A LETTER L E " T E R HlON. JOHN LYNCH,'., fHAIRMAN-OF THE SPEC:IAL- CONGRE-SS-IO-NAL: COMMITTEE; OF THE UNITED STATES SF',A*ATE, ON. THE NAVIGATION INTEREST: ADVOCATING THE EXPEDIENCY OF. PURCHASING. IRON SHIPS AND STEAMERS IN SCOTLAND, BEING THE RESULT OF A RECENT VIS1T AND EXTENDED OBSERVATION BY CAPT. JOHN: CODMAN. B:OSTON:; A. W I L LI AM S&- CO-eMPA NY 135 WASHNGT ON- T, LETTER AT)T)RES.SiET) TO TUIE HON. JOHN LYNCH, CITRM\IAN OF TIHE SPEC(IAL CONGrrESSIONAL COMIIITTEE O1 rTi ll UNITErl SI'ATES SENAT'F,, 0N TIHE NAVIGATION INTEREST: AD)VOCATING THE EXPEDTENCY OF PURCIIASTIN( IRON SIlIPS AND STI'EAITERS IN S(rOTLANI), BEINGS TIlE RESULT OF A REC('E'T VISTT AND EXTENDE'D OBSERVATION BY CA.PT. JOH-1-N CODMAAN. BOSTO N: A. WILLIAMS & COMPANY, 1 ) W\\VASHING(TON STREET, THESE investigations in Scotland were made at the request of the New York Board of Underwriters, and the result is thus presented with the hope that it may attract not only the attention of the Congressional Committee, but also that of the general public. BARKER, COTTER & CO., PRTNTER.S, 14 STATE STREET. DUMIBARTON ON TIlE CLYDE, NTovember 15, 1869. SIR: -I propose, with your kind permission, to ask your attention to some remarks and statistics touching the rise and fall of the American merchant marine, and to some suggestions, or rather a single suggestionfor the renewal of its prosperity. Little can be added in the way of argument, to what I have often written for commercial newspapers in Boston and N ew York, upon this subject, but new facts are every day corroborating the views advanced years ago, and these still point to the same-the only remedy. More than twenty years since, the relative advantages of wood and iron in the construction of ships, and especially of steamers, were discussed by some anonymous writer and myself in the columns of the New YorkJoturnal of Commrerce. My opponent favored the former mnaterial, and when, as I flattered myself, he was driven to the wall in the discussion of durability, cargo space, and danger from lighltning, he fell back upon what he considered incontrovertible at any rate, "Wood is buoyant, iron is not, when waterlogged;" forgetting that a steamer of any kind must have machinery in her, the weight of which with the addition of the rest of her capacity being occupied by water, would surely sink her. There was one aCrgument however then used against iron, which I was bound to (admnit had a certain force, but which has lost 4 mluc of' its force since that time, —I inean the quick fouling of iron bottoms. In those days, dockage was rare and expensive, and was scarcely to be obtained at all, especially for large ships, excepting in a very few of the ports of Europe and America. At this time, although it must be confessed that no lasting coating for iron has been discovered, still the facilities for docking all over the world have so increased that this difficulty is infinitely less; and science has also disposed effectually of the vagaries of the compass. Time has therefore settled one great point for us. Iron is better than wood, and the proof of it is, that all nations excepting the United States use the iron in preference. Our people do not use it, because iron and the labor on iron are too costly, and because not being able consequently to build iron vessels ourselves, our ridiculously absurd navigation laws prevent us firom purchasing such ships, and we thus deliberately throw the trade in them into the hands of the nation that can build them cheapest, and into those of others like the Germans, who buy their ships in England. Our action quo ad hoc is neither more nor less than national suicide! I am appealing through you to our government for a repeal of the present odious law — a law which expressly forbids us to hoist the American flag on any vessel that is not built on American soil, and launched into American waters. It is not a party question. I almost wish that it was, for then it would colmmen-d itself to the amlition of some politician. It concerns equally the democrat and the republicall, and paradoxical as it may seem, the free trade men and the lrotectionists alike. For the present law, while clearly inl opposition to free trade, protectsforeigners instead of our own people. Yes we protect the British, German, and French shipowners, captains, engineers, crews and their families, insurance companies, ship-chandlers, (and even the shipbuilders and machinists who do their repairs at home instead of in our yards —against ourselves! When last in New York one of our first shipbuilders told me that he wished the law repealed, because, lhe said, "our business is now so nearly dead, that it is worth nothing, whereas if our imerchants owned the ships that came into-this port, we should have ten times:more work to do in repairing than we now have in building." I know th that there are certain antiquated shlipbuilders on the eastern shore, of whlonm the newspapers report occasionally that they have built a fine schooner or possibly a bark or a ship, (for the coasting trade in almost every instance,) who innocently suppose that the abrogation of the law would be an injury to them, and their little parish; and who mioreover flatter themnselves that if they can get Congress to lessen the dluty on copper and hemp they can compete with iron hulls a(nd wire rigging! Accordingly they make periodical journeys to Washington, perhaps to find General Jacksonl. But Congress plays no attention to these old fogies. To aflbrd them reelict; it would be obliged to do mtLuchJ more than they ask. The duties should not only be taken off from copper and hemp, but iron and coal mines should be established in their neighborhood fobr their express convenience, their workmen should be obliged to labor for one dollar per day - all internal and inward revenue dues should be abolished for all articles consumed by their families, and their people should give up their roast beef, and live on porridge! When all this comes to pass the Maine shipbuilder can perhaps after a fetw years experience compete with the Scotsman. Possibly they would be the gainers in the long run, if like Mr. Briggs, whoml we all remember as one of our best Boston shipbuilders, they should take a run over here, and after looking at the work going on, come home again, and selling out their stock in trade, go into some other business. At most the Maine shipbuilders build only for the coasting trade, and if it were deemed advisable that the whole country should suffer for their supposed benefit, the law might be abrogated in so far only as relates to foriegn trade, leaving the coasting trade to be still carried on in /American built vessels. Protectionists would then have nearly all they have now, for it is notorious, and the marine columns of the newspapers bear daily witness to the fact that nearly all our foreign trade is carried on in foreign bottoms. This we cannot help, for so long as the treaties with En(gland, France, Germany and other countries exist, our merchnants c:annot be prevented from importing their merchan (ise in tlhe clleapest manner. We may still lieep up our coastinglo monopoly, and tlhus oblige merchants and ultimately consumers to pay more for their goods than if cheaper vessels were allowed to carry them. We may for the sake of benefiting Pennsylvania iron, force our railroads to use it, even if English iron could be imported for half the money. But this class of protectionists although exercising an unlimited amount of tyranny on our own highways, seem to forget that they cannot control the ocean, which is the highway of the world! In order to do that, they must abolishl all treaties, and enact a law that none other than vessels under the American flag shall enter our ports. The result of such 1" protection " as this would be, that American vessels would not be allowed to enter foreign ports, and all the European trade would be carried on through Canada and thence in British Jbottom-1s. But we mullst take facts (as we find them. Our produce is carried in British built ships fromn our ports. Our merchants ship and receive almost all their goods in British built ships, and what is imost humiliatincr of all, our governiment pays sulbsidies to dailv lines of, British built steamers inuder foreign flags, and no subsidy to any transatlantic line of our own,,1and our people when they go abroad or return home, can never see the stars and stripes waving over tlleir heads - because, and all because we insist on protectigy - Awhom? why the foreigners iinstead of (orsel) ves! Il tlle old( (lLys of wooden sailiing ships, of cheap living, and of conmparatively cheap labor in the United States, our inechanics advanced so rapidly in skill of workmanship and in perfection of model, that the Engllish shipbuilders were not only rivalled, but far outstripped in the race. Though her navy was still the largest in the world, the commercial marine of Englaind was vastly inferior in speed, symmetry and (liscipline, to the American, and was faist yielding to it in amnount of tonnage. Who (loes not reimemlber our magunificent liners an(l China clippers? Our ships were built cheaper and better than they could be built in England, and therefore English merchants preferred to ship their cargoes in them. rather than in British bottoms, because they conld affor(l to carry the goods at a cheaper rate. They acted precisely as our mnerchants act now. But did tlleir governm-ent act like ours? On the contrary, it saw its conmmerce declining, its seamen becominii Americans, and thus (lepriving their native land of their services in case of war, while American shipowners were malkingc the profit on freighllts that Englishmen before had made. At tllhat tilme the navigration laws of England were the same as ours now are, and(l moreover, she had a powerful and influential body of shipbuilders to contend against, wllich we have not. Still, in face of the difficulty, and even with the necessity of bringing temporary disaster on a, class for the good of the nation, tlhe Englisll wisely abolislhedl their system of 9 protection, anC1d gave their merchants the liberty to come to the United States for their supply of ships. Neither was there any eventual loss to the builders, for they turned their attention to iron; and now the wooden clippers and packets are dying out, as no more of them. are being built, and the age of wood and sails has given place to the age of iron and steam. These are revolutions in the nature of things that old fogyism cannot stop, any more than it can stop the revolution of the earth by holding a handspike against the sun! If we examine the statistics of English and American vessels engagled in foreign trade, we shall find that in the year 1858 they were about equal, being in round numbers 5,500,000 tons each. After that time the British tonnage gradually increased, and the American tonnage slowly decreased in comparison, till the year 1860, when the war put the finishing stroke to our commercial marine, and in 1867-1868, the English tonnage had run up to nearly 8,000,000, and ours had fallen off to 4,300,000. This includes inland, river and lake navigation. So nearly as can be estimated, the tonnage engaged in foreign trade was less than 1,?3)0,000, the exact statistics being at the elose of tlle year 1868.Sllipl)ing oni the Lake......... 695,94 ~' 1n1 the livers.... 481,217 ol tlhe Pacific,...... 16G6,512 on the Aftlantic and Gulf, (the greater part coastwise)....... 2.974,975.31 89-8 By some, this will be accounted r i two ways. By Some't, thlis +rill lbe accountedl fol~ ihl l-\\ro Ivays. First, by the transfer of many of our ships to the British flag, as a security against the rebel cruisers; and secondly, by the raids of the c" Alabama " antd her consorts. IDoubtless both these causes 1have somffething to do with the matter; but the first is not of its supposed importance, and the latter is almost infinitesimal. For a better judgment of fact, let any one who has eyes survey our deserted shipyards, and then come over here, and look at the business doing upon the Clyde alone. It was an occasion aind an era, when, two years ago, thousands of people went from Boston to Nerwburyport to see two steamers launched, which were to compete successfully with the Cunard and Inmoan ships for the carrying trade to Liverpool. They are still lying at the clocks, overwhelmed with debt contracted in their short career. Here, you will see ships of equal size launched almost every week, and attracting so little attention that the neighboring worklnen (lo not cease from their labor as these vessels slip fionm the ways! That their business is profitable is evident b)y their increase. I have taken the statistics of 1867 from a document issued by our government. Since that tilIe, while our shipyar ds have been as idle as b)efore, those of (Great Britain have been increasin their business ill a greater ratio thuan ever. Taking, therefore, into consideration the losses by perils of the sea, which have not l)een replaced on our side, we c.nu sccarcely have 11 at this day more tonnage engaged in foreign trade than at the close of 1868, while Great Britain cannot fall short of 9,000,000 tons, including the amount she has 1built.and sold to Gerlmany and other foreign countries. If we continue in the same traclk of downward progression or standstill, it will not be many years before our colmmercial marine shall become nearly extinct. If we resolve that this shall be so, because our country having extended into the interior so vastly that our seaboard is not of the importance it once was, and, therefore, we have no further need of ships or of sailors, let us allow the humiliating fact at once, and call no imore meetings fior the consideration of the reviv.al of' our coimmerce. I was about to s~ay, let us become Chinese or Japanese, and admit to other civilized nations that tlley only are competent to perform the carrying trade for us. But I will not do the Chinese and JIapanese such injustice. Even these nations, just emierging fiom barbartis-nL entertaiin no such suicidal doctrine of 1" protection " as we do. Be it remembered that the nlzited States is the only znation, civilized or uncirvilized, u)pon the face of the earth, that puts an ablsolute prohilition upon the purchase of a foreign,sl-iI) by its people! Are we, because circumstances beyond our control, -such as the substitution of iron for wood, and because llhe taxes that civil war has brought upon us have n(Cade us Iinal)l to compete with England in shipbuildinlg,- ire we to refuse to buy her ships for our use, especially when there is no possible interest of our own that we can injure by so doing? The question before us is, whether by our present policy of supine indifference we shall suffer our nierchant marine to be totally annihilated. If we take that resolution we may as well abolish the navy likewise, for it will have no commerce to protect. And yet we must perforce support a larger navy than ever before in time of peace, because in time of war we shall want sailors. What manner of economly is this? Before the late war we had one of' the largest commercial marines in the world, and, considering the importance of' that, one of the smallest navies. Now we have a powerful navy and very little comlnmerce. I well remember when in command of a ship in the harbor of Rio de Janeiro twenty years ago, and loading coffee with forty other American vessels, how one old sailing frigate was considered protection enougl for all of us on the whole coast of Brazil. Three years since I was aglain in that port in (a steamer, and mine was the only American flag that flew there, exceptingr those of seven gunboats and frimates and of an iron-clad, whose only "protege " was the little "Tij uca." Yes, what manner of economy is this? If w\e will not have merchantmen we must have mren-of-war. When the late war broke out, small as our navy was in its llulllbers of men a1l(nd ship)s, it was instantly 1 t recruited to its full requireillent of' sailors fromI the nmerchant service, which also supplied steamners and sailing vessels for its first need. Reinember, too, that until these men were wanted, they were adding to the industry of the country by earning wages, paid thelm lby merchantsfor value received, whereas we are now obliged to pay them for no real value received. In other words, a great part of the muoney disbursed for navy appropriations might be saved, and an equal amount imighlt be gained to the country in the produce of labor, so that we virtually not only spend unnecessarily these anounts, but the double of thein. Surely fr'om both points of view, the necessity of Ca supply of men, and the economy of maintaining this supply, the restoration of our commercial marine is worthy of consideration. I am aware that it has been proposed to introduce a bill into Congress allowing our merchants to buy foreign vessels upon the payment of a duty. This scheme must have emanated from the brain of some one who cannot have given the subject due consideration. We claim, to use a treaty phrase, 1" to be put on the footing of the most flhvored nations." Duties are levied for revenue and for protection. This is not a case for either. If Cong'ress will not abro('ate the law in toto, there will be no revenue fion- suchl a source as p)roposedl, for we cannot afford to b)uy the ships and to compete with other nations, unless we 1(have the sanme facilities that they 1h ave. In this ('oll)etition lor the carryiiig tradelc, with the rest of the 14 world, we must 1ave notlling whatever to hold us back in the race, especially as the long continued indifference of our government has left us already far astern. We must have ships duty free, and also ship's stores out of bond, as in Englrand. As to protectingr any home interests I think it has been already demonstrated that there are none to protect. But if our antidiluvian arkwrighlts still object, maintaining as they do at this late day, like my friend in the "c Journall of Commerce" more than twenty years since, that wood is preferable to iron- then let an exception be Illmade in their fa1vor, let iron, steel and composite ships only, be admitted duty free to our flag, and let the law rematin as it is, so far as wooden vessels are concerned. They will still have the market of the world before them, for not only will we buy their vessels of them, if we fihd them cheaper, and more profitable than iron, but the English, who have no prohibitory law, will do likewise. I have not heard however that any orders have gone out la-tely firom this country to America for wooden ships. There is certainly nothingr that looks like it upon the Clyde. In the rmean time, it nmay not be amiss for thelm to look over the estimates of Mr. Donald McKay, a w-ellknown shipbulilder of Boston, and a born Scotsman I believe withalll-at any rate, a mall of thrift and business calpacity. Ile estimates the customs duties upon the articles r1eqtuired l or a wooden ship of' 1,000 tonls, at $8,:GG65.33 in gold. Let them 1)lpt tliat into 1]5 tlheir calelations, and tllhen add oe hundre per cent. for the difference in labor against them, and moreover find some means of stretching a woo den ship to the capacity of one of iron, and of makinr woo(d equally durable, before they solicit any order from this side. Th'llere are certain things upon which we form such fixed opinions, that we wonder that argument is necessary to convince those Nlwhom Awe wish to influence. This sulbject is one of themn, and yet it is not very sutrprising that whllile the argulmnents I have used are still uncontroverted(, so little interest is felt in the matter. It appeals to the individual interest of no one. It is everybody's business, - therefore it is nobody's. What little individual interest there is, is exercised against it, by tlhat very small class of short sigted slhipbuild ers that I hlave referred to, who imagine that they would suiffer injury, by a, repeal of the la-lviation laws, and wlhose few votes seem to be of' sufficient consequence for the whole nation to sufflr o-l their accountt. As I have (alreadcy hlinted, the importers and shippers are supremely indifferent -)about it. Patriotism with lt them,,enerallvT is a imotive secoldary to indlividual profit and convenience. They cain now\ ship, and ipl)ort all tlher desire, and they carTe not under whllat flagr it is (donle. I s1hall still fitrther, with the aid of figures which are slaid never to lie, endceavor to plLce thle su1bject before you in such a light, tliat tlhe correctness of these views cannot but t be acnowledtge(d, althou(rgh people muay not (lloose to interest thelmselves, in what does not 1 (, personally concern thlein. I have been lately spending some months in Scotland and more particularly at Dumbarton on the Clyde, where I have had ample opportunities for observing the immlense amount of work going1 on in shipbuilding upon that river, and of makincr the acquaintance of gentlemen engaged in it at Glasgow, Greenock and Duinbarton. Thle otlject of this essay is to convince my countrymnen by argument., - whrich, I hope, has already been (-ione, - that our present navigation laws are onerous and useless, and then to show by authentic statistics that thle Clyde is the natural ship-producing district of the worl(l. It is as muchll so as the valley of the Mississippi is intended by nature for the supply of grain. Th'l'at it is tle region for such pro(luction is allowed by- Great Britain. Therefore, she wisely admits all cereals (luty fiee, because she cannot prod(uce theli h!erself in sufficient quantity for her own consumption. Let, us iimitate her policy in supplying ourselves with a, necessity equallv imperative. I shall now plroceed to show that the capacity of thlis locality to supply the w\-orld Awith ships at the cheapest rates, hats not been overestimated. The advantages of tlhe Clyde' consist in its location, its well organize(1 systeml of labor, the clheapness of iron and coal whicll.are blotll abundallt upon its l)banks, tlhe economical habits of thle wNorlklmen, w-hose requirements are so small that th-ey are satisfied witlih moder(ate wages, and in the determlination an(l the ablilitv also to undierbid( the wh1ole world in contracts 1r1 sluipbuild in. I7 It is not manl:ly years since thle Cly(le was an insignificant stream, insignificant at least as regarded everything but its history, and the b)eauty of its surrounding scenery. In those days of wooden shipbuilding, Greenock at its mouth was a place of sonle commercial importance, while the shallow water opposite Dumbarton and( Glasgow, excluded these towns from any participation in the prosperity of their more fortunate neighbor. But of late years the whole river has been dredged, so that at this day, vessels drawing twenty-one feet, can reach the wharves of Glasgow with ease. If you would observe the work. that is going on,'you should take a steamer at the bridge in Glasgow, and after passing the quays crowded with shipping, you will see upon eitlher bank for miles, steamers and sailing vessels in process of construction, and your ears will be almost deafened with the din of hammers and machillery. There are but intervals of quiet betw-een Glasgow, Renfrew, Dumbarton, Port Glasgow and Greenock, all of' which places are alive with this one industry. Ilponlan n average tllere.are about twenty thousand workmen empllployed, and when the prolific nature of this population is considered, it -may be computed that their ftitnilies coulnt eiglhty thousand cimore. Besides these a Jarge numnller are dependent upon tlleir labor in variouts iway s. This strongl force cannot be easily conquere(l. They are a well educated people, and they undierst.nd(l their combine(d interests so well, thlat I S they vill submlllit witllout nurmuriing to any necessary reduction of profits or wages, rather than to see the industry, upon which their existence depends, departing from their hands. Let those economists who prate of the "encouragement of foreign paupers" consider that these stalwart laborers and their faimilies are consumers of our produce. The profit on the shipbuilding inures to them, the profit on the raising of grain to us, and then there is the profit on thle transportation. This, we stupidly insist shall be theirs likewise. On the whole business we modestly claim but one-third, voluntarily surrendering the freight to England! Upon the banks of the Clyde there are about thirty shipbuilding firms, all doing a floturishing business, but the giants among them are: — John Elder, Glasgow; Barclay & Curlie. A. & J. Inglis, " Robert Napier & Sons, J. & G. Thompson, Tod & MaicGrecor, John Reid, Port Glasgow; Duncan & Co., " Henderson & Co., Renfrew; William Dennv & Brothers, Dumbarton' Caird & Co., Greenock. Scott & Co., Steel & Co., 19 By either one or the other of these firms, stealllships lhalve been and are being continually turned out ftr the Cull(ard Line, Ininan's Linlle, Allan's Line, Rloyal Mail West India Lilne, P2anama Line, French Transatl'antic Line, Spanish and West India Mail Line, HIanmburgr and United States Line, Brleniei and United States Lille, Peninsula and Orienta,l Comnpany's Line, Britisll India Comlpanyl's Line, Austrian Llovds Line, Brazilian, Chinese and Jap).anese coast lines, and others too numerous to mention. This list will show not only that these great compallies select this locality as their best and cheapest building place, but it will show that all maritime nations, including the Chinese, avail themselves of the Clyde for their own advantage. All nations, excepting free and enlightened eiAmerica! France, Spa)in, Italy, Gcrmany,- even Brazil, China and Japan, — are in advance of us in this branchl of political economy! Add to the above list the hundreds of sailing ships, and numerous steamers, besides those for British and ofreign navies hlere lbuilt by contract, and soime idea itlay be folltmed of thie )business (lone uiponl the Clyde. I have before inic a11n official "Report upon the vital, social, and economic statistics of Glasgow for 1868, by Williamn West Watson, F. S. S., City Chamberlain." Mr. Watson justly remarks: " In my Report of last year I ventured to express atn opinion that the prospects of 1868, for the shipbuilding interests of the Clyde, seemed very hopeful. The result has greatly exceeded these anticipations, and the year has produced almost the lar^gest amount of new tonnage of any upon record; -it has closed also with sanguine prospects of continued success. In point of faict, the remark nmay be made with somre degree of pride, that the shipbuilding of the Clyde exceeds that of a71 the other ports of Great Britain combined. Only a lillited portion of the tonnage constructed on the banks of the Clyde is on account of native owners. The Clyde h11as a(cquired:a wMide-spre(ad falne, alnd it is worthily maintained upon every sea; otheriwise, shipowners of every nation,* as well as our own and other governments, would not, year rafter year, resort hither to have their work performled. -TlThere lmust unquestionably be an adwlvtltage obtained on the one side, and ta preference afibrded on the other, either in regard to econoimy tas to cost or durability (as to construction, or in elegance as to forn and figure, or probably all combined, which can enable the Clyde tlhus successfully to hold her own against all competitors." AMir. ANI tsonII is Co r ece t, -witlI tle exeit oll, tI(' th i Uited,Stdticts. He then subjoins the following tables, and adds a commentary upon theim, which cannot be more clearly expressed than in his own words - The fbllowTilg table exhibits the iparticulars, arrancred in groups, of' all tlle new vessels which have been launched upon the Clyde froin Rutherggle to Greenock, during the year 1868. NEW AVESSELS LAUNICIIIED ON TIIE CLYDE DURING(J TIIE YEAR 1868. IRON STEAMERS a ider 100 tons eacl,. 12 617' fi1from 100 to 50C)() tons eac, 32 8,255 fom 500 to 1000 " 14 9,914 from 1000 to 2000 " 17 26,749 "i from 2000 to 3000 " 4 9,480 "i firom 300 and Upwards,. 9 27, 653 88 82,668 IRON SAILING SmIIIS under 50() tons each, 1I 2,170' fio 5)from 500 to 1000()() " 22 1,655 "' ffrom 1000 to 2000 ( 34 43,10 67 61,930 CO-MPOSITE STEAMERIS under 500 tons each, 2 928 t' "i 5C00 to 1000' 4 2,82 6 3,810 COMIPOSITE SAILING SHIPS under 500 a.. 3 694" " " 500 to 1000". 12 9,761 " 1000 to 2000 ". 3 3,448 18 13,90)3 WOODEIN STEAMIERS,... ) 0 WOODEN SAIIAIN VTESSELS,... 2 270 ARtIOR-CLAI) TURRET ~AR-SHIPS,- DI)e Buff1l," and " De er,"...... 3,(86 COMPOSITE IUNBOATS,... 4 1,)(9 ThiON STE AA1 It1OPP R BARG S,..... 8 11,95OIRON STEAI DIIDGEIRS,...... 2 485 IRON STE1AM FER. P, O T,..... 1 11()) 1 97 1 (;9,571 "The next table exhibits, also inI groulps, the particulars of all the vessels which were either actually in process of construction or uLnder contract, at the close of the year 1868. VESSELS IN 1 (ROCESS OF CO(NSTRUCTION ORI CONTRACTEI) FOIR, AT 31ST DICEA[BEI'R, 1868. IRON STEA1MElS,- rallging fro 40 111p to 3,1 60 tons each,. 95,876 IRON SAILING(- SIlrIIS, 40 4 38,689 COMIPOSIT E STEVAIES,.. 1,805 <" i SAILINGT SNIIPS,. 14 13,317 WOODENN STEAMES.. 0 S"mI; N SAIIN PS, 4 656 ARMIOR-CLAD WAR-S1ITPS,-" nvincible, " A udaCiOul," and "I tspur,".. 1()0,188 COMPOSITE LIGIITSHIIP, fbr Ind(ia, 1 287 120 134,818 "To a non-professional observer, or indeed to almost any one whomsoever, the tables given above will filrnish only a very vague and indefinite idea of something which is remarkably extensive; but the mnatter becomes somewhat, although not mlluch more intelligible, or at least it is apparently more capable of being graspecd, if we express it in the form of a; pecuniary value. Well, tlhen, some idea of the vast magnitude and inportlance of the shipbuilding trade of the C/tlde mnay possibly be retalized, if we reflect that the value of the vessels enumerated in the first of' tllese tb)les -was ulpwaril s of three and a qulatrtcr ]iillioiis o(' ]pottlds sterli n g; a(ndl tll;t of thle Lttter-.1' M (A'I tllose inl course of construction ol- somewhat above three millions sterling. "I need scarcely again advert to the continued development of the employment of iron in shipbuilding, as contrasted with that of any other material upon the banks of the Clyde. Indeed, a glance at the two tables last exhibited elicits the fact that while not:a single wooden steamer was built or was under contlract in 1868, only two sailing vessels built of wood were launched during the year, and only four were contracted for at its close. Upon the other hand, the composite construction - especially for sailing ships - advances in favor, as nearly 14,000 tons of the latter were launched during the year, while uplwards of 13,000 tons were in process. Yet all these present but an insignificant proportion to the array of figures which the iron statistics exhibit, anld which may be sllmlnarize(d tihusl: Launched in 18(68 - Iron Steame nlll nd Sailing Sllps,,. 1 51.688 tons. Complosite 1 (1,..... 1, 1 Wooden Sailig Sllips,...... 2 70 Under contract, or in I)rocess of construction, 31st Decemler, 1868 - Ion Stealllnes an1d Sailing Shlip,.... 11 8,753 tc, ns. Composite do do,... 15,40(1) Woodolel Saliillg Ships..... 656"" The "'coimposite," referred to in Mr. Watson's tables, is a system little kno-wnv witll us. It combines many of the adv-Tantages of iron and the only one of wood. A composite vessel is constructed with iron frame and wooden planks, which are fastened to the metal ribs with composition screws. Oak is unserviceable, as it contains a pyroligneous acid which eats the iron and reacts by rendering the wood " ironsick." Teak is generally used, as instead of this acid, it has an oily nature which is a preservative for both sublstances. Composite vessels have the same room for stowage as those of iron, although they are perhaps not so durable. But they can be sheathed with copper so that they (are not liable to the objection of fouling. I have addressed a note to Messrs. William Denny & Brothers, one of the firms already referred to, makinc t le followincg inqnirie':I. Wlhalt is the av\erage price for skilled labor in slipl)uildino? II. Whlatt is the price of ordinary labor? 1li. What is the cost of iron per tonl?-pigr sheet a(ln wroughlt. LV. Wllat, is the price of coal? V\. AWI~t is tlle Cost of laborl on a steamer of 3,()0 tolls. yV. Whliatt is the cost of nmaterial on thle sam-e? II. Whllat is the cost of engines of 400 nomninal hIorsce power " AVIII. Abllat is the cost, per ton. of an iron sailino' sllip readyl for sea? IX. Whlat is 111e rulle for cal(cill:atinr Br itisl toiin-ao;( e X. What is thle diflerence in cal)acity between wooden and iron vessels of the same exterior dimensions? XI. What is the cost of composite vessels, as coinpared with those of iron? XII. What is the comparative cost of wire and hemp riooging' To whiclh they have obligingly returned the following replies - "I. Twenty-five to twenty-eight shillings per week. 11. Fifteen to eighteen shillings per week. III. Picg iron, ~2 17s.; plates, ~8 Ss.; bar (coilmmon,) ~t7; bar (best,) ~S8. Of course, they vary. I\V. Tenl to twelve shillings per ton. A. About ~2E1,500. V1i. About ~40,000. V-II. ~22000. E\verythingc depends on the style tnd l inish of ship and enllines; but the (Ins-wers to 5, 6, 7, 1refer to at first-class ship, -- the enginells complete, and well found in sptare gea'r. A four hlundred horse-power nlominal engine should indicate 2,600 effectivxe, eIad would drive la good fobrn of ship thirteen knots on trial. A rough way of arriviing, at the cost of a first-class screw patssenger steamer, is to calculate the gross tonnagoe at ~28 to ~30. This would include (leng'ines catpable' giving at speed of eleven to twelv\e lknots. 4 VIII. ~14 10s. to ~15, according to finislh. IX. The customs rule is yenertaly explained by calculating the internal capacity of the vessel into cubic feet, and dividing by 100, the result being considered tons. X. An iron ship of say 1,000 tons register, would carry 200 tons more of measurement than a wooden ship of the same dinmensions. Such is the experience of Mr. TIenderson, of Glasgov, who is largely engaged in the Australian trade. XI. Comnposite vessels from ~2 to ~3 more per ton than iron. XII. There is a saving in Aweig ht lby using wvire rope of one-third.'Thus, 3-inch wire rope, of wei giht per fathomn 10 lbs., is equal to 8-incl hemp rope of weight per fatlhom 1;5 lbs. The ppreseint pI)ice of wire is thirtwy-seven shillinogs per cwt. The price of hemlp rope per cw\t. is forty-tw\o shillinlls. Upon the diffl'erence tlhere is aL saving in nmo1ey of 33 per cent.'' My esteemled frien(d, Mr. Edward(s, of the Boston Atlantic Works, whose compuany has been largely engaged in building ships and machinery for the Government, inforns me that the American price of' Pig ion is.... 41.00 currenlll l)er ton. Plates,.I... "D B.ar, (colrmol),).... 5'- " I'sar, (best,,') * * * *."' ).... 7.'0"",A\ld tlhalt skilled( labor witll tlhem l is...;,e' ()rdinarv lbo,........ 27 On both sides tle water the day's labor is considered as of 10 hours. Mr. Edwards says that he is persuaded that if the Government will remit the duties on iron, he can build ships as cheap as they do in Scotland. He does not say that there are coal and iron mines in East Boston, within a stone's throw of his furnaces, nor does he say that his imen will submit to a reduction of one-half their wages. I have not deemed it necessary to propound any questions as to the cost of wooden ships. Hereabout such vessels are obsolete, and I doubt if nmost of the builders in Enllland and Scotland could give us any information on that point, to which they are as indifferent as they would be in regard to the items that entered into the construction of Noah's Ark. Not only are all ships built principally of iron, but the tendency is to discard wood altogether in their construction. The last answer, relating to wire rigging, shows how hemp is entirely dispensed with, except for running gear. Wood is no longcer needed for lowermasts, bowsprit and yards, all of which spars are infinitely strongrer, lighter, cheaper, and more durable than wood. Decks are soinetin-es made of iron p)lates instead of planks, as in the case of the London and New York line of steamers, and it should not be long before one greater belnefit than (any thus far enumerated shall accrue to humanity in the absolute freedom from the slihlitest danger of fire at sea. Every table, celair, 28S blulldllead andl Ierth fixture, in the cabin, forecastle and steerage, lnay be imade of thin or corrugated iron, rlnd tlle mlattrasses may be saturated with fireproof preparations. As emigrant ships may thus be made secure from one of the greatest perils to which such vessels are exposed, the law should compel them to adopt these precautions. I have spoken of the Clyde as the shipbuilding emporium of the world. Let us see how the English reg(ard it, as incidentally appears from a recent article in the Pall Mall Gazette. "TIE SIIIPBIUILDING TRADE. - The cause of the decline of shipbuildinog on the Thames seems to be fully accounted for on studyingr a table prepared by Mr. John Glover, showing the daily rate of wages on the Thames, Wear and Clyde, of carpenters, joiners, platers, caulkers, riveters, painters, riggers, saillmakers, boilermakers, engineers, turners, and pattern workers. The cost of one day's labor fronm those combined crafts is, on the Thames, 72s.; on the Clyde, 58s. Sd. The Thames price is 22.72 per cent. higher than the Clyde. Moreover, it 1appears that Thames worklnanship is no better than that on the Clyde and Mersey, or Tyne an(d Wear; and that Government and other contracts are'iaturally no longer restrictedl to the Thames. The difference iin the rate of wages is agglravated by tlhe extent to which work is done )by the "' piece " in tile northern yards. Iron work on the Clyde is nearly all so done, and nine-tenths of' it on the Wear. Tlle comparative lisuse of wood in the construction of ships has also materially affected this industry. Formerly all vessels were built of wood. Coal and iron, and the cost thereof, were not then very important items in their construction. Now a steamer built of wood is a rarity, and nearly all large sailing vessels are built either entirely of iron, or of iron in the interior, with a wooden skin. The disuse of wood: and the greatly increased use of iron: favors the rivers in close proximity to the banks of which iron is manufatctured, and -where coal, so important an item in all work with iron, is also found proximate and therefore cheap. The reason why Thames wages dlid not fall with the decline of trade, until such a level had been reached as would have enabled Thamnes masters to comlpete successfully with other rivers, is attributed by Mr. Glover to the decrees of the "c union." They fixed a limit below which wa(ges ought not, in their opinion, to fall. They succeeded thus far. Wages remain nominally high. But there is no wvork; trade is destroyed. It is perhaps, lie adds, an extreme illustration of what happens when the men become masters." What then? It is true that London and Glasgrow are under the samie government, and so the cases are not exactly parallel; but they are enough so to,suwrest the question, should the London merchants, now that ships canll no longer be built in their district? insist thlat the Glasgow people, who (lo build them, should continue to own themn, and take to themselves all the profit of their freight as well as of their construction? Would such a resolution promote the building of a single ship or steamer on the Thames? Would it not inevitably force the control of all their foreign trade into the hands of their provincial neighbors, and the ownership of their continental steamship lines upon foreigners? And yet this is American policy, —it is our system of "cprotecting" Englishmen, Dutchmen, G-ermans and Frenchmen against ourselves! I have now clone with argumnents and statistics. It may be said that if our navigation laws were repealed the builders on the Clyde will benefit thereby, and that this fc.et will weigh against the measure. But I cannot believe that my countrymen are such dogs in the 1mangerl or that they will refuse to ride in the "c(a r of Time," which carries L"bright improvelent" -with it, merely because there mnay be other passengers on the traill. Doubtless a. still greater impulse would be (given to shipbuildingr ]lere, if' they are disposed to come over 111.1d participate in its i)enefit. I know these hospitable Scotsllen well enourlh to be assured that they would give those Amlnericans of their own craft, who cannot mnlake a living at home, a hearty welcome " to the land of cakles." They are not slow to admit that they can learn some thlings from our builders of the beam enl(ine, and from our artistic modellers and (lecoratoi s. 81 In conclusion, it is from all considerations of national economy, and those totally irrespective of tariff or free trade as the revenue will be affected thereby otherwise than for the general good, that I urge you and your conmmittee, in yotur forthcon-ing report, to advocate the total repeal of the old law, and to couple with it the permissioz for our ships to tcake their stores out of bonid free of dutty. In this way, and in this way only, we lmay hope for the revival of our conmerce, and for a participation with England in the sovereignty of the seas. I a1l, Sir, very respectfully, lYour o1bedient servant, JOHN C()ODMAIN. lion. JoI-N LYNCls-I, C1Cair'7.?.. WuIILE tllis letter wa-s iln press, an auction sale has bleen imade of the ]Boston steamers " ()lltario " uclnd' Erie,' referred1 to on )1ae' 10. l'l\hen thicsc \\w-(,(llen sllil)s we'eC ill pr-ocess o(f co.st'Ction, thle files of tilce l,.Bot, Post wNAill lbea.Nit witiess to tile plredictionl that tl'erv w,ild ltiilatclv co't:)st dolblle thle amgllllt t)i' \\ lill two stetamels of eqlalt c alpaeity could lce built of' iroll in Scotlalld1. It lImxv Oa l.'a's lthat thleir liabMilitics f'or luildill,' ailid 1(1' tl;'e V 11io01s lietls 1)11 l the l, tall littile sI(ort ( t''>2,000.0().0) The'lre c)> Aw-as but one bid fir them, and they were sold for 8_256,17 each. (-Only one lnan could be found who walted cheap elephants. Now, it may be claimecd, Awith absolute certainty, that slips wlvich will carry as nucltl as these, tlhat will steam as fast on one-half tlhe coal tllhey consume, and will be serviceable vessels whellll tese are'rotten, can be built on the Clyde f)ir ~75,000 each. instead of fulrnisiiig so costly ann argumnent, Ihad the stockhol(ers excted tllceir influence to get tlle prolhibitory navigation law relpealed, Bostoil llight n110 have had a successful line of her o\wn, insteadl of "; protecting" the British flag, under which sthe is lnow obliged to ship and receive her merchandise.