In regard to Pett's competence:
Being asked, also by virtue of his oath, whether Phineas Pett be a workman sufficient to be put alone in trust upon a ship of so great charge and burthen, he answereth that he never saw any work of his doing whereby he should so think him sufficient for that work, but rather thinketh the contrary. Further, being demanded what ship he knoweth or have heard the said Pett hath built or repaired, he saith he never knew any new ship of his building, but one of 120 tons or thereabouts which he built by Chatham for himself,[115] as far as he knoweth, and another ship of the burthen of 223 tons he repaired,[116] and a pinnace[117] for his Majesty, which he saith was so done that after he had repaired them they were worse in condition than they were when he took them in hand, for that they were so unserviceable that they would bear no sail, by which default of his they were returned from the seas into Chatham to be new furred[118] to make them bear sail, so that with his first repairing and furring of them he doubts not but it will appear by the accompts that his workmanship with stuff was more chargeable than a new ship of their burthen might have been new built for, which are enough to persuade any man that he cannot be sufficient to perform the building of so great a ship when he hath performed the reparation of a small ship so ill, as of a good ship he made a bad.
Further, being asked what his opinion was concerning the choice of the stuff, he saith it was not chosen for the good of the King but for their own turns, and that very little of it fit to be put into any ship, and much less into a great ship, because it will be of no continuance, and that he never knew Pett to make any frame in the wood either for ship or boat, who cannot do it, being never brought up to it; and as for his brother Peter Pett, who was appointed purveyor, he holdeth him a man most simple for such a purpose, and also saith that, though they be both unsufficient for the making of such a frame, yet the badness of the stuff is not altogether to be imputed to them, but to those who dispose of the business according to their own humour.
Five days later, Bright came up for examination and was required to give answers to seventeen questions, apparently the same as those put to Baker. Six of them he did not answer, but referred the Commissioners to the answers given to them by Baker. His replies to the others were generally in corroboration of what Baker had said, but as regards Pett's capability he expressed no direct opinion, contenting himself with pointing out that
the old Officers, in former times, in such great works did place two Master Shipwrights in the building of one great ship, as my father Mr. Bright was joined with Mr. Pett in the building of the Elizabeth Jonas, as also in the building of the Bear with Mr. Baker. Their reason was that two Master Shipwrights' opinions was little enough for the charge so great in scope as she at Woolwich will be, but now it is carried by the favour of some of the Officers to whom it pleaseth them; but howsoever it is, the charge is great for a young man to do which never made great ship before of that burthen.
Captain George Waymouth.
After this the matter remained in abeyance until the end of March, when Northampton enlisted the services of George Waymouth, who appears to have possessed a great reputation among his contemporaries for his theoretical knowledge of shipbuilding. In 1602 Waymouth had set out, under the auspices of the East India Company, to attempt the North-West Passage in the Discovery, with another small vessel, the Godspeed, but had been compelled, through the mutiny of his crew, to abandon the attempt, after entering the strait subsequently known as Hudson's Strait. In 1605 he made a short voyage of discovery in the Archangel along the American coast. Of actual experience in shipbuilding he seems at that time to have had none whatever, and a perusal of his chapter on that subject in the manuscript volume 'The Jewell of Artes,'[119] which he presented to James in 1604, would not inspire any great confidence in his theoretical knowledge, but fortunately other means of judging the extent to which this knowledge was subsequently increased have lately presented themselves.
The chapter in 'The Jewell of Artes' consists entirely of criticism, together with a few crude drawings not explained in the text. These criticisms are not without point, as may be seen from the following extracts. He says:
Although the form and fashion of these our English ships have always been, and yet are accompted to be made by the best proportion, and fittest both for service and burden, yet if art and diligence were to the full performed in their buildings as they might, there should not remain in them so many dangerous impediments as there do at this day, which maketh me verily suppose that the one of them, if not both, is not in such measure in our shipwrights as with all my heart I do wish.
A little further on, in speaking of the discrepancies to be found in ships supposed to be built from the same design, he says: