symbols was evidently about this time a disputed point, as in a
register dated four years later an entirely new system appears, the
letters _a_, _b_, _c_ being used in conjunction with the Roman numerals
1, 2, 3, 4. Under this system, _a_1, an approximation to the now
familiar character, represented a good vessel; and _c_4 its antithesis.
Seven years later still, in 1775, the vowels again make their
appearance for expressing the character of the hull, the Roman numerals
being retained, and A1, as the symbol for a first-class ship, comes
on the scene. To decide what shall be the classification letters or
numerals used in describing ships of varying character is one thing; to
give to each ship the class to which it is justly entitled is another
and decidedly more difficult matter. So the London underwriters found;
but instead of treating the question as one in which many interests
were involved, they treated it as concerning themselves alone, and,
during the closing years of last century, came to a decision the sole
merit of which was its simplicity. The London shipbuilders of the day
got a better price for their work than the builders at other ports, and
consequently were able to, and admittedly did, turn out a better ship.
Further, it might be _primâ facie_ supposed that a ship, built even on
the Thames, was not so good after being afloat ten years as on the day
of its launch. Putting these two things together, the compilers of the
Register decided to class ships simply according to their age and where
they were built; such events as a ship newly built on the Tees being
occasionally better than a Thames-built craft of the same size that had
been knocking about the seas for five years; or a thirteen-year-old
ship under good management being actually in better repair and more
seaworthy than an eight-year-old one in careless hands, being held
to be contingencies needless to provide against. It was hardly to be
supposed that the shipowners would agree to a system of classification
which practically placed a monopoly in the hands of certain builders,
and which decreed that existing ships after a certain period would
lose their class, no matter how perfect their state of repair; and the
result of indignation meetings on the subject was the starting of a new
Register of shipping; thereafter known as the ‘Red Book;’ the former,
or underwriters’ register, being known as the ‘Green Book.’ From the
date of founding of the Red Book, the history of ship-classification,
from being fragmentary, becomes continuous; and, had the popular
saying, that competition is the life of trade, been of universal
application, great advance might have been looked for; the law of
supply and demand, however, stopped the way. There was not sufficient
work for the two Registers; each found it difficult to meet its
expenses without taxing its supporters; and although, during the thirty
odd years the rivalry lasted, some advance was made, still, during the
whole of that period the relationships of shipbuilders, shipowners,
shippers, and underwriters one to the other were on an unsatisfactory
footing. Nowadays, it is recognised—and no one thinks of disputing
the justice of the arrangement—that the shipowner, being clearly the
person most interested in his ship bearing a high class, should pay the
expense of all surveys. This apparently elementary truth was, however,
far from being recognised sixty years ago, the opinion then being that
the interested parties were the shippers and underwriters.
After the close of the war with Bonaparte, when privateering was a
thing of the past, and convoys of frigates were no longer required,
the shipping trade of England rapidly increased; each Register was
impelled to keep pace with its rival in adding to its number of ships
registered, and the expense of surveys increased in proportion, the
number of subscribers remaining but little altered. This was the
beginning of the end. By the time that a fourth of the present century
had elapsed, the rival Registers were in a hopeless condition; but
ten years more of trouble and dispute had to pass ere differences
were adjusted, jealousies set at rest; and the ‘Red’ and the ‘Green’
now united, commenced a fresh career of usefulness under the title of
‘Lloyd’s Register of British and Foreign Shipping,’ the new departure
dating from January 1835. The Committee of management of the new
Register was supposed to represent in equal proportions the interests
of the shipowners, shippers, and underwriters, and, so far as London
was concerned, it doubtless did so. With, however, that preference
for men and things metropolitan, not unknown yet on the banks of the
Thames, the interests of the other shipping ports of the United Kingdom
received scant recognition, and the result was the perpetuation of
grievances, the effects of which have lasted to our own day. Of much
greater importance than the mere union of the rival Registers was the
adoption of the system of surveying and classification, which, although
improved in detail to an extent then undreamt of, is in operation
still. It was settled that henceforth vessels were to be classed on
their own merits as at date of survey; that the class should be fixed
by the committee on the report of the surveyor; that vessels built
with a view to class should be under survey during the course of
construction; and that the shipowner should pay the survey fees.
At the date of the founding of Lloyd’s Register, and for untold
generations before, the one material used for building ships was wood.
Long experience had made its properties common knowledge, and it
might reasonably be supposed that shipbuilders would long since have
come to an agreement as to the dimensions, say, of the ribs, keel, or
planking of a ship of given size; such, however, was far from being
the case. Owing, possibly, in part to the fact of ships built at one
port being assumed inferior to those built at another, and the builders
accepting the situation, and certainly in part to the fact that the
rule of thumb was then the leading rule in British naval architecture,
the practice in one part of the country differed widely from that in
another. To induce the adoption of a uniform scale of ship scantlings
founded on the best practice was one of the first tasks attempted
by the Committee; but while its members were yet considering the
proportions of wooden ships, an influence was at work in the world that
was shortly to render their labours of small account. Along with the
old familiar click of the calker’s mallet, the dwellers by river-banks
began to hear mingle a new sound, the rattle of the riveter’s hammer;
and by the time Lloyd’s Register had completed its tenth year of work,
the _Great Britain_ had crossed the Atlantic, and the Iron Age had
come. The ship-designer found his business brought back at a single
step to the experimental stage, and the Committee and surveying staff
of Lloyd’s Register found that they had a new business to learn. It
is probable that every branch of human industry has been, at one
period or another of its history, the subject of trade secrets; iron
shipbuilding in its earlier days was no exception, and, as no builder
thought it his interest to initiate Lloyd’s Register, that body had no
share in the development of the iron ship. This was probably the best
arrangement; the days of competitive tenders and ‘poor man’s ships’
were yet in the future; and the men who launched the _Great Britain_,
the _Persia_, and the _Great Eastern_, were more in a position to teach
than to be taught. In 1844, Lloyd’s Register agreed, for the first
time, to give the A1 class to iron ships built under their survey, on
the surveyors’ report that they were of good and substantial materials
and workmanship; and eleven years later, their first rules for iron
ship-construction were issued.
Landsmen who voyaged in the wooden ships of the past were but too
familiar with the creaking that went on without intermission whenever
weather of a certain degree of roughness was met with. This was due
to a slight rubbing of the timbers one on another, and was no sign
of weakness, it being impossible with a yielding material like wood
to drive bolts absolutely tight. The amount of straining and actual
distortion that a wooden ship might undergo and yet remain fairly
seaworthy, was astonishing; and a go-ahead skipper preferred a
springy ship to a stiff one. With iron, the conditions were entirely
changed; rigidity proved essential to safety, and loose fastenings
were fatal. It was this necessity for rigidity that made it possible
to frame constructive rules from the observation of the behaviour
of comparatively _new_ ships, old and tried ones not being then in
existence. On examining an iron ship after a single voyage, the
surveyor, provided always the painter had not been at work before
his arrival, could point unchallenged to the weak points of her
structure—started joints, cracked plates, and bent bars, telling their
tale only too plainly. For reasons which are not far to seek, but
which need not be entered upon here, the rules for the construction
of iron vessels issued by Lloyd’s Register in 1855 did not meet the
success their framers intended. Greatly improved rules were issued in
1863; but it was not until 1870 that the Committee emancipated itself
from various obsolete ideas, and, under the guidance of the honoured
gentleman who now holds the position of Secretary to the Register,
issued rules in the form now existing. Various editions of these
rules appeared from time to time, each more comprehensive than its
predecessor; for some years past they have been issued annually; and
those now current leave little to be desired so far as completeness
is concerned. Lloyd’s Register grants three leading classes—namely,
100A, 90A, and 80A; the numeral 1, making 100A1, being added to keep
up the time-honoured classification mark. The system of classification
a century ago provided, as we have seen, for differing qualities
of outfit in ships otherwise bearing the same character, and the
numerals 1, 2, 3, &c. were used accordingly; but the fact has come to
be recognised that a good ship with a bad or insufficient outfit is
practically a bad ship, and the 100A class is not granted unless the
outfit be up to the requirements of the numeral 1.
In addition to the above-named classes, Lloyd’s Register will survey
and grant the class A for a vessel designed for almost any desired
service, the plans being submitted for their approval; for instance,
the swift steamers that carry the mails in connection with the
South-Eastern Railway are classed ‘A. Folkestone and Boulogne Passenger
Service.’ These special classes, however, are not taken advantage of
to any great extent.—Two classes of surveys are held—the ‘Ordinary’
and the ‘Special.’ The first consists in a given number of visits paid
to a ship at certain periods during construction; the second, in a
systematic inspection of the vessel at short intervals, from the time
of laying the keel to that of certifying to the anchors and cables
being the proper weight. The first of these, as might be imagined, is
open to various drawbacks; and few shipowners who desire a class at
Lloyd’s hesitate to incur the somewhat greater expense of a ‘special
survey,’ which, as it includes the machinery also if the vessel be a
steamer, practically saves the expense of a private inspector. Lloyd’s
survey only extends to the _structure_ of the ship, and takes no
account of the fitting-up of the cabins and other work connected with
the accommodation or comfort of crew and passengers; the class meaning
simply that, in the opinion of the Committee, the ship is strong and
seaworthy. The work of surveying is carried on in the United Kingdom
by about one hundred surveyors, who give their whole time to it; in
addition, about three-fourths of this number scattered throughout the
world give their services in part. The Committee of management, whose
headquarters is in Cornhill, consists of fifty members, representing
the different ports of the country, although by no means in proportion
to their relative standing, London securing about half the total
representation. The Register Book, which represents the results of
the labours of Committee and surveyors, is a ponderous volume, and
gives the particulars of all the vessels now afloat that have received
Lloyd’s classification, in addition to the particulars of numbers of
other vessels not so classed; in fact, the Register Book is a great
shipping directory, the ship, not the owner, being the leading feature.
Lloyd’s Register is not alone in the field of surveying and classifying
ships. Liverpool up till a year ago had a registry of its own, the
‘Liverpool Underwriters’ Registry.’ This has now united itself with
Lloyd’s Register, a fact which, for some reasons, is to be regretted.
Paris is the headquarters of the ‘Bureau Veritas,’ an undertaking
whose classification is in repute in Scandinavia, North Germany, the
Netherlands, and France; and which maintains a staff of surveyors in
the United Kingdom. This undertaking is not a representative one,
and on this ground has been objected to. It is doing useful work,
nevertheless; and its system of classification is superior to Lloyd’s,
inasmuch as it takes into account the service for which the vessel is
intended. A kindred institution to the ‘Bureau Veritas’ looks after
the shipping of Italy, and is known in this country as the ‘Italian
Veritas;’ while the ‘American Lloyd’s’ controls to a certain extent the
building of ships on the Delaware, but is unknown in this country, on
account of the well-known navigation laws by which only native-built
craft can sail under the stars and stripes.
Classification Societies are not an unmixed benefit to the community,
still less have they an unmixed influence for good on the design of
ships. Theoretically perfect rules would proportion the strength of
every individual ship to the _work_ it had to do; but, as Lloyd’s
Committee, through whose hands the designs for over eight hundred
ships probably pass in the course of a year, have no possible time for
going into such detail, standard types of vessel have been adopted,
the designs submitted being compared with these on the basis of their
_dimensions_ alone. The natural result of this is that ships are in
many cases built to suit Lloyd’s type; and the art of the ship-designer
but too often has degenerated into getting the maximum of advantage out
of certain dimensions which are known to bring the vessel just within
the limits of one of these types.
In the days gone by, ships were built for a certain trade, and kept
at it, the East Indiaman, the West Indiaman, and the Atlantic packet
seldom interfering with each other. The leading steamship Companies
naturally adhere to this system still; but, during recent years,
hundreds of individually owned ships have been set afloat, designed for
no special trade, but simply to carry the maximum cargo on the minimum
cost wherever a freight offers itself. It is largely from the necessity
of making its rules applicable to these privateers of trade that the
frequently grumbled-at oppressiveness of Lloyd’s Register arises. This
brings us to notice that some first-class steamship Companies do not
class their vessels at all; and it may cause surprise to many to know
that of those steamers whose rapid passages across the Atlantic have
made their names familiar, the majority are _not_ A1 at Lloyd’s. The
reason for this is simply, that a skilful designer who knows thoroughly
the requirements of the service for which a ship is intended can always
turn out a better and more economical vessel than one built to class,
a fact which more of the leading steamship Companies will doubtless
come to recognise before long. The rules of Lloyd’s Register for the
construction of iron vessels are growing in stringency from year to
year; a vessel built to class ten years ago, and which has proved her
efficiency by doing the work for which she was designed during all that
period without a complaint, would, if built to-day, require a large
percentage of additional weight put into her structure to bring her
strength up to the demands of the current rules. That this is so is due
to the fact that, up till quite recently, Lloyd’s Register has taken
account of one element only out of the several that the question of
the safety of a ship on the ocean involves. For years past, the aim of
the Committee has been to take from the shipbuilder more and more of
the responsibility which he at one time bore for the strength of the
vessels he builds, until now his share is practically _nil_; while it
has been but too evident for years past, from the disclosures that now
and again have been elicited before the Commissioner of Wrecks, that a
good ship may be badly stowed, overloaded, or undermanned, and, under
such circumstances, be in much greater danger from sea-risks than a far
inferior ship in good hands.
The aim of Lloyd’s Register is the protection of the shippers and
underwriters against undue risks, and the present high rates of marine
insurance show that this protection is not what it might be. If the
trouble and expense now devoted to securing strong vessels are not to
continue to be thrown away, as they certainly are at present in a fair
percentage of cases, the Committee will require to take steps to insure
that a ship bearing their highest class shall not take the sea with a
cargo badly stowed, an insufficient crew, or too little freeboard. The
question of freeboard is already engaging attention; the other points
cannot long be left in their present state; and the day will then come
when shippers will think with wonder on the times when premiums at the
rate of ten per cent. were paid for insuring cargoes in ships that were
100A1 at Lloyd’s.
DESTRUCTIVE INSECTS.
The Agricultural Department has issued two Reports by Mr C. Whitehead,
F.L.S., F.G.S., dealing with Destructive Insects. The first of these
treats of ‘Insects Injurious to Hop-plants.’ In the opinion of
the writer, there is an increased and increasing risk of loss and
destruction from injurious insects to many of the crops cultivated in
this country. We scarcely grow anything exempt from the ravages of
these pests. They attack corn of all kinds, fruit-trees, hop-plants,
clover, turnips, mangold-wurzel, &c. Although some kinds are well
known and long known, others are new, or, at anyrate, they have only
recently been noticed. In certain instances they appear to have been
imported with the plant, as, for example, the mangold-wurzel fly,
_Anthomyia betæ_, which, within the last five years—contrary to the
opinion of Curtis, who, writing in 1859, thought its injuries would
not be of much consequence—has wrought much mischief. The turnip-fly
again, which originally fed upon charlock and other cruciferous plants,
has now quitted these, because the turnip supplies more suitable food.
With its increased cultivation, this fly has multiplied enormously,
as the farmer knows to his cost, for, in seasons favourable to its
development, it sometimes destroys whole fields and causes great loss.
Cultivation is not only favourable to such old offenders, but it seems
to have introduced entirely new ones; at least, the farmer now finds
that wheat, clover, and other crops raised by rotation in the same
fields, suffer injuries from insects, which, if they existed formerly,
escaped notice. It may be, however, that the scientific spirit of late
introduced into agriculture has only just discovered what in many cases
has always been going on. At the same time, it is universally admitted
that the destruction occasioned by insects is larger than ever it was,
and that there are insects at work in the fields which were little, if
at all, known to our forefathers.
One very good reason for the progressive increase of agricultural
plagues is that they multiply proportionately at a much quicker rate
than the plants on which they feed. We are actually rearing them
artificially, and the problem is how to cultivate crops without at
the same time cultivating these parasites. High-farming, by pampering
plants, no doubt renders them more delicate and more liable to attack;
but perhaps we help to make our own trouble by not exercising ordinary
caution. Certain it is that destructive insects are imported into, as
they are exported out of, this country. The agricultural produce which
we bring from various parts of the world must contain many unwelcome
visitors, though, fortunately, our climate does not agree with the
majority of them. Like the famous Colorado Beetle, even if allowed a
fair chance, they would scarcely thrive. Others there are with the
Scotsman’s reputation of being able to do well anywhere. They only
require a suitable plant to feel perfectly at home. They sometimes get
‘assisted’ emigration at the cost of their favourites, like the hop
aphis, which was introduced into America among hop-roots sent from
England. The former country has by entomologists been styled ‘the home
of insects;’ but, to Europe’s loss, one highly interesting though
destructive American crossed the Atlantic—namely, the phylloxera, so
destructive to vines. An individual that undergoes various puzzling
transformations is not readily identified, and the hop aphis, having
these disguises, has alarming opportunities of getting a footing where
it is least wanted. Indeed, all such destructive insects should receive
more study than they have hitherto obtained. Within the last few years,
scale insects were introduced into the Californian orange groves from
Australia; and orange, citron, and lemon growers in other parts of the
world are now complaining of pests of a similar nature. Considering
the evil which has been already accomplished, it is highly important
that farmers, fruit-growers, gardeners, and all who cultivate the land
should be made acquainted with all that is known regarding the insects
which attack their several crops.
The hop-plant in particular has many enemies, some of them so
destructive, that if not checked, they would soon ruin the grower.
Within the last thirty years, it is believed the liability of this
plant to attack by insects has considerably increased. Hop-planters
assert that insects now destroy their crops which were not known in
the plantations until recently. Mr Whitehead selects ten of the most
troublesome species, and gives descriptions of each insect, together
with its life-history, its modes of attack, and the injury to the hop
resulting therefrom; also a detailed account of methods of prevention,
and of measures which have been found efficacious in stopping or
alleviating these attacks.
Mr Whitehead originally intended to confine his second Report to
insects injurious to corncrops; but as the work progressed, it was
found desirable to include those destructive to grasscrops, as some
insects are common to both. While dealing with cereals, he also thought
it well to treat pulse, under which title are included plants such as
peas, beans, and tares, and to describe the principal insects which
affect them, especially as they are all crops liable to be attacked
by the same insects. A description of a genus the most injurious to
different kinds of clover, is also given. To include comparatively
harmless insects in a work which is intended not so much for scientific
purposes as to enlighten farmers and others regarding the pests which
molest them most, was not necessary. For sufficient reasons it has
been found most expedient neither to arrange them alphabetically nor
according to a recognised scientific classification, but to take
the insects of each group as far as possible in the order of their
injurious effects. Indeed, there are included what, in the scientific
acceptation of the term, are not insects at all. But the Report was
written to convey useful and practical instruction to the cultivators
of the soil, and wisely it was done in the manner which was likely
to benefit them most. ‘With regard to these’ (the chief pests),
Mr Whitehead writes, ‘it has been endeavoured to collect all the
information that is known about them, and to bring this down to the
latest date. It is believed that each monograph is a _résumé_ of all
that is known of its subject, of its life-history, and the means of
prevention, and remedies against it. It is admitted that in several
instances the information is still imperfect; and in compiling this
series of Reports, I have been more than ever impressed with the
necessity of enlisting skilled workers in this cause, as well as
of urging and encouraging habits of observation amongst those who
superintend the cultivation of the land and those who work upon it.’
A NURSE.