Second Way—The second way is assumed by the shipwrights of the river to be the old way, but it is not, which makes the ship to be 28 in the hundred greater than the former, and is this: The length of the keel taken as before, or ought to be. The breadth from outside the plank to outside. The depth or draught of water from the breadth to the bottom of the keel all multiplied together and divided by 94 (say they) give the content in tons, into which add one third for tonnage.
| ft. | ||||
| Length | 63.6 | 1802 | 7737 | |
| Breadth | 26.8 | 1426 | 230 | Without yᵉ timber and plank. |
| Depth | 12.3 | 1088 | 1361 | To yᵉ lower edge of keel. |
| Divisor | 94 | 8026 | 8721 | |
| Tons | 220,71 | |||
| One third for tonnage | 73,57 | |||
| 294,28 | tons and tonnage. | |||
If you divide this by 100 (which is said to be here done by 94) it is yᵉ true old way, called Baker’s way.
Third Way—The third way was proposed by Mr Gunter, Mr Pett, Mr Stevens, Mr Lyddiard, and myself, who were required by warrant from my lord Duke of Buckingham and the commissioners for the navy (then being) to measure the Adventure of Ipswich, the greatest bilged ship in the river, and from her dimensions to frame a rule that in our best judgments might be indifferently applicable to all kinds of frames. This we performed and yielded our reasons for it, which, to avoid the abuse of furred sides and deep keels and standing strakes, which increaseth the burden but not the hold, was thus: the length by the keel as the first; the depth in hold from the breadth to the seeling;[1137] the mean breadth within that seeling at half that depth multiplied together, and the product divided by 65, gives the tons, into which add one third part for tonnage.
| ft. | ||||
| Length | 63.6 | 1802 | 7737 | |
| Mean breadth | 22 | 1342 | 4227 | Within the seeling. |
| Depth | 9.8 | 985 | 4265 | To the seeling. |
| Divisor | 65 | 8187 | 866 | |
| Tons | 207,83 | 2317 | 7095 | |
| One third for tonnage | 69,27 | |||
| 277,10 [1138] | This increaseth 12 per 100 above the old rule. | |||
There is a fourth way, devised by the shipwrights and Trinity masters, but exploded for the great excess which makes the ship 30 in the hundred greater than the first, and it is thus: length of the keel as at first, middle breadth beneath the greatest, viz. the breadth at the wrunghead, depth to the outside of the plank, all multiplied together and divided by 70.
| ft. | ||||
| Length | 63.6 | 1372 | 5438 | |
| Middle breadth | 23.7 | 1051 | 1525 | Without (i.e. outside) timber and plank. |
| Depth | 11.3 | 1802 | 7737 | Without the plank. |
| Divisor | 70 | 8154 | 9019 | |
| Tons | 240,68 | 1381 | 3719 | |
| One third for tonnage | 80,22 | |||
| 320,90 | ||||
Although this document is quoted at length as showing the opposing views, the controversy began in May 1626, when Wells, Stevens, and others sent in an interesting paper,[1139] which is the one referred to in their ‘third way’ of the preceding, too long to transcribe fully, but from which some extracts may be given. The main question was whether the depth and breadth should be taken from within or without board. In the second case the King paid for more tonnage in a hired ship, especially if she was furred or girdled, than he actually obtained, but the first was held to be a direct incentive to owners to build flimsily. The Adventure of Ipswich was all through the subject of experiment. They say:—