¹ Parliamentary Papers, Report from the Select Committee on Steam Navigation to India, XIV (1834), 188Google Scholar, testimony of McGregor Laird, steamship-builder; Holt, Alfred, “Review of the Progress of Steam Shipping during the Last Quarter of a Century,” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, LI (1877-1978), 2Google Scholar.

² Clapham, J. H., An Economic History of Modern Britain (2d ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1952), II, 71Google Scholar.

³ , Holt, “Review of the Progress of Steam Shipping,” 7Google Scholar.

⁴ Report of Glover Brothers (London) in “Commercial History and Review of 1865,” supplement to the Economist, XXIV (03 10, 1866), 19Google Scholar.

⁶ At £6 per ton, incidentally, double the usual freight for cotton. Times of India (Bombay), 05y 12, 1869Google Scholar.

⁶ Parliamentary Papers, Annual Statement of Trade and Navigation, LVIII (1868-1869), 402-8, 462–63Google Scholar.

⁷ Shipping and Mercantile Gazette (London), 12 6, 1869Google Scholar.

⁸ “The Suez Canal and its Relations to Commerce,” Banker's Magazine, XXX (1875), 270Google Scholar.

⁹ Samuda, Joseph D' Aguilar, “On the Influence of the Suez Canal on Ocean Navigation,” Transactions of the Institution of Naval Architects, XI (1870), I, 8Google Scholar.

¹⁰ “Nautical Topics of the Day,” Nautical Magazine, XXXIX (1870), 223Google Scholar.

¹¹ Economist, XXVII (1869), 1158Google Scholar.

¹² Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, tatistical Abstract for the United Kingdom and Tables showing the Progress of Merchant Shipping in the United Kingdom, LXXI (1910)Google Scholar.

¹³ Mitchell's Maritime Register (London), XVI (1871), 17Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Report of C. Moller (London) in “Commercial History and Review of 1872,” supplement to the Economist, XXXI (03 15, 1873), 44Google Scholar.

¹⁵ , Samuda, “On the Influence of the Suez Canal,” Journal of the Society of Arts, XVIII (1870), 505Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Allen's Indian Mail, XXIX (1871), 113Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Times of India (Bombay), 06 7, 1871Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Ibid.

¹⁹ Published in “Produce Shipments from Calcutta to Great Britain,” supplement to the British Trade Journal, XXI (08 I, 1883)Google Scholar.

²⁰ Ibid.

²¹ Cornewall-Jones, R. J., The British Merchant Service (London, S. Low, Marston & Company, 1898), p. 203Google Scholar.

²² “Commercial History and Review of 1871,” supplement to the Economist, XXX (03 16, 1872), 29Google Scholar. The method of calculating these profit figures is not described in the article.

²³ XVI (Nov. 3, 1871), 1391.

²⁴ In 1882 Robert Giffen expressed his belief that the 3:1 ratio grossly underestimated the efficiency of steamers. He was convinced that if sailing ships had to do all the work of steamers, it would be found that the steamer's efficiency would be nearer four to one. See his remarks on the paper presented by Glover, John, “The Tonnage Statistics of the Decade 1870-80,” Journal of the Statistical Society, XLV (1882), 37–58.Google Scholar

²⁵ Graham, Gerald S., “The Ascendancy of the Sailing Ship, 1850-85,” Economic History Review, 2d ser., IX (08 1956), 75, italics in the originalGoogle Scholar.

²⁶ Fayle, C. Ernest, A Short History of the World's Shipping Industry (London, G. Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1933), p. 241Google Scholar.

²⁷ Parliamentary Papers, Board of Trade, “Suez Canal (Trade from the East): Return …,” LXIV (1883), p. 4Google Scholar.

²⁸ Sargent, A. J., Seaways of the Empire (London, A. & C. Black, Ltd., 1918), p. 52Google Scholar.

²⁹ XXVII (1869), 1367.

³⁰ Based on data compiled from the Supplement to Worms & Coy's Suez Canal Weekly Shipping List (London, 1911)Google Scholar.

³¹ See Parliamentary Papers, Trade of British India, 1874-75 to 1878-79, LXXI (1880), xiiiGoogle Scholar.

³² French shipping during the same year amounted to 5 per cent of the total, Dutch shipping 5 per cent, and Austro-Hungarian 4 per cent Based on data compiled from the Supplement to Worms & Coy's Suez Canal Weekly Shipping List (London, 1911)Google Scholar.

³³ Fairlie, J. A., “The Economic Effects of Ship Canals,” Annals of the American Academy, XI (1898), 66Google Scholar.

³⁴ Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for the United Kingdom.

³⁵ Parliamentary Papers, Trade of British India, 1879-80 to 1883-84, LVIII (1884-1885), viGoogle Scholar.

³⁶ Ibid. On a tonnage instead of a value basis, of course, the percentages in all cases would be somewhat lower.

³⁷ Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for British India.

³⁸ Sargent, A. J., Seaways of the Empire (London, A. & C. Black, Ltd., 1918), p. 64Google Scholar. If every ton of utilizable capacity had been fully employed the load-index would have been 1.0 or 100 per cent. Sargent assumed that a net register ton of shipping could carry two 40-cubic-tons of freight. If a 1,000-ton steamer had on board 2,000 measurement tons of freight, therefore, its load-index was 1.0.

³⁹ Ibid., p. 67.

⁴⁰ Ibid., pp. 92-93.

⁴¹ See Parliamentary Papers, Annual Statement of the Navigation and Shipping of the United Kingdom for the Year 1913, LXXXII (1914), 30 ffGoogle Scholar.

⁴² Mookerji, Radhakumud, Indian Shipping (London, Longmans, Green and Co., 1912), p. 255Google Scholar.

⁴³ See ibid., p. 255, and Parliamentary Papers, Trade of British India, 1871-72 to 1875-76, LXXX (1877), lviii–lixGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁴ Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for British India. During the same period Britain's share of total Indian imports fell only from 70 to 65 per cent. Ibid.

⁴⁵ See Saul, S. B., “Britain and World Trade, 1870–1914,” Economic History Review, 2d ser., VII (1954-1955). 61Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ lbid., p. 51.

⁴⁷ Root, J. W., The Trade Relations of the British Empire (2d ed., Liverpool, J. W. Root, 1904), p. 148Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for British India.