (94 and 1730 Rules)
| Description | Diamond | Vril | Trident | Olga | Doris | Oona |
| Length on load-line | 25 ft. 3 in. | 28 ft. 4 in. | 32 ft. | 33 ft. | 33 ft. 8 in. | 34 ft. |
| Breadth Extreme | 7 ft. 2¼ in. | 6 ft. 7 in. | 6 ft. | 5 ft. 8¾ in. | 5 ft. 7 in. | 5 ft. 6 in. |
| Draught of water extreme | 4 ft. 6 in. | 5 ft. 2 in. | 6 ft. 3 in. | 6 ft. 4 in. | 7 ft. | 8 ft. |
| Displacement | 4.92 tons | 7.18 tons | 8.9 tons | 10.4 tons | 12.55 tons | 12.5 tons |
| Total area of lower sail | 671 sq. ft. | 830 sq. ft. | 912 sq. ft. | 985 sq. ft. | 1,116 | |
| Designer | W. Baden Powell | G. L. Watson | W. E. Paton | W. E. Paton | G. L. Watson | W. E. Paton |
| Date when built | 1873 | 1876 | 1879 | 1883 | 1885 | 1886 |
Profiles of 5-tonners.
Sections showing decrease of breadth and increase of depth in 5-tonners—under 94 and 1730 Rules.
In the autumn of 1881 it was thought a check might be put on this development by adopting a rule somewhat easier on beam than the existing 94 one, and in 1882 it was determined that the tonnage should be reckoned in accordance with the formula:—
(L + B)2 × B / 1730
Diagram of variation under different rules.
The incidence of this rule is clearly enough shown by the diagram, where the possible dimensions for a 10-, 20-, 30-, and 40-tonner are plotted under both rules; the two curves crossing at a point where the vessel is about 5-¼ beams in length. Below this point the new rule was easier on beam, and above it more severe; and it was thought that the extra beam admissible below the five-beam point would have induced builders to avail themselves of this quality; but beam, as we learn by the light of later years, was then altogether undervalued, and length was taken at any price, with the result that the adoption of extreme proportions was hastened rather than averted, till in 1886 a radical change in the rule was demanded, and in the autumn of that year a Committee of the Yacht Racing Association, after taking most exhaustive evidence from the various experts, decided on the adoption of a rule proposed by Mr. Dixon Kemp, based solely on length (which was measured on the load-water-line) and on sail-area.
In this rule, breadth, so sorely taxed by the 94 rule, was left absolutely unfettered; depth as heretofore being also untaxed, so that infinite scope was left for experiment in the way of beam. Simultaneously with this change, the use of the centreboard was permitted; and, as the pessimists declared, the road made clear for all manner of skimming dishes and consequent caprices. I ventured to point out at the time the possible dangers of unlimited beam, and proposed that the rule should be (L +B) × sail-area/constant; but this limitation was held to be unnecessary, as, indeed, it appeared to be for a year or two. With the exception of the 'Thistle,' built immediately on the passing of the rule, and built probably more with a view to American racing than performance in home waters, builders were somewhat chary of availing themselves of the advantages of beam, and, in the larger classes at least, successive yachts, though getting broader, only 'slowly broadened down from precedent to precedent.' To Mr. Alfred Payne, of Southampton, is due the credit of showing what could be done with large beam and moderate displacement.
In 1889 he built the 'Humming Bird,' 2½-rater, for Captain Hughes; this boat was 26 feet on water-line, 7.5 feet beam—that is, 3.46 beams in length—and was extremely successful against other and narrower boats, notably 'Thief' and 'Queen Mab', of like rating and designed by the writer.
Elements of 40-Raters (Length and Sail Area Rule)
| Description | Mohawk | Deerhound | Creole | Thalia | Varuna | Centreboard cutter — Queen Mab | Lais | Vendetta |
| Length on load line | 61.23 ft. | 58.85 ft. | 59 ft. 6 in. | 59.14 ft. | 59 ft. | 59 ft. 8 in. | 59.92 ft. | 59.96 ft. |
| Breadth extreme | 14.5 ft. | 13 ft. 5 in. | 13 ft. 2¼ in. | 13.9 ft. | 14 ft. 7 in. | 16 ft. 4 in. | 17 ft. | 17.05 ft. |
| Draught of water extreme | 9.5 ft. | 11 ft. 6½ in. | 12 ft. | 12 ft. 6 in. | 13 ft. 4 in. | 10 ft. 9 in. | — | — |
| Displacement | 58.8 tons | 58 tons | 58 tons | 57 tons | 55 tons | 54.8 tons | — | — |
| Designer | C. P. Clayton | G. L. Watson | G. L. Watson | W. Fife jun. | G. L. Watson | G. L. Watson | W. Fife jun. | A. E. Payne |
| Date when built | 1888 | 1889 | 1890 | 1891 | 1892 | 1892 | 1893 | 1893 |
In 1890 'Iverna' was built, of practically the same length as, and of less beam than, 'Thistle,' and no great advance was made until the present year (1893) in the adoption of beam in the larger classes; but the progress in this direction may be easily traced in the 'forty' and 'twenty' rating classes, where the growth of beam and decline in displacement are very well marked, as the table and diagram show.
Diagram showing variation of dimensions, &c., with years. 40-raters. L. and S.A. Rule.
Profiles of 40-raters.
1893 will be remembered as having produced four notable boats on this side of the Atlantic, and five in America; and in all nine due prominence is certainly given to beam, if, indeed, more breadth has not been taken, in some of these at least, than can be advantageously used.
The dimensions of these boats, so far as they have been obtainable, will be of interest.
Midship sections of 40-raters.
How far under the present rating rule beam may yet be increased with advantage to speed is still matter for debate and experiment. Personally I am inclined to think we have pretty nearly approached the limit. But of this much I am confident, that we have long ago exceeded the limit where beam improves a yacht as a comfortable sea-going craft, and that we should have a much more wholesome and useful vessel for all purposes, except possibly for international racing, with somewhat less beam and somewhat more displacement.
The diagram given ante may serve to give the reader an idea of the influence that the various tonnage or rating rules have had on the proportions and form of yachts.
British Yachts, 1893
| Name | Length on L.W.L. | Breadth ext. | Y.R.A. sail area | Length over all | Draft | Y.R.A. rating |
| feet | feet | square feet | feet | feet | ||
| Satanita | 97.7 | 24.70 | 09,923 | 131.00 | 16.5 | 161.58 |
| Britannia | 87.8 | 23.66 | 10,328 | 121.50 | 15.0 | 151.13 |
| Valkyrie | 86.8 | 22.33 | 10,271 | 117.25 | 16.3 | 148.58 |
| Calluna | 82.0 | 24.30 | 10,305 | — | 15.0 | 140.83 |
American Yachts, 1893
| Name | Length on L.W.L. | Breadth ext. | Y.R.A. sail area | Length over all | Draft | Y.R.A. rating |
| feet | feet | square feet | feet | feet | ||
| Navahoe, C.B. | 86.93 | 23.00 | 10,815 | 128 | 13.0 | 156.7 |
| Vigilant, C.B. | 86.19 | 26.25 | 12,330 | 124 | 14.0 | 178.0 |
| Colonia, K. | 85.00 | 24.00 | — | 124 | 14.0 | — |
| Jubilee, C.B. and Fin | 84.00 | 22.50 | — | 123 | 16.0 | — |
| Pilgrim, K. | 85.00 | 23.00 | — | 122 | 22.0 | — |
But an entirely false impression has been conveyed should it be understood that the only advance made in yacht designing was due to more or less ingenious methods of evading the existing measurement rule; and it will be sufficient if the fact has been impressed, that a designer is as unlikely to make a successful vessel if he ignores the measurement under which the yacht is to race as by failing to recognise those laws of nature which govern the stability of bodies in water and their resistance in passing through it.
What has to be done by the yacht designer, besides getting the very utmost out of the tonnage rule, has never been more happily put than by Lord Dunraven in an article on International Yachting, from which I venture to quote:—
How most successfully to drive a body through the water by the means of the motive power of the wind acting upon the sails, is the question that puzzles men and turns them grey-headed before Nature should have thinned or whitened their locks. The designer has not merely to discover the form of solid body which, at various rates of speed, will excite the smallest degree of resistance in passing through the water, for the body is not solid, it is hollow. It must have buoyancy, and suitable accommodation for all the living and dead freight on board. It must possess stability, real and acquired; that is, natural by means of breadth, and artificial by means of ballast, if the expressions are allowable. It does not proceed on a level keel or at any uniform angle, but at angles varying at every moment, and the contour of the body must be adapted to these various angles. Neither does the wind exert its force upon it from a fixed direction, nor propel it through water uniformly smooth or constantly rough. On the contrary, the propelling power strikes from various angles on the surface of the sails; and the sea, as we all know—and some of us to our cost—has a reprehensible habit of becoming, on the shortest notice, agitated in the most disagreeable manner.
Every point of sailing suggests an appropriate and different form of hull. The shape that is well adapted for one kind of weather is ill adapted for another sort; vessels that move as by magic in light airs may be of little use in a whole sail breeze; one that is by no means a flier in smooth water may be very hard to beat in a sea-way. In short, a vessel must be light enough to be driven easily by a moderate breeze, stiff enough to stand up to her canvas in a hard wind, shallow enough to be docked with ease and to run with speed. She must have depth enough to hold her up to windward, breadth enough to give her stability; she should be long enough to reach well, and short enough to turn well to windward; low in the water so as not to hold too much wind, with plenty of freeboard to keep the sea off her decks. The satisfaction of any one requirement necessitates something antagonistic to some other requirement equally clamorous for satisfaction. Your vessel, to be perfect, must be light, of small displacement, and with the centre of gravity brought very low; she must also have large displacement, and the ballast must not be too low, in order that she may be easy in a sea-way; she must be broad, narrow, long, short, deep, shallow, tender, stiff. She must be self-contradictory in every part. A sailing ship is a bundle of compromises, and the cleverest constructor is he who, out of a mass of hostile parts, succeeds in creating the most harmonious whole. It is not strange that designers pass sleepless nights, and that anything like finality and perfection of type is impossible to conceive. No wonder that yacht designing is a pursuit of absorbing interest.
It has been shown, then, how from the three beam yachts of fifty years ago, the proportions drew out, under the 94 rule, to five, five and a half, and in some instances six beams in length, the 'Evolution' reaching even 7.8 beams; and even more rapidly, under the length and sail-area rule, fell back to something like three again. But the proportions are about all that remain in common to the clippers of 1845 and 1893 and it will be interesting now to trace how form, mode of construction and equipment have developed, as well as proportions.
Prior to 1820, what yachts there were afloat seem to have presented but little individuality of form, and showed, in common with the faster smugglers and fishing vessels of the day, a round barrel-like bottom, full round bow and fairly clean run, the buttock lines and after riband lines being generally fair and easy. These yachts were, one and all, built of timber, were ballasted with stones or gravel, the more advanced possibly with ore, while the sails and equipment were of a piece with the hull, the main rigging being of hemp, and no attempt being made after flatness in the sails.
The original 'Arrow,' of 84 tons, built somewhere about 1823 by Mr. Joseph Weld, seems to have been a fairly representative craft of that time, and raced with considerable success, even against much larger vessels than herself.
This original 'Arrow' was 61 ft. 9½ in. long by 18 ft. 5-¼ in. beam, with a depth of hold of 8 ft. 8 in.—that is, she had a proportion of length to breadth of 3.35—not very much differing in proportion from our present cutters of 1893: 'Calluna,' the 40-raters 'Lais' and 'Vendetta,' being about 3.4 and 3.5 beams to length, and the American 'Vigilant' about 3.32.
Midship section.
'Leopard.' Built by Linn Ratsey, Cowes, Isle of Wight, 1807. These lines are accurately reproduced from the original by his grandson, Michael E. Ratsey.
'Arrow' had the usual round barrel-like bottom, and, so far as can be learned, a round, short bow, the run being fair and easy, the small midship section lending itself pleasantly to this.
'ARROW' CUTTER
113 tons. Length on L.W.L., 79' 2"; beam extreme, 18' 9"; draught extreme, 11' 6".
[The original 'Arrow,' 84 tons, was built by Mr Joseph Weld about 1823. In 1846 she was bought by Mr. Thomas Chamberlayne and rebuilt; but it was not until 1852 that her bow was lengthened and she appeared as shown above.]
Midship Section
Racing with the 'Arrow,' but without any very conspicuous success, was the cutter 'Menai,' designed by that famous sportsman, Mr. T. Assheton-Smith, and memorable from being the first vessel in which hollow lines were adopted. But little notice seems to have been taken of this very radical alteration in form, and although Scott Russell in 1840 elaborated a system of construction, based on hollow lines, and the famous 'Mosquito,' built in 1848, and 'Tiara,' built by Simons of Renfrew in 1850, all showed this feature strongly, it was not till the 'America' schooner appeared in 1851 that the old round bow was utterly condemned, and everyone went more or less crazy on the long hollow bow.
Meanwhile the original old 'Arrow' was being sailed with fair success against craft much larger than herself, until in 1827 she was laid aside by her owner in favour of the first 'Lulworth,' of 130 tons, known for little else than that she was of the same name as the famous 'Lulworth' of 80 tons, also built by Mr. Weld in 1857.
Meantime, Mr. Weld built the famous 'Alarm' of 193 tons in 1834, and for a long time this enormous cutter was Queen of the Solent.
But the old 'Arrow' was to begin a second career. Bought in 1846 from a dealer by Mr. Thomas Chamberlayne for a few pounds, that gentleman had her replanked and some alterations made in the bow and run, indeed not very much more than the amidship frame seems to have been preserved. Anyway the resuscitated vessel appeared again in 1847, recommencing a career which has certainly been an extraordinary one.
In 1848 'Mosquito' was built and fairly tackled the older ship, but the 'Arrow' was not yet the boat she now is, or as represented in the plate, as it was not till 1852, and until after the advent of the 'America,' that she appeared with her present long, hollow bow, having been pulled out some 17 feet in the winter of 1851, as indeed was pretty well everything else that aspired to be in the fashion. As is often the case, the pendulum swung too far the other way; bows were built on old boats, and new boats were designed with fore bodies, altogether out-Heroding Herod; and the 'America's' graceful, well-proportioned and moderately hollow bow was caricatured in some instances to a ridiculous extent. The 'America' showed also a decided departure in form of midship section, the bottom being much straighter than in our British-built craft, and the bilge higher and quicker—altogether a fine form for stability. The run, though somewhat short, was very fair, the buttock lines especially (as will be seen by the plate given in the second volume) showing beautifully easy curves.
But the lesson hinted at by 'Menai,' reiterated by 'Mosquito' and 'Tiara,' insisted upon by Scott Russell, but only brought home to us by the American schooner, was not the only one to be gleaned from that graceful vessel. Previous to her advent, our British-made sails were most baggy productions, kept decently flat only by drenching the luffs with water, a process called 'skeating.' This defect could not altogether be laid at the door of our sailmakers, as they did fairly well, considering the material they had to work with; but flax canvas at that date was still made by hand and was little firmer in texture, if indeed as firm, as the unbleached merchant canvas of the present day. The 'America's' sails were of machine-spun cotton, and, farther, were laced to the booms as well as the gaffs and masts, the staysail also being laced to a boom. These flat sails certainly suited the easy form of the 'America'; but here again the reaction was too strong, and it is undoubtedly the fact that for some years afterwards sails were got too flat, at least, for many of the full-bodied boats that they were put over, and the want of flow of the older-fashioned loose-footed sails was sadly missed when there came to be any work off the wind.
For some years then after 1851 (the year of 'America's' début here), sails were probably flat enough for the forms they had to drive; and American sailmakers apparently arrived at this conclusion, as they first of all gave up lacing the head sails, and later cut those rounder and rounder, until now American head-sails are cut much fuller than our own, and their mainsails also somewhat fuller. But while the 'America' was undoubtedly the great epoch-making vessel in yacht designing, the cutter 'Mosquito' possessed quite as many original features, and had she only come from abroad instead of being a home production, would have made a far greater stir than the schooner.
'Mosquito,' 50 tons, 1848.
The 'Mosquito' was turned out by the Thames Iron Works Shipbuilding Company. She was designed by that great original genius, Tom Waterman, who had already produced many successful merchant steamers and sailing ships: notably the steamer 'Himalaya,' built originally for the Peninsular and Oriental Company, but afterwards sold to Her Majesty's Government for a troopship, and still a gem of the ocean and mother of the troopers.
Midship section.
The 'Mosquito,' besides presenting novelties in form, in the way of an easy and hollow bow, large displacement, well-raked post and deep heel, also upset all preconceived notions of what was yacht fashion, by being built of iron. Great was the discussion over this departure; but, among many prophets of evil, a writer in 'Hunt's Magazine,' in 1854, discussing wood versus iron, predicts that 'the "Mosquito" is likely to be well and hearty when the present wooden craft have gone to that "bourne from which no traveller returns."'
This prediction has been exactly fulfilled, as 'Mosquito,' after as long and brilliant a career as has fallen to any yacht, is now, or was a few years ago, doing good work as a pilot boat off Barrow-in-Furness.
In 1852, Mr. William Fife, of Fairlie, in Ayrshire, who, with his father before him, had for some years been turning out fast and weatherly boats, produced 'Cymba,' a notable cutter. His father had made Scotch-built yachts, well known by his 'Gleam,' built in 1832, though only fitted out for racing by Sir Robert Gore Booth in 1837; but 'Cymba' was a marked improvement on this model, having a far longer and easier bow, larger displacement, considerable rake of post, and great drag aft.
The dimensions of 'Cymba' are appended, and it will be seen that she was just under four beams in length.
'Cymba', built 1852, by Fife
| Length of keel | 52.0 | feet |
| Length between perpendiculars | 59.0 | " |
| Breadth, extreme | 15.3 | " |
| Draft aft | 10.0 | " |
| Forward | 5.6 | " |
| Mast from stem | 23.0 | " |
| Length of mast | 56.0 | " |
| Boom | 53.0 | " |
| Bowsprit | 32.0 | " |
| Lead outside | 3.0 | tons |
| Lead in all | 23 to 24.0 | tons |
Meanwhile in matters of equipment steady progress was being made. Wire rope was rapidly ousting hemp for all standing rigging. Sailmaking, in the hands of Messrs. Lapthorn and of Charles Ratsey, was rapidly becoming a science. Machine-spun and woven flax canvas was in universal use, even cotton canvas was fitfully tried, and from the first strongly upheld by Charles Ratsey, of Cowes; but prejudice was too strong as yet for this material, and flax held the day for many a year to come. It is gratifying that Mr. Ratsey should have lived to see his favourite material triumphant, and to have looked, as he might have done in 1893, at the finest fleet of racing yachts the world has seen, clothed, from the Prince of Wales's majestic 'Britannia' to the tiny half-rater, entirely with cotton.
'LETHE'
163 tons, showing lead keel and construction. Designed by G. L. Watson. Built by Fay & Co., 1889.
A considerable factor in modifying form was the gradual abolition of shifting ballast; this, though not yet actually illegal, was being more and more looked upon with disfavour, and as the use of outside lead increased, it was found that depth was a more than sufficient substitute for weather ballast, especially as beam was being squeezed down by the tonnage rule, and a long lever in this direction rendered impossible.
Timber was still the favourite material for building ('Mosquito,' 'Torpid,' and one or two others being the sole exceptions to this rule); but about 1860 a new system of construction was tried in which an iron framework was combined with a wooden skin or planking. This system came rapidly into vogue on the Clyde, and was adopted by several firms there in the building of those beautiful creations, the China clipper ships. The annual race home with the season's teas was the subject of discussion in the great Clyde shipyards, and I can well remember the highest ambition of every spirited lad in the drawing office was to live to design a China clipper. The Suez Canal closed for ever this avenue to fame.
Among the most successful builders of these ships were Messrs. Robert Steele & Co., of Greenock, who had, so early as 1807, built yachts for the Excise and for various Scotch owners. Mr. William Steele of that firm being an able designer of yachts as well as of ships, it was natural that this method of construction should be adopted by him in the building of 'Nyanza,' 'Oimara,' 'Garrion,' and the majestic 'Selene,' to-day one of the handsomest schooners afloat; while many of that firm's large steam yachts, notably the 'Wanderer,' 850 tons, the finest auxiliary yacht of her day, were built on this plan.
Dan Hatcher of Southampton carried out this system in building several vessels, commencing with a schooner, the 'Bella Donna,' of 119 tons, in 1867; 'Seabird,' 126 tons, 1868; 'Lizzie,' of 20 tons, 1868; then, in one of his finest craft, 'Muriel,' which he built for Mr. Bridson in 1869; and in the famous 'Norman' he also adopted this construction. But, owing to the steel frame being considerably more expensive than timber, the composite build has never become popular until within the last few years, when the naturally weak shape of the modern yacht, the fact of all the lead being outside, and her enormous stability, have so increased the racking strains on the structure, that a merely wooden frame cannot be got to hold together without making the weight of the hull altogether prohibitive; and the composite racing yacht, for everything except very small vessels, seems likely to push all the others from the field. As illustrating this method of construction, a midship section is given of 'Lethe,' 163-ton yawl, and one of the finest of our cruising yachts. The photograph shows the lead keel, the heaviest ever cast, and also the method of securing the same to the bottom of the ship.
Since 'Mosquito' astonished the yachting world in 1848, until to-day when 'Navahoe' and other American racing yachts have been constructed of metal, iron and steel yachts have been more or less successful; but the difficulty of keeping a smooth and perfectly clean bottom is a considerable source of expense and worry, although the immense strength of the steel shell, and in a large yacht its lightness, will always be a set-off to the trouble of the uncoppered bottom.
'Lethe,' 163 tons. Built for S. C. Watson, Esq.—Midship section.
In a lecture on 'Progress in Yachting and Yacht-building,' which I delivered early in 1881, in a fanciful specification of the yacht for the season 2000, I required that the plating below water should be of manganese bronze. Curiously enough, a few years later saw an attempt to combine the strength of steel and the smoothness, anti-fouling, and non-corrosive properties of copper, in the building of a torpedo-boat of this material; while this year the chosen defender of the America Cup has been plated with a similar bronze on a steel frame, the builders claiming, and not without reason, that the additional smoothness of bottom gives her an advantage of five to seven minutes on a forty-mile course. But such a practice seems hardly likely to become general for ordinary racing yachts built for men with a normal depth of pocket, and whilst, as in the old Mississippi steamboat days, it sometimes paid to burn hams, most of us have to try and get along with good coal.
I was going to build the topsides, frames, and beams of my ideal vessel of aluminium, and the other day a small yacht has been built, on the Continent, of this lightest of metals; but the present cost of this material, and, as yet, its unreliability, place it, for the present at least, outside the range of practical material for yacht-building. There seems more hope for some of the very beautiful and immensely strong alloys of aluminium, but they too are expensive, and also heavy. It may be some years before the complete realisation of my design is accomplished, and platinum is substituted for lead as ballast, though when syndicates of millionaires start yacht-building there seems very little limit to extravagance in construction.
In nickel-steel there is promise of a very perfect material. This is an alloy of the ordinary Siemens-Martin steel with nickel, and called by the makers Yolla metal. It can be made to comply with all the ordinary tests applied to ship steel, in the way of ductility under stress, and at the same time have a breaking strength of 40 tons to the square inch as against 27 for ordinary steel. This metal was used by Mr. Fife in 1893 for the frames and beams of the 20-rater 'Dragon' (third), and although the few pounds of weight saved by no means accounted for the phenomenal success of this little ship, yet the gain was all in the right direction.
Wire standing rigging continued to improve in quality, and very rapidly pushed out the old hemp rigging. From being made at first of good charcoal iron wire, it is now manufactured of the very highest class of steel, of such perfect character that the breaking strength of each wire is equal to 130 tons per square inch.
Used at first for standing rigging only, flexible wire rope takes the place of Manilla or hemp for the runners, and runner tackles, topping lifts, bobstay falls, outhauls, topsail and jib-topsail halliards, and latterly even for throat and peak halliards.
Other details were also perfected. Instead of the heavy and clumsy windlass, neat and light capstans are arranged of cast steel and gun metal, made so that the whole thing can be lifted away and stowed below while racing.
Right- and left-handed screws have superseded the old dead-eyes and lanyards, although these held their own desperately for many years. Introduced first in the 10-tonner 'Verve,' in 1877, the chain-plates were torn up in an extra heavy squall; but this occurred from the great stability of the boat and the fastening having been insufficient; the rigging screws, however, were blamed for all the trouble, and were laid aside for ten years or thereabouts, until re-introduced in the 5-tonner 'Doris.' Now no racing boat is without them.
Attention was also given to the lightening of deck fittings, skylights, companions, and the like, these in the racing vessels being kept lower and flatter, and the scantling reduced perhaps rather farther than advisable, as one certainly thinks on getting a stream of water down the neck from a leaky skylight.
Bulwarks have been reduced so as to save weight and windage, until in the smaller yachts they have become a mere ledge or foothold, whilst even in the largest class the rail is less than a foot from the deck.
Below, fittings have been lightened correspondingly. Cedar, yellow pine, and cretonnes or tapestries stretched on frames or light panels, take the place of the good solid oak and mahogany framing of the years gone by. Indeed, in some of the classes under 40-rating, cabin fittings have been dispensed with altogether; although this is not altogether a novelty, as the Marquis of Ailsa, in 'Bloodhound' (built 1874), and 'Sleuthhound' (built 1881), had at first no fittings beyond a seat along each side. 'Thistle' in 1887 was similarly arranged, nor had 'Valkyrie' or 'Vigilant' much more inside than a coat of paint when racing for the America Cup; but these last are of course special cases, where everything was sacrificed so that the uttermost second of speed should be taken out of the yachts. In cruising yachts the cabins are infinitely more elegant and comfortable now than formerly. The good old birdseye maple panelling with rosewood mouldings and gilded 'egg and dart' cornice has given place to tasteful cabinet-work designed in many cases by high-class artists. The main cabin of the 'Lethe,' designed by Mr. T. L. Watson, F.R.I.B.A., is a good example of this, and the 'Thistle,' now called 'Meteor,' the property of the German Emperor, has since been very beautifully fitted up from designs by the same gentleman, the photographs reproduced here giving but an indication of the elegance and richness of the interior.
Profile of 'Valkyrie.' Designed by G. L. Watson.
Profile of 'Vigilant.' Designed by N. Herreshoff.
One of the happiest combinations of lightness of structure with taste and comfort is in the Prince of Wales's 'Britannia.' The fittings throughout are of polished yellow pine and mahogany, with tapestries and cretonnes above the polished wood dado, the effect being extremely bright, cosy, and unostentatious.
SALOON OF 'THISTLE' (NOW 'METEOR').
To return to the story of the evolution of the modern racing yacht, no striking change in form was made for some little time after 'America's' advent, beyond, of course, the steady lengthening and deepening of the model. Dan Hatcher, with the 'Glance' in 1855, entered on the wonderful series of successes which culminated perhaps in 'Norman,' 1872. These were all reasonably long boats with nice bows, fine after ends, and of big mid-area and displacement, but beautifully fair and easy all over, and showing a slight but not inordinate hollow forward. In 1866 Mr. Fife, of Fairlie, built the 'Fiona,' and though Clyde builders had already turned out successful yachts, it was 'Fiona' that put the fame of Scotch builders on a solid footing. This beautiful vessel was a cutter of 80 tons, of great length in proportion to beam (73 ft. 6 in. × 15 ft. 9 in.) and of large displacement for those days (108 tons); but she had singularly long, fair and easy lines, and, sailed in a masterly manner by John Houston, of Largs, more than held her own with the Solent-built craft. However, beyond being exceptionally fair and easy, 'Fiona' presented no striking novelty in form, nor did the big cutters 'Kriemhilda,' 'Vol-au-Vent,' or 'Formosa,' built by M. Ratsey, of Cowes, in 1872, 1875, and 1878 respectively, and it is an outsider and amateur yacht-builder that we have to thank for the daring departure in form that was made in 'Jullanar.'
Cutter yacht 'Britannia'—general arrangement plan.
Prior to 1870 but little was known of the laws governing the resistance to bodies moving through water. It is true that eighty years before this, towards the close of last century, Colonel Beaufoy had made an elaborate series of experiments in towing bodies through water, beginning first in one of the tanks of his father's brewhouse. These were elaborated in the Greenland Dock near London, and included the determination of the resistance of all manner of shapes, except unhappily shipshape ones, the nearest approach to these being double wedges, and double wedges with a straight amidship piece inserted. But while Colonel Beaufoy also made experiments for the determination of the value of surface friction on planes pulled through the water, no great importance seems to have been attached to these by shipbuilders in general, and the subject of surface friction was more or less lost sight of by them until again brought forward by Maquorn Rankine, first in a series of papers in the 'Mechanic's Magazine,' and more elaborately in his 'Shipbuilding, Theoretical and Practical,' published in 1866. In this Rankine, basing his deductions on Weisbach's experiments on the flow of water through pipes, concluded on mathematical principles that the entire resistance at moderate speeds of a fair and easy formed vessel was due to surface friction—i.e. the rubbing of the water against the sides and bottom of the ship. Rankine showed also that at higher speeds the forming of waves was a material and ever-increasing element in the resistance.
It is fully twenty years ago that the late Mr. William Froude began to give to the world the results of his experiments on the resistance of planes of different lengths, coated with various substances and towed at varying speeds through the water. These experiments were conducted under the most favourable conditions, and with the nicest regard for accuracy, and practically confirmed Maquorn Rankine's deductions, although it was found that Rankine had somewhat overestimated the value attachable to surface friction, and had also overestimated the increase in frictional resistance, due to increased speed. Still the great fact remained that practically the entire resistance to a fairly formed body, moving through water at moderate speeds, is due to friction and to friction alone.
Rankine's reasoning, early in the sixties, had been too subtle for those fathers of shipbuilding at that date engaged in the art. Able, honest, practical men, most of them could have handled an adze, or maul, with the best of their workmen, and were more at home fairing a sheering batten, or directing a launch, than in analysing speed curves, or investigating strength calculations.
But one or two of the younger and brighter minds in the profession, more especially those who had the advantage of Rankine's direct tuition, felt that the old beliefs as to resistance presented such anomalous and unreconcilable results that they could not be founded on any true law of nature. John Inglis, jun., then a mere boy, instituted in Pointhouse Shipyard Rankine's method of estimating the resistance of ships, and for many years was alone in this mode of investigation.
Resistance curves
Model of S.S. 'Merkara.'
But with Froude's experiments all doubt on the matter vanished. It was no longer a question of 'condemned mathematics.' Froude had the happy knack of writing so that the proverbial schoolboy could understand him; and the schoolboy could see the value of resistance to motion through water weighed out as simply and accurately as a pound of currant bun. These experiments for the determination of the frictional resistance of water, published in 1874, were supplemented presently by experiments on models of actual ships, and also by towing a full-size ship, the 'Greyhound,' her resistance at various speeds being recorded by means of a dynamometer on board the 'Active,' the vessel towing her. The results of the experiments on model and ship were set out in a curve, when it was found, after the necessary corrections were made, that both curves were of precisely similar character. A basis of comparison between model and ship was thus established, the measure of this being set forth in what is known as Froude's law of comparison, which may thus be stated. The equivalent speed of a ship and the model it represents will vary as the square root of their lengths. Thus, in the case of a ship 100 feet long represented by a model 4 feet long, the equivalent speed of the ship would be five times that of the model, and at these equivalent speeds would present similar phenomena connected with resistance as the model does. This fact enormously increased the knowledge of investigators, and it was belief in it that gave the writer absolute confidence in carrying out the design of the 'Vanduara,' though he possessed experience in small boats only. Mr. Froude also split up the several elements of resistance to motion through the water into their component parts, assigning a value to each, and showing what was due to surface friction and eddy-making, and what to wave-making. Scott Russell had already argued for a given length of fore and after body for any given speed, and this was recognised by yacht-builders to some extent by their gradually lengthening out their vessels; but the disadvantages as well as the advantages of length could only be thoroughly realised on investigating Froude's experiments. An example is given of such an experiment in the diagram, which shows the resistance curve of a model of the 'Merkara,' built by Messrs. Denny Bros., at Dumbarton, where the several resistances are shown, each in its place. In this diagram the resistance due to surface friction is indicated by the dotted line, and the total resistance by the full line. Up to a speed of 250 feet per minute (for the model) the resistance is almost entirely due to skin friction, but after that the wave-making becomes more and more serious until at 370 feet per minute the wave-making takes more power than the surface friction.
While surface friction thus plays a very large part in the resistance of all vessels, and more especially in that of ocean-going steamers and ships, which from their large dimensions seldom attain serious wave-making speeds, yet undue importance may be placed upon friction, and, in the smaller yachts, especially, surface may be inordinately cut away. A notable example of this was the 'Thistle,' built in 1889 to compete for the America Cup; here the surface was so cut down that sufficient lateral plane was not left to hold her to windward, and although she sailed the water as fast as the American champion, the 'Volunteer,' she drifted bodily to leeward.
A short history of Mr. Froude's discoveries in resistance was advisable before touching on 'Jullanar,' as this wonderful vessel, whether the result of intuition or of early and immediate appreciation of Froude's investigations, was a remarkable example of the modern theories regarding naval architecture.
The same year that 'Jullanar' was built, I designed my first racing yacht, the 5-ton 'Clotilde,' but whilst I had the advantage, through my friend Mr. John Inglis, jun., of specially early access to Professor Froude's investigations, I cut her away in a somewhat timid fashion, though sufficient for her at that time to be compared to a 'cart-wheel,' with the accompanying prediction that she might 'run on land, but would never sail in salt water.'
Meanwhile, with splendid audacity, and with no timid reverence for precedent, Mr. Bentall built the 'Jullanar.'
An Essex plough and agricultural implement maker, Mr. E. H. Bentall had but little training in naval architecture, but from boyhood had been fond of yachting and of yacht modelling. He fancied he could do something in the way of improving the form of the existing racing yacht. After cutting several half-models, he got one that pleased him, and on a piece of his own property adjoining the Blackwater river in Essex, the famous yawl, afterwards to be known as 'Jullanar,' was laid down.
'JULLANAR'
126 tons. Built by E. H. Bentall, Esq., 1875.
Great length was taken in proportion to beam, as length means capacity for speed, and beam in those days was doubly taxed. Draft was untaxed, and was used boldly to obtain stability and weatherly qualities; but while such proportions would have been impossible with the ordinary form of forefoot and sternpost, as the boat would have been clogged up with wet surface, this was got over by cutting all deadwood clean away both forward and aft, in such daring fashion as was not attempted until 'Thistle' was built, years afterward and I should not have essayed such a form of profile in her had not 'Jullanar's' success given me a precedent. Add to these features the fact that every line in the vessel was easy and fair, and the only wonder is that the famous yawl was not even more phenomenally successful than she was.
'Jullanar'—midship section.
Mr. Hunt, publisher of 'Hunt's Yachting Magazine,' has kindly supplied the following measurements of the 'Jullanar,' which were given to him by Mr. Bentall himself, when he would not let anyone else have them. Coming therefore from the fountain-head they are accurate, and should be preserved as a register of detail.
'Jullanar'[3] 126 tons, yawl
To my mind the genius, daring, and originality of mind of Mr. Bentall were even more fully displayed in the design of the unsuccessful 'Evolution' than of the successful 'Jullanar.'
'Jullanar,' yawl, 126 tons, 1875. Designed by E. H. Bentall, Esq.
The 'Evolution,' as her name implied, was the logical outcome of the then tonnage rule, and of the laws of resistance rediscovered, or at least popularised, by Froude. It seems self-evident now that with a belief in these laws only one type of boat could be the result; but Mr. Froude alone had the courage of his opinions, and built the extraordinary 10-tonner which, if it did nothing else, scared the authorities into changing the tonnage rule. 'Evolution' was by far the longest of the 10-tonners, her dimensions being 51 ft. × 6 ft. 6 in.—indeed about the same water-line length as the twenties. To get moderate wet surface the ends were cut away; but as 'Jullanar' already represented the utmost that could be done in that direction, while preserving a fair line of keel, this was cast aside in 'Evolution,' and the profile was that of a true 'fin' boat. More than this, it was found after a trial sail or two that she was very deficient in stability when the lead slab forming the keel was recast in the form of a bulb on the bottom of the plate, the completed design simply forming one of our modern bulb fin keels, but of course, owing to the 94 rule, with vastly less beam. 'Evolution' was not a success because of her insufficient stability, but with the meagre data in possession of the designer as to the stability of boats of this class, it would have been marvellous had the difficulty been overcome in a first trial. To those able to see the beauties in a design, it matters less whether the ultimate outcome has been successful or not, and while to 'the general' nothing succeeds like success, a few have a kindly sympathy and hearty admiration for those who have laboured, that we may enjoy the increase. Many of the best and kindest thoughts and brightest ideas never reach fruition in this world, and so in the mechanical arts there is often more genius displayed in a failure than in a success, with this difference, that a mechanical idea seldom dies, but, 'blossoming in the dust' of one brain, is plucked and worn by another. 'Evolution' lay dead for fifteen years. She has had a striking resurrection on both sides of the Atlantic.
'Evolution,' October 12, 1880, 10 tons, Y.R.A.
Designed by E. H. Bentall, Esq.
In the autumn of 1886, as has been stated, the tonnage rule was changed to that of rating, the only taxed dimensions being length on water-line and sail-area. This change, though at once affecting dimensions, did not materially affect form, though even in the earlier boats designed under this rule more hollow was given to the sections, this being of course a necessity, as with the added beam abnormal displacement would otherwise have been the result. But displacement was not immediately cut down, and for a given length of load-water-line yachts had quite as much displacement as formerly; 'Thistle,' 120-rating, and 'Mohawk,' 40-rater, the only two large yachts built the first year for the new classification, both being wholesome big-bodied boats, with 130 and 58 tons displacement respectively. Overhang naturally increased somewhat, as it was apparent that this could be more usefully adopted with a shallow-bodied boat than with a narrow one, it being evident that the natural way of forming the stem and counter was to follow the general buttock lines of the fore and after body. This overhang on the fairly deep boats built up till 1890, so far from being objectionable, was a distinct advantage, as it gave a fine, easy, and at the same time lifting, bow in a sea, eased the bow riband lines when the boat lay down and was hard driven reaching, and carried the side fairly out aft in the long counter.
Profile of lines of 'Meteor' (late 'Thistle'). Designed by G. L. Watson, 1887.
Midship section
But beam was now steadily increasing, as untaxed dimensions are apt to do, while extreme draught also increased, and these two giving ample stability, displacement was more and more cut down. Length still had to be got somehow, but length ran up wet surface, and in the 'classes' for every foot of length a considerable amount of sail-area had to be given, making, as it were, a direct and indirect tax thereon. With an ordinary form of profile, the longer yachts would have been clogged up with wet surface; so profiles first imitated 'Jullanar' and then 'Evolution,' while displacement was cut down to a minimum, to give an easily driven form, and stability got in another way, by lengthening the righting lever of the ballast, by giving immense draft of water, and in the smaller classes concentrating this ballast in the form of a bulb, as in the altered 'Evolution.' With the shallow body, overhang has of course increased, the flat section carrying out naturally into overhangs forward and aft, which almost double the water-line length of the boat on deck. That such a type of boat sails fast for a given sail-area and water-line length is beyond dispute, but this exhausts almost all that can be said in its favour. For ½-raters, 1-raters, and 2½-raters, the type is perhaps suitable enough, as these are only used as day boats, and extended cruising was never contemplated in them. But from 5-up to 40-rating the type is nothing like so good as that of the boats built prior to 1890. Expensive to build, expensive to handle, without head-room, or indeed room of any kind inside, they would thrash themselves to pieces in any sea but for the admirable manner in which they have been put together. A season, or at most two, sees the end of their success as racers; then they must be broken up, or sold for a mere song, as they are quite useless for cruising. So strongly was this felt by the various yacht-builders and designers, that in the autumn of 1891 they, in response to the invitation of the Yacht Racing Association, addressed a joint circular to that body, and, with I think exceptional abnegation of what looked to be their more immediate interests, pointed out the undesirability of the present type of yacht, in the following letter:—
Langham Hotel, London: October 6, 1892.
We (C. P. Clayton, William Fife, jun., Charles Nicholson, Arthur E. Payne, H. W. Ridsdale, Joseph Soper, and G. L. Watson) have met for the consideration of the questions put before us in the circular of the Council of the Yacht Racing Association, dated September 27, 1892.
We have considered that, besides the saving in time to the Council and to ourselves, it would be more satisfactory for many reasons to have such a preliminary meeting for interchange of ideas on the important issues raised in this circular, and we trust that this course of action will be approved of by the Council. We may state that we are practically unanimous in the opinions hereinafter expressed, the only exception being on the one point of taxing overhang, Mr. Ridsdale feeling that he could not go with the majority in this.
We would, then, most respectfully submit to your Council that as designers of racing yachts we have no desire whatever to interfere with the present rating rule. It has the merit of being the existing rule, and is a perfectly fair one for racing yachts together by, as indeed is any rule whatsoever, so far as designers are concerned, provided its conditions are clearly stated beforehand. But as naval architects, and, if we may be permitted to say so, as trustees for the yachting public, we think it our duty to point out any deteriorating tendency in a rule. We cannot help fearing that the present length and sail-area rule has such a tendency, and is leading, if it has not already led, to an unwholesome type of boat.
We take it that the general yachting public require in a yacht: That she shall be safe in all conditions of wind and weather; that she shall combine the maximum of room on deck and below with the minimum of prime cost; and that she shall be driven as fast as may be with the least expenditure of labour—i.e. that she shall have a moderate and workable sail-area. Therefore, as but few men can afford to build for racing, and for racing only, and as the racer of to-day is the cruiser of a few years hence, any rating rule should by its limitations encourage such a wholesome type of vessel.
On the above assumptions we have based our advice, and it is for your Council, as representing the general body of yachtsmen, to determine whether these assumptions are correct or not.
We are all agreed, then, that the present length and sail-area rule is a most admirable one for the classification and regulation of time allowance of racing yachts. But we are also of opinion that the tendency of this rule is such as to induce a vessel of so large dimensions, relative to displacement and internal capacity (i.e. the useful living room on board the ship), that it is advisable to so alter or modify this rule that a type of vessel having more body may be evolved.
We suggest that length and sail-area (as being the leading elements in speed) should be preserved in some form, but modified so as to make it the interest of builders to produce a bigger-bodied boat.
The direct method of doing this would be to introduce displacement or register tonnage in some way as a divisor in the formula, but we foresee so many difficulties in the practical working of this that we are not prepared to advise it.
By taxing breadth and draft or, alternatively, girth, and by reducing the tax on sail, we think this result may be arrived at indirectly. As to the precise value that each element should take in such a formula, we, at this stage, are not prepared to venture an opinion.
'Florinda,' yawl, 126 tons. Built by Camper and Nicholson, 1873.
The above on the general principles of the rule.
But we also feel that the details of measurement, &c., require revision.
On the hull.—The overhang, at least forward, should be taxed, as it may be carried to such an extent as to be a source of danger, but it need not be taxed excessively or to extinction.
The L.W.L. should be marked forward and aft.
Should girth or draft be used in the formula in centreboard vessels, some proportion of the drop of board should be added, and a limit should be placed on the weight of the board.
In the smaller classes, at least, the crews should be limited.
'Kriemhilda,' 106 tons. Built by Ratsey, 1872.
On the sails.—The perpendicular of fore triangle should be measured from top of deck to where the line of luff of sail would cut mast.
That the question of limiting the relative area of mainsail to total sail in the various classes be considered.
Mr. Alexander Richardson, of Liverpool, was unable to be present at this meeting, but this note has been submitted to him, and receives his endorsation:—
The Council of the Yacht Racing Association, however, took the view that what the yacht-owning public want in a racing yacht is speed, and speed at any price, and on the yacht-builders clearly understanding this they withdrew their objections as having been made under a misunderstanding, but asked to be tied down to some extent, in a letter dated November 8, and in the following words:—
'Our opinions, as expressed in that letter of October 6, practically remain unaltered; but so far as we are able to interpret the wishes of yacht-owners, as stated in the public prints, and more especially as expressed by your chairman and the majority of your committee, we now take it that speed, and speed before other good qualities, is what is to be aimed at.
'We consequently withdraw any suggestions made in that letter, as having been made under a misapprehension as to your requirements.
'But while it may be determined to retain a length and sail-area rule, either in its present or in some slightly altered form, we would most respectfully suggest that, at least in the classes above 5-rating (if, indeed, a lower line should not be drawn), the tendency toward abnormal and un-shipshape form should be curbed in some way. The main direction in which we would propose such limitation in form would be in the outline of longitudinal section, and we would suggest that this should be bounded by a fair line, concave, or at least not convex, toward the water-line. That the sternpost should show, say, a quarter of an inch above the water-line aft, and the rudder be hung thereon. That overhang forward and aft should be restricted, as also the extreme forward position of mast; but as we deem it undesirable to absolutely prohibit any form, we would simply propose to tax such variations from this normal one so heavily as to make their adoption unprofitable.'
The Yacht Racing Association, however, thought it undesirable to limit form in any way, and beyond the adoption of the proposed method of measuring the fore triangle, and marking the L.W.L., the rule remained unaltered.
'Florinda,' yawl.
1893 therefore saw new boats in the classes, fast, it is true, in fresh breezes, but undesirable from anything but a racing point of view. In the unclassed vessels above 40-rating things were not quite so bad, as with a practically unlimited sail-area a fair amount of body was required to carry it. Besides, men who did not mind spending two or three thousand on a 'machine' hesitated before putting down ten or twelve. In America, however, where money is spent like water when the national honour is at stake, 85-foot machines were built on the off chance of their being successes; but it is gratifying alike to American and British yachtsmen that the Cup should have been defended by such a wholesome type of vessel as 'Vigilant' undoubtedly is.
'Florinda'—midship section.
In a short chapter showing the evolution of the modern racing yacht, many links in the chain of descent must be left unnoticed. I have had to leave almost undescribed Dan Hatcher's wonderful fleet, beginning in 'Glance' and 'Muriel,' and culminating, perhaps, in 'Norman'; Nicholson's famous schooners and yawls ('Florinda' was a standing miracle for years); Michael Ratsey's equally fine ships; Richardson's grand cutters and Clayton's clever 'length classers'; the work accomplished, and still being accomplished, by the famous William Fifes, besides many others whose labours are more fully recorded in other parts of these volumes. But I think no one of all that band who have loved and worked for the sport of yacht racing cares for the type of ship which has been evolved by their own ingenuity and the present Y.R.A. rule, and I am convinced that they would thankfully welcome any legislation which should protect the yachting public against the present extravagant, costly, and by no means seaworthy type of boat.
H.M. brig 'Lady Nelson,'[4] 60 tons (1797), to Australia. Three keels, 1798, 1800-1-2.