Commissioners and Officers appointed for the Government of the Same.

Full as this title-page is, it does not tell us who compiled the work or give its date, but from comparison with other existing MSS. there is no doubt that its authorship is to be attributed to Edward Battine, who was for some years an official in Portsmouth Dockyard. He issued these tables or Navy lists at intervals from 1684 to 1689, or later. This copy is nearly identical with one dated 1688, and was issued probably early in that year.

Battine and his works being little known, I give some account of them in an appendix to this paper.

Perhaps a reason for the compilation of these elaborate tables may be found in the inquiry which Samuel Pepys set on foot in 1678, sending a letter to the shipwrights in the various dockyards, asking for authentic information from each person now surviving that has had the honour of building of any of his Majesty's ships", since he had "an occasion of making a perfect list as soon as may be for his Majesties own use."

It may be that this letter gave Battine the idea of preparing such a list, but the more immediate cause of its accomplishment and issue was possibly to be found in the rush of interest in naval matters after Pepys was reinstated in 1684.2 It will be recollected that, owing to the anti-popery excitement, Pepys was in 1679 thrown out of office, and committed to the Tower on the charge of sending information to the French Government, &c. : accusations which appear to have been unfounded, and manufactured for political purposes. The charges not being substantiated, Pepys was released, but for five years from 1679 he had no direct influence, and the Admiralty Department was managed-or mismanagedby a committee till, in May 1684, Charles II. sent for Pepys to resume work.

Then it was that the disastrous effects of five years'

1 Adm. Letters viii., 19, quoted in Eng. Hist. Rev., xii., p. 698. 2 Battine's ambition to distinguish himself had probably some share in the motives which induced him to undertake the great labour of compiling such lists,

neglect of the navy became apparent, and we learn from Pepys' work, Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England for Ten Years, Determin'd Dec. 1688, something of the efforts which he made during the next few years to undo the evil, and to restore ships and stores which were rotting in harbour. Pepys writes:

"the Navy (under this five years uninterrupted Peace) was suffer'd to sink into this calamitous estate, even to the rendring some of its Number wholly irrepairable, and reducing others (the most considerable in Quality) to a Condition of being with difficulty kept above Water."

Under James II., who came to the throne in 1685, renewed efforts were made by Pepys, and he rendered to the King full details as to the best method of expending the annual grant to the navy.

I propose to describe the contents of this MS., as it is mainly the same as Battine's other editions, the principal variations being in the ships and the holders of the Navy and Admiralty offices.

On pages 3 and 4 are tables headed Proportions for Ships with directions for drawing or delineating, followed by The Reason of ships Swimming deeper or shallower.

On page 5 is A Computation of the Weight of the Royall James giving the tonnage of the ship itself—hull, masts, yards and ballast-as well as stores for a six months cruise.

Bread for her 750 men figures at 56 tuns 15 cwt., beef over 32 tuns, pork and fish over 16 tuns each, and so on; but out of all proportion to the eatables appears beer349 tuns 18 cwt. 1 q. 2 lbs., followed by water15 tuns 1 c. 1 q. 10 lbs. It is to be hoped that they reckoned to obtain more water, but not beer, in the course of the cruise. The guns, of which she carried 100, are estimated to weigh 178 tuns, and the shot 55 tuns. The 750 men total up to 50 tuns.

The next section of our MS. is entitled, A proportion For his Majesty's Ships of Warr, Being their True Length, Breadth and Depth, and contains fourteen pages closely filled with information as to dimensions of all parts of ships of each rating; information which might be of interest to

a naval antiquary or an expert, but with which we cannot deal here. Passing to pages 23 to 35, we have the matter which must be my chief apology for bringing the MS. to notice.

On these pages we have a complete list of The Dimensions and Burthen of His Majestys Ships. When, Where, and by Whom Built with The Price of Their Hulls Launched.

In this section, which we may call a Navy list, each of the Battine MSS. differs slightly from the others; some ships drop out, others are added, the rating is altered, and so on. There are lists in Pepys' State of the Royal Navy (Dec., 1688), the book to which reference has already been made; these lists show further changes.

In our MS. a mistake has apparently been made in including 12 ships as 1st rates which should, according to Battine's other MSS., be classed as 2nd rates; while some classed 2nd should be 3rd; or it may be that the alteration was intentional, as there seems to have been some uncertainty as to rating (see Eger MS. 670).

Pepys' list of Dec. 18, 1688, differs from this MS. by including fireships, hoys, hulks, &c., thus making a total of 173 vessels in the fleet, whereas this gives only 139.

A naval historian would find useful material in the ship-lists of the years covered by the various editions of Battine's MSS.; and possibly when Mr. Oppenheim's large work, History of the Administration of the Royal Navy, approaches the end of the 17th century some information may be derived from this little-known series.

Though not claiming any knowledge of Naval matters, I may mention a few points that have struck me in reading this list. The largest ship was the Britannia, 146 ft. long, with 47 ft. breadth, and a burden of 1,546 tons. Such a vessel would not be large even for the channel passage of to-day from Dover to Calais, or from other of our ports to the continent; she would, indeed, be small beside some of the passage boats from Harwich. What the Britannia lacked in length she made up in

1 The portion of this interesting work which has already appeared was published in 1896, bringing the history down to 1660.