Boat weighing machines - why?

[magpie patrick]

I know most of you know what I'm talking about with a boat weighing machine, but just in case I've attached the Glamorgan Canal Machine, photographed when it was at Stoke Bruerne - it's now in Swansea (I am going to keep quiet about the politics of giving CARDIFF's weighing machine to SWANSEA!!!  ) 

 

There were four in England and Wales, Newport, Cardiff, Brimscombe Port near Stroud and Midford on the Coal Canal. The one in Newport was shortlived, so short lived it had gone by the time the one in Cardiff was built. 

 

I've just given a talk on the Coal Canal, and relayed the conventional wisdom that these devices were more dificult to defraud than conventional tolls - yet both work on the same idea - weigh/gauge the boat with no cargo, then weigh/gauge the boat with cargo - the difference is the weight of the cargo. 

 

So, two questions really - first, what was the advantage of a weighing machine, second, how did one defraud the gauging system and why did this not work with a weighing machine? 

[springy]

No help but I remember looking at it at Stoke Bruerne and wondering "why", in general use I can only see disadvantages. A guaging stick and set of tables is easy and quick to use, and cheap to distribute around the toll stops. It could be used for initial guaging but seems a mechanically complicated solution compared to a wharf crane and a set of guaging weights. The only possible advantage would be an accurate tare weight for the empty boat.

 

springy 

[Tacet]

Gauging by displacement will tend to be less accurate if the boat is not loaded in the same manner as when first gauged.  I.e. if the testing weights are loaded to give an evenly distributed hold but the cargo is subsequently stacked towards the stem or stern.  Not sure how much difference it would make but no doubt there were boaters well-versed in minimising tolls.  A weighing machine would not be so easily fooled

 

But it's difficult to see what substantial benefit might be gained by having only an occasional weighing machine given the initial cost and the additional time taken to use it.

 

 

 

 

   

[Jen-in-Wellies]

I suppose you could hide lots of heavy ballast in the cabin cupboards and in the bow locker when it was gauged by displacement, then remove it after it goes in to service. A big risk of getting caught I'd have thought, especially once one has been found out and the company is aware of it. A half ton or so of toll saved for each trip mounts up over the years. Tempting to try for something as financially marginal as narrowboat carriage in its later years. Did it ever happen?

[David Mack]

Standard gauging sheets noted what equipment was on the boat when it was gauged, so presumably all the lockers would have been inspected.

[Ian Mac]

Interesting comments.
I suspect boaters we interested in maximising the amount carried as they were normally paid by delivered weight if they were number ones. If they were company men they did not care, that much what was on they only really care what draught they were as that slowed them down.
I suspect that as a boat is basically a box as two measurements were taken it is very easy to calculate the tonnage carried. I am not sure to what precision it was measured and more to the point charged, I suspect to the cwt. but I may well be wrong, different canals may have used different methods not sure if it was standardised. 

[Ray T]

For those who may not know what the gauging process is.

 

From the museum at Stoke Bruerne.

 

From Waterways world Nov 1974

Edited February 17, 2022 by Ray T

[springy]

Logically there can be five parties interested in the weight carried :-
1 The supplier of the goods - so that they can charge their customer
2 The customer - so they do not pay for tonnage not delivered
3 The canal company(ies) - so they can charge the appropriate toll(s)
4 The carrier/boat owner - so they can charge for carriage
5 The steerer - may be paid by the ton delivered rather than per trip, may "know" the route well enough to know that 1/2 ton extra on the boat will make the trip slower.

In addition different cargoes attracted different toll rates, calculated on the nearest quarter (5 cwt) under the gauged weight, and some - particularly raw materials (coal limestone etc.) had a built in "rebate" on the BCN, AIUI they had a toll rate of 22 cwt to the ton (10%) i.e. if the boat was actually carrying 22 tons the toll due would be calculated on 20 tons, presumably particularly applicable to open day boats in rainy conditions.

Were boats gauged at the suppliers wharf before leaving to get an accurate starting point or did they rely on the canal companies gauging, similarly did the customers gauge before unloading. Either of which would require knowledge of the gauging tables for the boat.

 

springy

[Jen-in-Wellies]

11 minutes ago, springy said:

Logically there can be five parties interested in the weight carried :-
1 The supplier of the goods - so that they can charge their customer
2 The customer - so they do not pay for tonnage not delivered
3 The canal company(ies) - so they can charge the appropriate toll(s)
4 The carrier/boat owner - so they can charge for carriage
5 The steerer - may be paid by the ton delivered rather than per trip, may "know" the route well enough to know that 1/2 ton extra on the boat will make the trip slower.

In addition different cargoes attracted different toll rates, calculated on the nearest quarter (5 cwt) under the gauged weight, and some - particularly raw materials (coal limestone etc.) had a built in "rebate" on the BCN, AIUI they had a toll rate of 22 cwt to the ton (10%) i.e. if the boat was actually carrying 22 tons the toll due would be calculated on 20 tons, presumably particularly applicable to open day boats in rainy conditions.

Were boats gauged at the suppliers wharf before leaving to get an accurate starting point or did they rely on the canal companies gauging, similarly did the customers gauge before unloading. Either of which would require knowledge of the gauging tables for the boat.

 

springy

If relying on just the canal companies measurement, the opportunities for "shrinkage" are obvious, so one would expect the loads weight to be determined at the suppliers and customers end as well. This could be by weighing the load off the boat, while it is in sacks, railway, or road wagons by weighbridge, or other means. Not just with the canal company gauging tables. Weight can be tricky. Coal in open railway wagons going any distance would be kept wet, for example, to prevent dust flying everywhere once it picked up some speed.

Jen

[Heartland]

Ah gauging

I did try to get the Tipton Gauging Station upgraded to 2 * on the very subject, Patrick has asked why ? The then listing authorities chose not to grant the application and it was all tied in with the possibility of the Black Country Museum using the station as a depot for their boats. That also was not proceeded with and the station is again the subject of interest for a predatory developer to maximise the site for houses at expense of heritage

 

The BCN chose to adopt the dry system of gauging, that is weighing boats. They had previously adopted at the request of coal masters to have the wet system of gauging where the indexes were fixed on the boat side at Smethwick. Some boat owners through careful design of their craft could actually carry more cargo than the indexes measured,

 

That was in the 1830's and the Grand Junction Canal Co already adopted a dry gauging system to ensure better accuracy with weighing than by indexing.

 

The BCN followed suit in the 1870's when there was a greater determination to get rid of the longweight system where allowances were made for loss to the customer, and to the detriment of the seller. A ton could be measured at 21 cwt or greater. By the 1870's there was also a movement to standardise weights and measures and these opinions were  factor in the BCN adopting the dry system  and creating the gauging tables for all boats using their network, unless they had a GJC table.

 

The crux of the argument for the 2 * listing was the new direction adopted by the BCN for more accurate gauging of craft. Smethwick Indexing Station was converted into a boat gauging station and a third was also suggested. That the longweight system was to be got rid of, or least curtailed, became an important aspect of the BCN policy and the greater legislation that happened at this time regarding accurate weights and measures.

 

Tipton Gauging Station is presently a monument to that policy and now a developer wants to destroy it.

 

 

[Athy]

16 hours ago, magpie patrick said:

, what was the advantage of a weighing machine, 

 

Obviously not much of one, otherwise there would surely have been more than four of them in service.

Did they come before or after the weighbridges used for wheeled traffic?

[BEngo]

A gauging stick is easily fiddled.  Stand on the gunwale and the boat will list.

Which gunwale you stand on depends on whether you want to minimise tolls ( stand on the opposite side to the gauger) or maximise freight carriage  ( stand on the same side as the gauger).

For extra freight carriage benefit, have plenty of water in the bilge, for toll benefit ensure you are pumped dry.

 

For a Number 1 which was wanted would depend on toll rates vs carriage rates.  For a paid boatman extra freight rates would be more beneficial.

 

Pilferage and loss of cargo can be hard to detect by gauging, but can be done in any lock or bridge.   Detecting it by weighing is more accurate, but involves getting the boat to the weighing machine, which is probably easier said than done in many cases.

 

N

[Ray T]

I stand correction but I always thought a boat was gauged, both sides?

Surely a competent official would notice a person stood on the gunwale?

 

Mr C. Burdett at Sutton Stop.

[1st ade]

16 minutes ago, Ray T said:

I stand correction but I always thought a boat was gauged, both sides?

Surely a competent official would notice a person stood on the gunwale?

 

Mr C. Burdett at Sutton Stop.

I'd assumed they gauged both sides and took an average...

 

Although a cunning shout down the hatch "children - all on Mummy's bed" at the right moment could swing that one.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

2 minutes ago, 1st ade said:

I'd assumed they gauged both sides and took an average...

 

Although a cunning shout down the hatch "children - all on Mummy's bed" at the right moment could swing that one.

and I thought they kind of did a ‘corner to corner’ of the cargo 

 

 

[springy]

You've got to do at least four to get anything accurate, I'm sure I've heard of taking six and then the average.

 

Yes gauging could always be prone to "fiddling" possibly with the collusion of the toll station operative - were they "trusted" employees or would they be moved around so as to avoid building "friendships" with the boaters (which may well also have been family). On the other hand an "on the ball" toll clerk would be well aware of the potential tricks particularly if they had spent some time as a boatman.

 

For coal, and probably other bulk materials, the extra work involved in weighing the cargo at the customers wharf - offloading into barrows or carts, passing over a platform scales/weighbridge, and then tipping into the customers store, would vastly depend on circumstances. For a coal yard with their own weighbridge and carts this would not be too onerous, however the company powering its steam engine with one or two boatloads per week and the coal bunker conveniently positioned by their wharf would be unlikely to undertake such an operation unless there was already a question over tonnages delivered as against invoiced. I suspect in many cases the customer would not even gauge the boats, trusting to their experience to judge the tonnage, and probably the toll gauged weight would be seen as "independent" reference between the customer and the supplier.

 

The supplier (certainly the collieries did) would gauge the boats before despatch for invoicing and records.

 

 

springy  

[Pluto]

The idea of weighing goods being carried was quite novel at the end of the 18th century, and it was one of the things which interested Sebastian Maillard when he visited England to look at canals in 1795. The last few sections of the book he wrote subsequently, and which I translated recently, looks at weighing machines for road vehicles. It must have been a new idea to him, and though most of his book is about canal construction, particularly for narrow canals, he did include the short section, with drawings, of weighbridges. Her also gives details of gauging boats, with a drawing of a gauging staff. Weighing boats seems to have developed around 1800, and this is suggested in the 1857 Canal Association paper on the subject which I have attached.

 

The methods used for charging must have varied from canal to canal, and the L&LC seems to have given up on gauging quite quickly. Cargoes were only weighed when they appeared to be above that which was declared, and occasionally the whole cargo would be removed from the boat or weighing. I suspect the time lost as a result of such actions must have been an incentive to provide reasonably accurate weigh bills. On gauging, there seems to have been two schools, those who measured from the bottom of the boat to water level, and those who measured the dry side, both relied on the boats having been through a gauging dock where dimensions and depths were recorded for each boat. The system was still being used recently, as when delivering iron ore from Rotterdam to Linz in a 1200 ton capacity boat, it was gauged on arrival at Linz.

1857 Gauging, GJC, Regents and Lee.pdf

[David Mack]

54 minutes ago, Pluto said:

On gauging, there seems to have been two schools, those who measured from the bottom of the boat to water level, and those who measured the dry side, 

The former is only practical for a boat with more or less vertical sides and a flat bottom, as with a typical narrow boat. But on the wide canals many of the boat types had more rounded hull shapes, so only dry side measuring would be feasible.

Edited February 17, 2022 by David Mack

[Pluto]

Many had round chines, but not all. Most wide boats off the Thames were square chined, as were many on the K&A and other southern canals heading towards the Severn, and not forgetting the MB&BC, which had wide and narrow boats of similar construction. Of course, the other method was carved lines on the stem and stern post, their position being calculated after weighing. I know it's a little difficult for narrowboat people to think outside the box  but, ..... 😉 

[Iain_S]

11 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

I suppose you could hide lots of heavy ballast in the cabin cupboards and in the bow locker when it was gauged by displacement, then remove it after it goes in to service. A big risk of getting caught I'd have thought, especially once one has been found out and the company is aware of it. A half ton or so of toll saved for each trip mounts up over the years. Tempting to try for something as financially marginal as narrowboat carriage in its later years. Did it ever happen?

Bit like a mate of mine from many years ago. Our local scrap merchant used a weighbridge to weigh vehicles in and out. My mate had a lead lined jacket which he left in the vehicle on the way in, but was wearing it when he exited ...

[MtB]

My own uniformed guess regarding the thread title question is 'resolution'. 

 

Weighing a boat can be done to an accuracy within a dozen or two lb I'd say, while gauging is probably only accurate to perhaps half a ton or so. Especially on a windy day when the water surface never settles. 

 

 

 

 

[Heartland]

• 

Posted Thursday at 17:45

The idea of weighing goods being carried was quite novel at the end of the 18th century, and it was one of the things which interested Sebastian Maillard when he visited England to look at canals in 1795. 

 

I did find a Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal gauging at Staffordshire RO which was pre 1800 but was rather basic. I will have to find a copy for posting.

 

[Pluto]

Gauging seems to have become more common and exacting after 1800. This is a report from the L&LC minutes of 10 April 1807 on the subject. Keith Fisher has transcribed the Trent gauging books, and his guide was published in the Waterways History Research Group's Sources Paper 35 a couple of years ago.

1807-4-10 RAIL846-7, gauging.pdf

[Chris M Jones]

Does anyone know who invented the dry-inch gauging system?

 

When Canal Acts refer to the gauging of boats they often describe the 'Index' system measuring the wet-inches. This suggests the dry-inch system came about at some point afterwards and it seems the Trent Navigation was the first to use it.  Was it something imported from abroad or did the Trent Navigation invent it themselves?

[Pluto]

I would expect, from the research I have done, that the idea is unlikely to have come from abroad. Although there was much more experience of examination for tolls, there being over twenty places where this was done between Trier and Rotterdam alone, the work seems to have been done by taking out the cargo for measurement. Several treadmill cranes survive, the last being used into the twentieth century, though the need for the majority of tolls on international rivers were much curtailed after the Napoleonic War.

 

I have copies of a couple of investigations into cargo weight measurement on the L&LC from 1803 and 1823 which seem to suggest that cargoes were unloaded for measurement. That in itself would have been a deterrent to under-disclosure, though some did seem to try it on. The discrepancy could be between 10 and 20% according to the papers, so enough to make a significant difference to the canal company. The L&LC seems to have built a weigh dock in Liverpool, perhaps around 1820, though it would have disappeared in the reconstruction of the terminal basin circa 1880. I suspect that by that time they were relying on accurate loading figures.