Canal Co. received from the Turkish Government and like the Hay-Pauncefote treaty between the United States and Great Britain, requires the charges upon ships to be imposed upon the same tonnage basis and without discrimination. When by 1860 the European Commission of the Danube had carried out the improvements of the Danube sufficiently to warrant the imposition of charges upon shipping making use of the port of Sulina and navigating the lower Danube, a tariff was issued by the commission imposing tolls upon the net tonnage of vessels as determined by the British Merchant Shipping Act of 1854. The size of vessels of different nationalities being expressed in various kinds of tons, the commission worked out a list of factors or percentages to apply to the tonnage of the vessels not measured by the Moorsom system, in order to reduce the tonnage of all ships to the equivalent of their net tonnage, British measurement. In order to secure the information necessary to determine these factors or percentages, the commission applied the British rules to a number of vessels, but the data secured by the commission was obtained by measuring so few ships that the table of equivalents was only roughly accurate. It soon became evident that serious discriminations resulted from the application of the table of percentages, and, as stated by Sir John Stokes, the representative of Great Britain on the commission:

In the year 1861 the commission formally recorded the desire felt by it that a universal system of tonnage measurement should be adopted in order to establish a real equality between ship and ship and between flag and flag. This desire was repeated from time to time as the protocols of the commission testify.'

The efforts of the European Commission of the Danube to bring about uniform tonnage laws in the principal maritime countries of Europe proved unsuccessful and the commission was compelled to adopt its own code of rules. This was done when the new tariff of 1871 was issued. These rules provided for the measurement of vessels by the Moorsom rules, 100 cubic feet being considered a ton, but the rules provided for propelling-power deduction in accordance with the Danube instead of the percentage rule. It was this action of the Commission of the Danube that gave to this rule for propelling-power deduction the name of Danube, although the rule first appeared in the British Merchant Shipping Act of 1854, by which act it was applied to vessels to which the percentage rule did not apply for making propelling-power deductions.

It was not the practice of the European Commission of the Danube actually to measure all vessels to determine their tonnage. The rules of the commission determined what spaces would be included in net tonnage. If the tonnage of such spaces was expressed by the vessel's certificates in other than Moorsom tons of 100 cubic feet, the tonnage was multiplied by such a factor as would reduce it to the equivalent of Moorsom tons-the measurement rules being accompanied by a revised table of equivalents or factors to be applied to the tonnage of vessels of different nationalities. In 1876 the European Commission of the Danube adopted the Suez measurement rules, substituting them for the rules it had adopted in 1871.

NEGOTIATIONS CONCERNING UNIFORM TONNAGE RULES BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND OTHER COUNTRIES, 1862 TO 1870.

In 1862 Great Britain enacted a law, referred to below, providing that, when any foreign nation adopted the British system of measurement, the tonnage of vessels as stated in their official papers would be accepted at the British ports without remeasurement of the ships concerned; and, at the time of the enactment of this law, the British Board of Trade, through the foreign office, submitted to the French Government the memorandum quoted at the beginning of this chapter, "pointing out the importance of the uniform system of tonnage measurement." This memorandum urged other countries to adopt the leading features of the British Merchant Shipping Act of 1854.

This appeal on the part of the British Government caused the French Government to appoint, in 1863, a commission to investigate and report upon tonnage. This was, in fact, the third commission which France had appointed within a comparatively short time. There had been a commission established in 1855, and another in 1861, to report upon the advisability of changing the French measurement rules as adopted in 1837.

Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on Tonnage, 1874, p. 3.

The commissions of 1855 and 1861 did not recommend the adoption by France of the Moorsom system, but the commission of 1863 recommended that France adopt and put in force the Moorsom system and the British measurement rules. Unfortunately, no action followed this recommendation, although the subject was not abandoned by the French Government, as is evidenced by the statement by the French minister of foreign affairs, made in 1869 in a letter addressed to De Lesseps, president of the Suez Canal Co. A commission that De Lesseps had appointed in 1868 to recommend a tonnage basis for the Suez Canal tolls had advised the company to levy the Suez tolls upon the net tonnage of vessels as stated in their certificates of registry until the negotiations then in progress for the international unification of tonnage had been successful. The statement made by the French minister of foreign affairs was that:

My department is especially occupied with this important question of agreement with other competent administrations, and, at the suggestion of the European Commission of the Danube, has put itself to work with the British Government to elaborate in common an international system of measurement to be submitted for acceptance by all the States. These labors have not yet had any definite result, but they are in search of one, and the opening of the Suez Canal will have the effect of hastening a solution which is of interest to the entire commercial world, while showing the impossibility of maintaining the present conditions longer.1

While these negotiations between France and Great Britain were being carried on, communications of similar tenor were being exchanged by other maritime countries. The only countries, however, that took action were the United States, 1865, and Denmark, 1867, which adopted the Moorsom system of measuring vessels and the Moorsom ton as the unit of vessel size. Whatever might otherwise have been the result of these negotiations, they were temporarily brought to naught by the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War in 1870. Another reason why international negotiations carried on between 1862 and 1870 failed to bring about uniform measurement and tonnage rules was the decision of the British courts in 1866 holding that the Board of Trade had acted without the authority of law when, in 1860, it abandoned the percentage rule concerning propelling-power deductions.

The Board of Trade in its memorandum of 1862, which was made the basis of international negotiations concerning the unification of tonnage, had stated that "in 1854 an attempt was made to determine this deduction (for propelling power) by a fixed percentage, but the difficulties of doing this fairly and universally have proved so great that it has been found necessary to adopt the plan of simply measuring the contents of the space and to deduct them from the aggregate contents of the ship." This administrative order concerning propelling-power deductions made in 1860 having been held to be illegal by the High Court of Justice, in 1866, the Board of Trade and the British Government were thereby embarrassed in urging other nations to adopt the British tonnage rules, as embodied in the act of 1854. The Board of Trade besought Parliament to amend the act of 1854, but without success.

ADOPTION OF MOORSOM TONNAGE SYSTEM, AND ACCEPTANCE OF TONNAGE CERTIFICATES.

The United States and Denmark were the only countries that adopted the Moorsom ton and the Moorsom system of vessel measurement prior to 1871; but, between 1870 and 1880, all of the maritime nations of Europe, with the exception of Belgium, adopted the Moorsom tonnage and measurement system. The following table states the date upon which the Moor❤ som system became effective in the countries of the world that have thus far taken action: TABLE XIII.-Nations that have adopted the Moorsom ton and the Moorsom measurement system.

The action taken by most of the maritime nations of the world in adopting the Moorsom ton of 100 cubic feet and the Moorsom system of measuring vessel spaces was but the first step toward international unification of tonnage rules and practice. In order to bring about international tonnage unity, it is necessary that the measurement rules of all countries should be uniform, i. e., that all rules should include in gross tonnage the same spaces and that all rules should make the same deductions from gross tonnage to determine net tonnage. The general adoption of the Moorsom tonnage system made possible, but was not followed by, the international unification of tonnage and vessel measurement.

The adoption by the principal maritime countries of the world of the Moorsom ton and the Moorsom method of measuring vessel spaces favored the acceptance by each of the principal countries, as the basis of port charges and tonnage taxes, of the tonnage certificates issued by countries that had adopted the Moorsom tonnage rules. This action was anticipated by the British Government which provided in a statute enacted in 1862 that:

Whenever it appears to Her Majesty the Queen in council that the tonnage regulations of this act have been adopted by any foreign country, and are in force there, Her Majesty in council may order that the ships of that country shall, without being remeasured in Her Majesty's dominions, be deemed to be of the tonnage denoted in their certificates of registry or other national papers in the same manner, to the same extent, and for the same purposes as the tonnage in the certificate of registry of a British ship is deemed to be the tonnage of that ship.

A provision similar to this was enacted in the United States tonnage law of 1864-the law which adopted the Moorsom system for measuring vessels. The present phraseology of the American statute of 1864 is that:

Whenever it is made to appear to the Secretary of Commerce [and Labor] that the rules concerning the measurement for tonnage of vessels of the United States have been substantially adopted by the Government of any foreign country he may direct that the vessels of such foreign country be deemed to be of the tonnage denoted in their certificates of register and other national papers, and thereupon it shall not be necessary for such vessels to be remeasured at any port in the United States.

Following the enactment of the law of 1862, Great Britain began to enter into reciprocal tonnage agreements with other nations providing for the acceptance, by the countries entering into such arrangements, of the tonnage certificates of the vessels under their respective flags. Agreements were made with the United States and Denmark in 1868 and with Austria-Hungary in 1871. These agreements were without restrictions; but those subsequently entered into by Great Britain and other countries generally stipulated that foreign certificates would be accepted only in so far as the measurement rules of the countries entering into agreements were alike, and that the tonnage as stated in certificates would be increased or decreased by admeasurers so as to make the tonnage upon which light dues or other shipping charges were levied the equivalent of the tonnage which the vessel would have if measured by the rules of the countries imposing the charges. This was necessary because of the insistence by Great Britain upon adhering to the 32 per cent rule in making propelling-power deductions and upon considering as open the spaces under so-called shelter decks provided with "tonnage openings." These provisions of the British measurement rules made the net tonnage of British vessels less than the net tonnage of vessels of the same size when measured by the rules of most other countries. Prior to 1895 the United States, Germany, and some other maritime countries made propelling-power deductions, either in accordance with the Danube rule or by the actual measurement of deducted spaces, and it was customary for Great Britain to permit the remeasurement of vessels at her ports and to give them the advantage of the larger deduction from net tonnage provided for by the British rule as to propelling-power allowances. To facilitate the correction of net-tonnage figures at foreign ports, some countries, including Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and the United States, have provided that their official admeasurers shall provide the masters of vessels not only with the certificate of the vessel's official tonnage, but also with statements showing what spaces in the vessel are entitled to deduction from gross tonnage by the rules of foreign countries. This may be illustrated by quoting the provision of the statute of the United States now in force, which is as follows:

Upon application by the owner or master of an American vessel in foreign trade, collectors of customs, under regulations to be approved by the Secretary of Commerce, are authorized to attach to the register of such vessel an

appendix stating separately, for use in foreign ports, the measurement of such space or spaces as are permitted to be deducted from gross tonnage by the rules of other nations and are not permitted by the laws of the United States.

The United States has reciprocal arrangements of the kind above indicated with Great Britain, Belgium, Denmark, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Spain, the Netherlands, Russia, Finland, Portugal, and Japan. The American measurement rules produce a net tonnage larger than results from the application of the rules of most of these countries, and American admeasurers thus add to the tonnage of foreign ships the spaces which our rules include in tonnage and which the rules of foreign nations omit therefrom.

The official instructions under which American admeasurers act are that "the like courtesy having been extended to vessels of the United States, it is directed that vessels of those countries whose registers indicate their gross and net tonnage under their present law shall be taken in ports of the United States to be of the tonnage so expressed in their documents, with the addition of the amount of the deductions and omissions made under such law not authorized by the admeasurement law of the United States."

Inasmuch as the British measurement rules give vessels a lower net tonnage than do the rules of most other countries, Great Britain is willing to accept, for purposes of taxes upon shipping, the tonnage without alteration as stated in the certificates of the vessels of foreign countries. The arrangement between Great Britain and Greece is that Greek steamers may be remeasured in the United Kingdom for engine room deduction-the Greek rules providing for smaller deductions by applying the Danube rule. The arrangement between Great Britain and Sweden provides for the acceptance by Great Britain of British tonnage when separately stated in the certificates issued to Swedish vessels by the admeasurers of Sweden.

The general practice now prevailing among commercial nations of accepting the tonnage certificates of vessels of foreign registry is of advantage to commerce and shipping, because it minimizes the expense and delays that would result from the measurement of vessels when subjected to tonnage charges at foreign ports. This practice, however, merely lessens the disadvantages resulting from dissimilarity in the tonnage rules of different countries. The arrangements providing for the acceptance at the ports of each country of the tonnage certificates of foreign vessels in accordance with special international regulations, have been made necessary by the lack of international unity in tonnage and vessel measurement. These agreements would be unnecessary and international commerce could be carried on more advantageously if the commercial nations of the world could agree upon common tonnage rules.

THE INTERNATIONAL TONNAGE COMMISSION OF 1873.

The opening of the Suez Canal in 1869 led to the convening of an international tonnage commission which met in Constantinople the latter part of 1873, and which provided a set of vessel-measurement rules that the members of the commission thought would be adopted by the countries represented at Constantinople and would lead to the international unification of tonnage and vessel measurement. As has been explained, this expectation was not realized, because of the refusal of Great Britain the following year to substitute the rules framed at Constantinople for those embodied in the British Merchant Shipping Act of 1854. Had Great Britain adopted the Constantinople rules, it is certain that other countries would have done so. As has been set forth in Chapter IX, the occasion of the convening of the International Tonnage Commission at Constantinople was the necessity of defining the phrase "ton of capacity" as used in the act of concession granted to the Suez Canal Co. by the Ottoman Government in 1856. Section 17 of that concession provided that the dues imposed by the canal company should "be collected without exception or favor from all ships, under like conditions," and "that for the special navigation due the maximum toll shall not exceed 10 francs per ton of capacity on vessels and per head of passengers."

In 1868, De Lesseps, the president of the Suez Canal Co., appointed a commission to consider problems connected with the operation of the canal and among the questions referred to this commission was that of determining the type or kind of tonnage upon which the charges imposed by the company for the use of the canal should be levied. While the commission

was deliberating upon this question active negotiations, with a view to the international unification of vessel tonnage and measurement rules, were in progress with prospects of early success. Accordingly, the commission appointed by De Lesseps recommended that "while awaiting the adoption of a universal rule [of measurement] the company levy dues according to the tonnage stated in the ship's papers without regard to the flag." The regulations adopted by the company under date of August 17, 1869, stipulated that "tonnage [upon which tolls are paid] will for the present (jusqu'à nouvel ordre) be that stated in the official papers carried by vessels." This provided for the payment of tolls upon net or register tonnage, and it was soon discovered that the net tonnage was often 40 to 50 per cent less than the gross tonnage. The revenues of the canal company being insufficient during the early years of the operations of the waterway to enable the company to meet its capital charges, the company felt obliged to increase its revenue. One of the steps taken was to substitute gross for net tonnage as the basis on which charges should be imposed. This change was made July 1, 1872, upon the recommendation of a commission that had been appointed by the company the previous year. As was explained in Chapter IX, this action of the Suez Canal Co. was vigorously opposed by the shipping interests, their opposition being supported by several of the European powers. Pressure having been brought by the European powers upon the Turkish Government to settle the question, the Porte invited the European Governments to send delegates to an international commission to meet in Constantinople or London.

In requesting the European nations to send delegates to an international commission, the Ottoman Government stated it to be "the desire of the imperial Government to insure an equal treatment of all ships without distinction of flag that use the ports of the Empire" and "expressed the opinion that the adoption of a uniform tonnage will be regarded with favor by maritime countries." It was further stated by the Ottoman Government that it "did not doubt that a commission of experts and men of practical experience would be able to find a uniform method of measuring ships and of fixing upon a standard ton that may serve at the same time as the basis for commercial transactions and for the collection of charges to which vessels are subject." The delegates sent to Constantinople by the maritime powers of Europe were not authorized to bind their respective Governments to a change in national measurement rules. The foreign office of the British Government, for instance, was careful to state "that the conclusions at which the commission may arrive shall not become operative until they have been referred to all the powers, and shall have been accepted by them." In this same communication, however, it is stated that "Her Majesty's Government have constantly urged the importance of a uniform standard of tonnage measurement * * * They are therefore glad to join in such a commission." Thus while the British Government participated in the deliberations of the Constantinople commission primarily for the purpose of assisting in deciding what should be the basis of charges at the Suez Canal, Great Britain was also willing that her delegates should join with those from other countries in efforts to work out a system of measurement rules that would be acceptable to commercial countries generally.

The German Government was careful to instruct its delegates to the Constantinople convention to give primary consideration to the settlement of the Suez Canal tonnage question. Germany had recently, by the act of 1872, adopted the Moorsom system of measuring vessel spaces, and had thus established uniform measurement rules to apply in all the States of the Empire, and the German Government accordingly felt that it would not be desirable to change the tonnage rules it had recently adopted. This is shown by Prince Bismarck's instructions to the German ambassador at Constantinople. In a letter dated March 18, 1873, the chancellor stated:

By the ship measurement ordinance issued on the 5th July, 1872, the process of admeasurement for sea ships is made uniform throughout Germany, and is regulated on the method originally English, now introduced in almost all European States. We are, therefore, no longer in a position to treat this question as an open one, of which the solution for Germany should depend upon an international commission. Germany would not be able to take part in a negotiation which treated of altering the aforesaid British-German system. On the other hand, supposing the maintenance of that system not to be called in question; we also might take part in a discussion as to what deductions are to be

1 Earl Granville to Sir H. Elliott, Mar. 3, 1873.