Download the Full Version of textbook for Fast Typing at textbookfull.

com

Introduction to Probability and Statistics for

Engineers and Scientists 6th Edition Sheldon M.
Ross

https://textbookfull.com/product/introduction-to-
probability-and-statistics-for-engineers-and-scientists-6th-
edition-sheldon-m-ross/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Download More textbook Instantly Today - Get Yours Now at textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Probability statistics for engineers scientists Walpole

https://textbookfull.com/product/probability-statistics-for-engineers-
scientists-walpole/

textboxfull.com

Statistics for Engineers and Scientists William Navidi

https://textbookfull.com/product/statistics-for-engineers-and-
scientists-william-navidi/

textboxfull.com

Probability and statistics for computer scientists Third

Edition Michael Baron

https://textbookfull.com/product/probability-and-statistics-for-
computer-scientists-third-edition-michael-baron/

textboxfull.com

Statistics and Probability with Applications for Engineers

and Scientists Using MINITAB, R and JMP 2nd Edition
Bhisham C. Gupta
https://textbookfull.com/product/statistics-and-probability-with-
applications-for-engineers-and-scientists-using-minitab-r-and-jmp-2nd-
edition-bhisham-c-gupta/
textboxfull.com
Statistics for Engineers and Scientists 5th Edition
William Navidi

https://textbookfull.com/product/statistics-for-engineers-and-
scientists-5th-edition-william-navidi/

textboxfull.com

Miller Freund s probability and statistics for engineers

Freund

https://textbookfull.com/product/miller-freund-s-probability-and-
statistics-for-engineers-freund/

textboxfull.com

Probability, Statistics, and Stochastic Processes for

Engineers and Scientists (Mathematical Engineering,
Manufacturing, and Management Sciences) First Edition
Aliakbar Montazer Haghighi
https://textbookfull.com/product/probability-statistics-and-
stochastic-processes-for-engineers-and-scientists-mathematical-
engineering-manufacturing-and-management-sciences-first-edition-
aliakbar-montazer-haghighi/
textboxfull.com

Turbulence an introduction for scientists and engineers

Davidson

https://textbookfull.com/product/turbulence-an-introduction-for-
scientists-and-engineers-davidson/

textboxfull.com

Introduction to Probability and Statistics Metric Edition

1925-2009) Mendenhall

https://textbookfull.com/product/introduction-to-probability-and-
statistics-metric-edition-1925-2009-mendenhall/

textboxfull.com
 Introduction to Probability and
Statistics for Engineers and Scientists
Introduction to Probability
and Statistics for
Engineers and Scientists
Sixth Edition

Sheldon M. Ross
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA, United States
Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier
125 London Wall, London EC2Y 5AS, United Kingdom
525 B Street, Suite 1650, San Diego, CA 92101, United States
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further
information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such
as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website:
www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the
Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience
broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment
may become necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating
and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such
information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including
parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume
any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability,
negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas
contained in the material herein.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-12-824346-6

For information on all Academic Press publications

visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Katey Birtcher

Editorial Project Manager: Sara Valentino
Production Project Manager: Rukmani Krishnan
Designer: Patrick Ferguson
Typeset by VTeX
 For
Elise
 Contents

PREFACE ...........................................................................................................xiii
CHAPTER 1 Introduction to statistics............................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction ....................................................................... 1
1.2 Data collection and descriptive statistics........................ 1
1.3 Inferential statistics and probability models................... 2
1.4 Populations and samples ................................................. 3
1.5 A brief history of statistics................................................ 4
Problems ........................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 2 Descriptive statistics................................................................ 11
2.1 Introduction ..................................................................... 11
2.2 Describing data sets ....................................................... 12
2.2.1 Frequency tables and graphs ............................. 12
2.2.2 Relative frequency tables and graphs................ 14
2.2.3 Grouped data, histograms, ogives, and
stem and leaf plots.............................................. 16
2.3 Summarizing data sets................................................... 19
2.3.1 Sample mean, sample median, and sample
mode..................................................................... 19
2.3.2 Sample variance and sample standard
deviation ............................................................... 24
2.3.3 Sample percentiles and box plots ...................... 26
2.4 Chebyshev’s inequality ................................................... 29
2.5 Normal data sets ............................................................ 33
2.6 Paired data sets and the sample
correlation coefficient..................................................... 36
2.7 The Lorenz curve and Gini index.................................... 43
2.8 Using R ............................................................................ 48
Problems ......................................................................... 52
CHAPTER 3 Elements of probability............................................................ 63
3.1 Introduction ..................................................................... 63
3.2 Sample space and events............................................... 64 vii
viii Contents

3.3 Venn diagrams and the algebra of events..................... 66

3.4 Axioms of probability ...................................................... 67
3.5 Sample spaces having equally likely outcomes............ 70
3.6 Conditional probability.................................................... 75
3.7 Bayes’ formula ................................................................ 79
3.8 Independent events ........................................................ 86
Problems ......................................................................... 89
CHAPTER 4 Random variables and expectation......................................... 99
4.1 Random variables ........................................................... 99
4.2 Types of random variables ........................................... 102
4.3 Jointly distributed random variables........................... 105
4.3.1 Independent random variables......................... 111
4.3.2 Conditional distributions................................... 114
4.4 Expectation.................................................................... 117
4.5 Properties of the expected value ................................. 121
4.5.1 Expected value of sums of random variables.. 124
4.6 Variance ......................................................................... 128
4.7 Covariance and variance of sums of
random variables .......................................................... 132
4.8 Moment generating functions...................................... 138
4.9 Chebyshev’s inequality and the weak law of large
numbers ........................................................................ 139
Problems ....................................................................... 142
CHAPTER 5 Special random variables ...................................................... 151
5.1 The Bernoulli and binomial random variables ........... 151
5.1.1 Using R to calculate binomial probabilities..... 157
5.2 The Poisson random variable....................................... 158
5.2.1 Using R to calculate Poisson probabilities ...... 166
5.3 The hypergeometric random variable ......................... 167
5.4 The uniform random variable ...................................... 171
5.5 Normal random variables ............................................ 179
5.6 Exponential random variables ..................................... 190
5.6.1 The Poisson process ......................................... 193
5.6.2 The Pareto distribution ..................................... 196
5.7 The gamma distribution ............................................... 199
5.8 Distributions arising from the normal ........................ 201
5.8.1 The chi-square distribution .............................. 201
5.8.2 The t -distribution .............................................. 206
5.8.3 The F -distribution ............................................. 208
5.9 The logistics distribution .............................................. 209
5.10 Distributions in R .......................................................... 210
Problems ....................................................................... 212
 Contents ix

CHAPTER 6 Distributions of sampling statistics ...................................... 221

6.1 Introduction ................................................................... 221
6.2 The sample mean ......................................................... 222
6.3 The central limit theorem ............................................ 224
6.3.1 Approximate distribution of the sample mean 227
6.3.2 How large a sample is needed?........................ 230
6.4 The sample variance..................................................... 230
6.5 Sampling distributions from a normal population ..... 231
6.5.1 Distribution of the sample mean...................... 232
6.5.2 Joint distribution of X and S 2 ........................... 232
6.6 Sampling from a finite population ............................... 234
Problems ....................................................................... 238
CHAPTER 7 Parameter estimation............................................................ 245
7.1 Introduction ................................................................... 245
7.2 Maximum likelihood estimators .................................. 246
7.2.1 Estimating life distributions ............................. 255
7.3 Interval estimates ......................................................... 257
7.3.1 Confidence interval for a normal mean when
the variance is unknown ................................... 262
7.3.2 Prediction intervals ........................................... 268
7.3.3 Confidence intervals for the variance of a
normal distribution ........................................... 269
7.4 Estimating the difference in means of two normal
populations.................................................................... 270
7.5 Approximate confidence interval for the mean of a
Bernoulli random variable ........................................... 275
7.6 Confidence interval of the mean of the exponential
distribution ................................................................... 280
7.7 Evaluating a point estimator ........................................ 281
7.8 The Bayes estimator..................................................... 287
Problems ....................................................................... 292
CHAPTER 8 Hypothesis testing ................................................................. 305
8.1 Introduction ................................................................... 305
8.2 Significance levels ........................................................ 306
8.3 Tests concerning the mean of a normal population... 307
8.3.1 Case of known variance .................................... 307
8.3.2 Case of unknown variance: the t -test.............. 319
8.4 Testing the equality of means of two normal
populations.................................................................... 326
8.4.1 Case of known variances .................................. 326
8.4.2 Case of unknown variances .............................. 328
8.4.3 Case of unknown and unequal variances ........ 333
8.4.4 The paired t -test................................................ 333
8.5 Hypothesis tests concerning the variance of a
normal population ........................................................ 336
x Contents

8.5.1 Testing for the equality of variances of two

normal populations ........................................... 337
8.6 Hypothesis tests in Bernoulli populations .................. 339
8.6.1 Testing the equality of parameters in two
Bernoulli populations........................................ 342
8.7 Tests concerning the mean of a Poisson distribution 345
8.7.1 Testing the relationship between two
Poisson parameters .......................................... 346
Problems ....................................................................... 348
CHAPTER 9 Regression.............................................................................. 365
9.1 Introduction ................................................................... 365
9.2 Least squares estimators of the
regression parameters................................................. 367
9.3 Distribution of the estimators ...................................... 371
9.4 Statistical inferences about the
regression parameters................................................. 377
9.4.1 Inferences concerning β ................................... 377
9.4.2 Inferences concerning α ................................... 386
9.4.3 Inferences concerning the mean response
α + βx0 ............................................................... 386
9.4.4 Prediction interval of a future response .......... 389
9.4.5 Summary of distributional results ................... 392
9.5 The coefficient of determination and the sample
correlation coefficient................................................... 392
9.6 Analysis of residuals: assessing the model ................ 395
9.7 Transforming to linearity.............................................. 396
9.8 Weighted least squares ................................................ 400
9.9 Polynomial regression.................................................. 406
9.10 Multiple linear regression ............................................ 410
9.10.1 Predicting future responses ............................. 420
9.10.2 Dummy variables for categorical data ............. 424
9.11 Logistic regression models for binary output data..... 425
Problems ....................................................................... 429
CHAPTER 10 Analysis of variance ............................................................... 453
10.1 Introduction ................................................................... 453
10.2 An overview ................................................................... 454
10.3 One-way analysis of variance....................................... 456
10.3.1 Using R to do the computations ....................... 463
10.3.2 Multiple comparisons of sample means.......... 466
10.3.3 One-way analysis of variance with unequal
sample sizes ...................................................... 468
10.4 Two-factor analysis of variance: introduction and
parameter estimation................................................... 470
10.5 Two-factor analysis of variance: testing hypotheses.. 474
 Contents xi

10.6 Two-way analysis of variance with interaction ........... 479

Problems ....................................................................... 487
CHAPTER 11 Goodness of fit tests and categorical data analysis............. 499
11.1 Introduction ................................................................... 499
11.2 Goodness of fit tests when all parameters are
specified ........................................................................ 500
11.2.1 Determining the critical region by simulation. 506
11.3 Goodness of fit tests when some parameters are
unspecified .................................................................... 508
11.4 Tests of independence in contingency tables.............. 510
11.5 Tests of independence in contingency tables having
fixed marginal totals..................................................... 514
11.6 The Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness of fit test for
continuous data............................................................. 517
Problems ....................................................................... 522
CHAPTER 12 Nonparametric hypothesis tests........................................... 529
12.1 Introduction ................................................................... 529
12.2 The sign test.................................................................. 529
12.3 The signed rank test ..................................................... 533
12.4 The two-sample problem ............................................. 538
12.4.1 Testing the equality of multiple probability
distributions....................................................... 541
12.5 The runs test for randomness ..................................... 544
Problems ....................................................................... 547
CHAPTER 13 Quality control ........................................................................ 555
13.1 Introduction ................................................................... 555
13.2 Control charts for average values: the x control
chart............................................................................... 556
13.2.1 Case of unknown μ and σ ................................. 559
13.3 S-control charts ............................................................ 564
13.4 Control charts for the fraction defective ..................... 567
13.5 Control charts for number of defects.......................... 569
13.6 Other control charts for detecting changes in the
population mean ........................................................... 573
13.6.1 Moving-average control charts ........................ 573
13.6.2 Exponentially weighted moving-average
control charts .................................................... 576
13.6.3 Cumulative sum control charts ........................ 581
Problems ....................................................................... 583
CHAPTER 14 Life testing∗ ............................................................................ 591
14.1 Introduction ................................................................... 591
14.2 Hazard rate functions ................................................... 591

∗ Optional chapter.
xii Contents

14.3 The exponential distribution in life testing.................. 594

14.3.1 Simultaneous testing — stopping at the rth
failure ................................................................. 594
14.3.2 Sequential testing ............................................. 599
14.3.3 Simultaneous testing — stopping by a fixed
time .................................................................... 603
14.3.4 The Bayesian approach ..................................... 606
14.4 A two-sample problem ................................................. 607
14.5 The Weibull distribution in life testing......................... 609
14.5.1 Parameter estimation by least squares........... 611
Problems ....................................................................... 613
CHAPTER 15 Simulation, bootstrap statistical methods, and
permutation tests................................................................... 619
15.1 Introduction ................................................................... 619
15.2 Random numbers ......................................................... 619
15.2.1 The Monte Carlo simulation approach............. 622
15.3 The bootstrap method .................................................. 623
15.4 Permutation tests ......................................................... 631
15.4.1 Normal approximations in permutation tests . 634
15.4.2 Two-sample permutation tests ........................ 637
15.5 Generating discrete random variables........................ 639
15.6 Generating continuous random variables................... 641
15.6.1 Generating a normal random variable............. 643
15.7 Determining the number of simulation runs
in a Monte Carlo study.................................................. 644
Problems ....................................................................... 645
CHAPTER 16 Machine learning and big data.............................................. 649
16.1 Introduction ................................................................... 649
16.2 Late flight probabilities ................................................ 650
16.3 The naive Bayes approach............................................ 651
16.3.1 A variation of naive Bayes approach ................ 654
16.4 Distance-based estimators. The k-nearest
neighbors rule............................................................... 657
16.4.1 A distance-weighted method............................ 658
16.4.2 Component-weighted distances....................... 659
16.5 Assessing the approaches............................................ 660
16.6 When characterizing vectors are quantitative ............ 662
16.6.1 Nearest neighbor rules ..................................... 662
16.6.2 Logistics regression .......................................... 663
16.7 Choosing the best probability: a bandit problem........ 664
Problems ....................................................................... 666
APPENDIX OF TABLES ................................................................................... 669
INDEX .............................................................................................................. 673
Preface

The sixth edition of this book continues to demonstrate how to apply probabil-
ity theory to gain insight into real, everyday statistical problems and situations.
As in the previous editions, carefully developed coverage of probability mo-
tivates probabilistic models of real phenomena and the statistical procedures
that follow. This approach ultimately results in an intuitive understanding of
statistical procedures and strategies most often used by practicing engineers
and scientists.
This book has been written for an introductory course in statistics or in proba-
bility and statistics for students in engineering, computer science, mathematics,
statistics, and the natural sciences. As such it assumes knowledge of elementary
calculus.

Organization and coverage

Chapter 1 presents a brief introduction to statistics, presenting its two branches
of descriptive and inferential statistics, and a short history of the subject and
some of the people whose early work provided a foundation for work done
today.
The subject matter of descriptive statistics is then considered in Chapter 2.
Graphs and tables that describe a data set are presented in this chapter, as are
quantities that are used to summarize certain of the key properties of the data
set.
To be able to draw conclusions from data, it is necessary to have an under-
standing of the data’s origination. For instance, it is often assumed that the
data constitute a “random sample” from some population. To understand ex-
actly what this means and what its consequences are for relating properties of
the sample data to properties of the entire population, it is necessary to have
some understanding of probability, and that is the subject of Chapter 3. This
chapter introduces the idea of a probability experiment, explains the concept
of the probability of an event, and presents the axioms of probability. xiii
xiv Preface

Our study of probability is continued in Chapter 4, which deals with the

important concepts of random variables and expectation, and in Chapter 5,
which considers some special types of random variables that often occur in ap-
plications. Such random variables as the binomial, Poisson, hypergeometric,
normal, uniform, gamma, chi-square, t, and F are presented.
In Chapter 6, we study the probability distribution of such sampling statistics
as the sample mean and the sample variance. We show how to use a remark-
able theoretical result of probability, known as the central limit theorem, to
approximate the probability distribution of the sample mean. In addition, we
present the joint probability distribution of the sample mean and the sample
variance in the important special case in which the underlying data come from
a normally distributed population.
Chapter 7 shows how to use data to estimate parameters of interest. For in-
stance, a scientist might be interested in determining the proportion of Mid-
western lakes that are afflicted by acid rain. Two types of estimators are studied.
The first of these estimates the quantity of interest with a single number (for
instance, it might estimate that 47 percent of Midwestern lakes suffer from acid
rain), whereas the second provides an estimate in the form of an interval of
values (for instance, it might estimate that between 45 and 49 percent of lakes
suffer from acid rain). These latter estimators also tell us the “level of con-
fidence” we can have in their validity. Thus, for instance, whereas we can be
pretty certain that the exact percentage of afflicted lakes is not 47, it might very
well be that we can be, say, 95 percent confident that the actual percentage is
between 45 and 49.
Chapter 8 introduces the important topic of statistical hypothesis testing,
which is concerned with using data to test the plausibility of a specified hy-
pothesis. For instance, such a test might reject the hypothesis that fewer than
44 percent of Midwestern lakes are afflicted by acid rain. The concept of the
p-value, which measures the degree of plausibility of the hypothesis after the
data have been observed, is introduced. A variety of hypothesis tests concerning
the parameters of both one and two normal populations are considered. Hy-
pothesis tests concerning Bernoulli and Poisson parameters are also presented.
Chapter 9 deals with the important topic of regression. Both simple linear
regression — including such subtopics as regression to the mean, residual anal-
ysis, and weighted least squares — and multiple linear regression are consid-
ered.
Chapter 10 introduces the analysis of variance. Both one-way and two-way
(with and without the possibility of interaction) problems are considered.
Chapter 11 is concerned with goodness of fit tests, which can be used to test
whether a proposed model is consistent with data. In it we present the classical
chi-square goodness of fit test and apply it to test for independence in con-
tingency tables. The final section of this chapter introduces the Kolmogorov–
 Preface xv

Smirnov procedure for testing whether data come from a specified continuous
probability distribution.
Chapter 12 deals with nonparametric hypothesis tests, which can be used
when one is unable to suppose that the underlying distribution has some spec-
ified parametric form (such as normal).
Chapter 13 considers the subject matter of quality control, a key statistical tech-
nique in manufacturing and production processes. A variety of control charts,
including not only the Shewhart control charts but also more sophisticated
ones based on moving averages and cumulative sums, are considered.
Chapter 14 deals with problems related to life testing. In this chapter, the ex-
ponential, rather than the normal, distribution plays the key role.
In Chapter 15, we consider the statistical inference techniques of bootstrap sta-
tistical methods and permutation tests. We first show how probabilities can be
obtained by simulation and then how to utilize simulation in these statistical
inference approaches.
Chapter 16, new to this edition, introduces machine learning and big data
techniques. These are methods that are applicable in situations where one has
a large amount of data that can be used to estimate probabilities without as-
suming any particular probability model. For instance, we consider situations
where one wants to estimate the probability that an experiment, characterized
by a vector (x1 , . . . , xn ), will be a success. When the characterizing vectors are
qualitative in nature, such techniques as the naive Bayes approach, and nearest
neighbor rules are studied. In cases where the components of the characteristic
vector are quantitative, we also study logistic regression models.
Aside from the newly added Chapter 16, the most important change in this
edition is the use of the statistical software R. No previous experience with R is
necessary, and we incorporate its use throught the text. Aside from additional
subsections devoted to R. we also have the newly added Section 2.7, dealing
with Lorenz curves and the Gini index. There are also many new examples and
problems in this edition. In addition, the sixth edition contains a multitude of
small changes designed to even further increase the clarity of the text’s presen-
tations and arguments.

Supplemental materials

Solutions manual for instructors is available at: https://textbooks.elsevier.com/

web/Manuals.aspx?isbn=9780128243466.
xvi Preface

Acknowledgments
We thank the following people for their helpful comments on material of the
sixth edition:

■ Gideon Weiss, University of Haifa

■ N. Balakrishnan, McMaster University
■ Mark Brown, Columbia University
■ Rohitha Goonatilake, Texas A and M University
■ Steve From, University of Nebraska at Omaha
■ Subhash Kochar, Portland State University
■ Sumona Mondal, Mathematics, Clarkson University
■ Kamel Belbahri, Mathematics and Statistics, Université de Montréal
■ Anil Aswani, Industrial Engineering and Operations Research, University
of California, Berkeley

as well as all those reviewers who asked to remain anonymous.

 CHAPTER 1

Introduction to statistics

1.1 Introduction
It has become accepted in today’s world that in order to learn about something,
you must first collect data. Statistics is the art of learning from data. It is con-
cerned with the collection of data, its subsequent description, and its analysis,
which often leads to the drawing of conclusions.

1.2 Data collection and descriptive statistics

Sometimes a statistical analysis begins with a given set of data: For instance, the
government regularly collects and publicizes data concerning yearly precipita-
tion totals, earthquake occurrences, the unemployment rate, the gross domestic
product, and the rate of inflation. Statistics can be used to describe, summarize,
and analyze these data.
In other situations, data are not yet available; in such cases statistical theory can
be used to design an appropriate experiment to generate data. The experiment
chosen should depend on the use that one wants to make of the data. For
instance, suppose that an instructor is interested in determining which of two
different methods for teaching computer programming to beginners is most
effective. To study this question, the instructor might divide the students into
two groups, and use a different teaching method for each group. At the end
of the class the students can be tested and the scores of the members of the
different groups compared. If the data, consisting of the test scores of members
of each group, are significantly higher in one of the groups, then it might seem
reasonable to suppose that the teaching method used for that group is superior.
It is important to note, however, that in order to be able to draw a valid con-
clusion from the data, it is essential that the students were divided into groups
in such a manner that neither group was more likely to have the students with
greater natural aptitude for programming. For instance, the instructor should
not have let the male class members be one group and the females the other.
For if so, then even if the women scored significantly higher than the men, it
would not be clear whether this was due to the method used to teach them,
or to the fact that women may be inherently better than men at learning pro- 1

Introduction to Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824346-6.00010-7

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
2 CHAP TER 1: Introduction to statistics

gramming skills. The accepted way of avoiding this pitfall is to divide the class
members into the two groups “at random.” This term means that the division
is done in such a manner that all possible choices of the members of a group
are equally likely.
At the end of the experiment, the data should be described. For instance, the
scores of the two groups should be presented. In addition, summary mea-
sures such as the average score of members of each of the groups should be
presented. This part of statistics, concerned with the description and summa-
rization of data, is called descriptive statistics.

1.3 Inferential statistics and probability models

After the preceding experiment is completed and the data are described and
summarized, we hope to be able to draw a conclusion about which teaching
method is superior. This part of statistics, concerned with the drawing of con-
clusions, is called inferential statistics.
To be able to draw a conclusion from the data, we must take into account the
possibility of chance. For instance, suppose that the average score of members
of the first group is quite a bit higher than that of the second. Can we conclude
that this increase is due to the teaching method used? Or is it possible that the
teaching method was not responsible for the increased scores but rather that
the higher scores of the first group were just a chance occurrence? For instance,
the fact that a coin comes up heads 7 times in 10 flips does not necessarily
mean that the coin is more likely to come up heads than tails in future flips.
Indeed, it could be a perfectly ordinary coin that, by chance, just happened to
land heads 7 times out of the total of 10 flips. (On the other hand, if the coin
had landed heads 47 times out of 50 flips, then we would be quite certain that
it was not an ordinary coin.)
To be able to draw logical conclusions from data, we usually make some as-
sumptions about the chances (or probabilities) of obtaining the different data
values. The totality of these assumptions is referred to as a probability model for
the data.
Sometimes the nature of the data suggests the form of the probability model
that is assumed. For instance, suppose that an engineer wants to find out what
proportion of computer chips, produced by a new method, will be defective.
The engineer might select a group of these chips, with the resulting data being
the number of defective chips in this group. Provided that the chips selected
were “randomly” chosen, it is reasonable to suppose that each one of them is
defective with probability p, where p is the unknown proportion of all the chips
produced by the new method that will be defective. The resulting data can then
be used to make inferences about p.
 1.4 Populations and samples 3

In other situations, the appropriate probability model for a given data set will
not be readily apparent. However, careful description and presentation of the
data sometimes enable us to infer a reasonable model, which we can then try
to verify with the use of additional data.
Because the basis of statistical inference is the formulation of a probability
model to describe the data, an understanding of statistical inference requires
some knowledge of the theory of probability. In other words, statistical infer-
ence starts with the assumption that important aspects of the phenomenon
under study can be described in terms of probabilities; it then draws conclu-
sions by using data to make inferences about these probabilities.

1.4 Populations and samples

In statistics, we are interested in obtaining information about a total collection
of elements, which we will refer to as the population. The population is often too
large for us to examine each of its members. For instance, we might have all the
residents of a given state, or all the television sets produced in the last year by
a particular manufacturer, or all the households in a given community. In such
cases, we try to learn about the population by choosing and then examining a
subgroup of its elements. This subgroup of a population is called a sample.
If the sample is to be informative about the total population, it must be, in
some sense, representative of that population. For instance, suppose that we are
interested in learning about the age distribution of people residing in a given
city, and we obtain the ages of the first 100 people to enter the town library. If
the average age of these 100 people is 46.2 years, are we justified in concluding
that this is approximately the average age of the entire population? Probably
not, for we could certainly argue that the sample chosen in this case is probably
not representative of the total population because usually more young students
and senior citizens use the library than do working-age citizens.
In certain situations, such as the library illustration, we are presented with a
sample and must then decide whether this sample is reasonably representative
of the entire population. In practice, a given sample generally cannot be as-
sumed to be representative of a population unless that sample has been chosen
in a random manner. This is because any specific nonrandom rule for selecting
a sample often results in one that is inherently biased toward some data values
as opposed to others.
Thus, although it may seem paradoxical, we are most likely to obtain a repre-
sentative sample by choosing its members in a totally random fashion without
any prior considerations of the elements that will be chosen. In other words, we
need not attempt to deliberately choose the sample so that it contains, for in-
stance, the same gender percentage and the same percentage of people in each
profession as found in the general population. Rather, we should just leave it
4 CHAP TE R 1: Introduction to statistics

up to “chance” to obtain roughly the correct percentages. Once a random sam-

ple is chosen, we can use statistical inference to draw conclusions about the
entire population by studying the elements of the sample.

1.5 A brief history of statistics

A systematic collection of data on the population and the economy was begun
in the Italian city-states of Venice and Florence during the Renaissance. The
term statistics, derived from the word state, was used to refer to a collection of
facts of interest to the state. The idea of collecting data spread from Italy to the
other countries of Western Europe. Indeed, by the first half of the 16th cen-
tury it was common for European governments to require parishes to register
births, marriages, and deaths. Because of poor public health conditions this
last statistic was of particular interest.
The high mortality rate in Europe before the 19th century was due mainly to
epidemic diseases, wars, and famines. Among epidemics, the worst were the
plagues. Starting with the Black Plague in 1348, plagues recurred frequently
for nearly 400 years. In 1562, as a way to alert the King’s court to consider
moving to the countryside, the City of London began to publish weekly bills of
mortality. Initially these mortality bills listed the places of death and whether
a death had resulted from plague. Beginning in 1625 the bills were expanded
to include all causes of death.
In 1662 the English tradesman John Graunt published a book entitled Natural
and Political Observations Made upon the Bills of Mortality. Table 1.1, which notes
the total number of deaths in England and the number due to the plague for
five different plague years, is taken from this book.

Table 1.1 Total Deaths in England.

Year Burials Plague Deaths
1592 25,886 11,503
1593 17,844 10,662
1603 37,294 30,561
1625 51,758 35,417
1636 23,359 10,400
Source: John Graunt, Observations Made upon the Bills of Mortal-
ity. 3rd ed. London: John Martyn and James Allestry (1st ed. 1662).

Graunt used London bills of mortality to estimate the city’s population. For in-
stance, to estimate the population of London in 1660, Graunt surveyed house-
holds in certain London parishes (or neighborhoods) and discovered that, on
average, there were approximately 3 deaths for every 88 people. Dividing by 3
shows that, on average, there was roughly 1 death for every 88/3 people. Be-
cause the London bills cited 13,200 deaths in London for that year, Graunt
 1.5 A brief history of statistics 5

Table 1.2 John Graunt’s Mortality Table.

Age at Death Number of Deaths per
100 Births
0–6 36
6–16 24
16–26 15
26–36 9
36–46 6
46–56 4
56–66 3
66–76 2
76 and greater 1
Note: The categories go up to but do not include the right-hand
value. For instance, 0–6 means all ages from 0 up through 5.

estimated the London population to be about

13,200 × 88/3 = 387,200

Graunt used this estimate to project a figure for all England. In his book he
noted that these figures would be of interest to the rulers of the country, as
indicators of both the number of men who could be drafted into an army and
the number who could be taxed.
Graunt also used the London bills of mortality — and some intelligent guess-
work as to what diseases killed whom and at what age — to infer ages at death.
(Recall that the bills of mortality listed only causes and places at death, not the
ages of those dying.) Graunt then used this information to compute tables giv-
ing the proportion of the population that dies at various ages. Table 1.2 is one
of Graunt’s mortality tables. It states, for instance, that of 100 births, 36 people
will die before reaching age 6, 24 will die between the age of 6 and 15, and so
on.
Graunt’s estimates of the ages at which people were dying were of great interest
to those in the business of selling annuities. Annuities are the opposite of life
insurance in that one pays in a lump sum as an investment and then receives
regular payments for as long as one lives.
Graunt’s work on mortality tables inspired further work by Edmund Halley
in 1693. Halley, the discoverer of the comet bearing his name (and also the
man who was most responsible, by both his encouragement and his financial
support, for the publication of Isaac Newton’s famous Principia Mathematica),
used tables of mortality to compute the odds that a person of any age would
live to any other particular age. Halley was influential in convincing the insurers
of the time that an annual life insurance premium should depend on the age
of the person being insured.
6 CHAP TE R 1: Introduction to statistics

Following Graunt and Halley, the collection of data steadily increased through-
out the remainder of the 17th and on into the 18th century. For instance, the
city of Paris began collecting bills of mortality in 1667, and by 1730 it had
become common practice throughout Europe to record ages at death.
The term statistics, which was used until the 18th century as a shorthand for the
descriptive science of states, became in the 19th century increasingly identified
with numbers. By the 1830s the term was almost universally regarded in Britain
and France as being synonymous with the “numerical science” of society. This
change in meaning was caused by the large availability of census records and
other tabulations that began to be systematically collected and published by
the governments of Western Europe and the United States beginning around
1800.
Throughout the 19th century, although probability theory had been developed
by such mathematicians as Jacob Bernoulli, Karl Friedrich Gauss, and Pierre-
Simon Laplace, its use in studying statistical findings was almost nonexistent,
because most social statisticians at the time were content to let the data speak
for themselves. In particular, statisticians of that time were not interested in
drawing inferences about individuals, but rather were concerned with the soci-
ety as a whole. Thus, they were not concerned with sampling but rather tried
to obtain censuses of the entire population. As a result, probabilistic infer-
ence from samples to a population was almost unknown in 19th century social
statistics.
It was not until the late 1800s that statistics became concerned with inferring
conclusions from numerical data. The movement began with Francis Galton’s
work on analyzing hereditary genius through the uses of what we would now
call regression and correlation analysis (see Chapter 9), and obtained much
of its impetus from the work of Karl Pearson. Pearson, who developed the
chi-square goodness of fit tests (see Chapter 11), was the first director of the
Galton Laboratory, endowed by Francis Galton in 1904. There Pearson origi-
nated a research program aimed at developing new methods of using statistics
in inference. His laboratory invited advanced students from science and in-
dustry to learn statistical methods that could then be applied in their fields.
One of his earliest visiting researchers was W.S. Gosset, a chemist by training,
who showed his devotion to Pearson by publishing his own works under the
name “Student.” (A famous story has it that Gosset was afraid to publish un-
der his own name for fear that his employers, the Guinness brewery, would be
unhappy to discover that one of its chemists was doing research in statistics.)
Gosset is famous for his development of the t-test (see Chapter 8).
Two of the most important areas of applied statistics in the early 20th century
were population biology and agriculture. This was due to the interest of Pear-
son and others at his laboratory and also to the remarkable accomplishments
of the English scientist Ronald A. Fisher. The theory of inference developed by
these pioneers, including among others Karl Pearson’s son Egon and the Pol-
 Problems 7

Table 1.3 The Changing Definition of Statistics.

Statistics has then for its object that of presenting a faithful representation of a state at a
determined epoch. (Quetelet, 1849)
Statistics are the only tools by which an opening can be cut through the formidable thicket
of difficulties that bars the path of those who pursue the Science of man. (Galton, 1889)
Statistics may be regarded (i) as the study of populations, (ii) as the study of variation, and
(iii) as the study of methods of the reduction of data. (Fisher, 1925)
Statistics is a scientific discipline concerned with collection, analysis, and interpretation of
data obtained from observation or experiment. The subject has a coherent structure based
on the theory of Probability and includes many different procedures which contribute to
research and development throughout the whole of Science and Technology. (E. Pearson,
1936)
Statistics is the name for that science and art which deals with uncertain inferences —
which uses numbers to find out something about nature and experience. (Weaver, 1952)
Statistics has become known in the 20th century as the mathematical tool for analyzing
experimental and observational data. (Porter, 1986)
Statistics is the art of learning from data. (this book, 2020)

ish born mathematical statistician Jerzy Neyman, was general enough to deal
with a wide range of quantitative and practical problems. As a result, after the
early years of the 20th century a rapidly increasing number of people in sci-
ence, business, and government began to regard statistics as a tool that was
able to provide quantitative solutions to scientific and practical problems (see
Table 1.3).
Nowadays the ideas of statistics are everywhere. Descriptive statistics are fea-
tured in every newspaper and magazine. Statistical inference has become indis-
pensable to public health and medical research, to engineering and scientific
studies, to marketing and quality control, to education, to accounting, to eco-
nomics, to meteorological forecasting, to polling and surveys, to sports, to
insurance, to gambling, and to all research that makes any claim to being sci-
entific. Statistics has indeed become ingrained in our intellectual heritage.

Problems
1. An election will be held next week and, by polling a sample of the voting
population, we are trying to predict whether the Republican or Demo-
cratic candidate will prevail. Which of the following methods of selection
is likely to yield a representative sample?
a. Poll all people of voting age attending a college basketball game.
b. Poll all people of voting age leaving a fancy midtown restaurant.
c. Obtain a copy of the voter registration list, randomly choose 100
names, and question them.
8 CHAP TER 1: Introduction to statistics

d. Use the results of a television call-in poll, in which the station asked
its listeners to call in and name their choice.
e. Choose names from the telephone directory and call these people.
2. The approach used in Problem 1(e) led to a disastrous prediction in the
1936 presidential election, in which Franklin Roosevelt defeated Alfred
Landon by a landslide. A Landon victory had been predicted by the Lit-
erary Digest. The magazine based its prediction on the preferences of a
sample of voters chosen from lists of automobile and telephone owners.
a. Why do you think the Literary Digest’s prediction was so far off?
b. Has anything changed between 1936 and now that would make you
believe that the approach used by the Literary Digest would work
better today?
3. A researcher is trying to discover the average age at death for people in the
United States today. To obtain data, the obituary columns of the New York
Times are read for 30 days, and the ages at death of people in the United
States are noted. Do you think this approach will lead to a representative
sample?
4. To determine the proportion of people in your town who are smokers, it
has been decided to poll people at one of the following local spots:
a. the pool hall;
b. the bowling alley;
c. the shopping mall;
d. the library.
Which of these potential polling places would most likely result in a rea-
sonable approximation to the desired proportion? Why?
5. A university plans on conducting a survey of its recent graduates to deter-
mine information on their yearly salaries. It randomly selected 200 recent
graduates and sent them questionnaires dealing with their present jobs.
Of these 200, however, only 86 were returned. Suppose that the average
of the yearly salaries reported was $75,000.
a. Would the university be correct in thinking that $75,000 was a good
approximation to the average salary level of all of its graduates? Ex-
plain the reasoning behind your answer.
b. If your answer to part (a) is no, can you think of any set of conditions
relating to the group that returned questionnaires for which it would
be a good approximation?
6. An article reported that a survey of clothing worn by pedestrians killed
at night in traffic accidents revealed that about 80 percent of the victims
were wearing dark-colored clothing and 20 percent were wearing light-
colored clothing. The conclusion drawn in the article was that it is safer
to wear light-colored clothing at night.
a. Is this conclusion justified? Explain.
b. If your answer to part (a) is no, what other information would be
needed before a final conclusion could be drawn?
 Problems 9

7. Critique Graunt’s method for estimating the population of London.

What implicit assumption is he making?
8. The London bills of mortality listed 12,246 deaths in 1658. Supposing
that a survey of London parishes showed that roughly 2 percent of the
population died that year, use Graunt’s method to estimate London’s
population in 1658.
9. Suppose you were a seller of annuities in 1662 when Graunt’s book was
published. Explain how you would make use of his data on the ages at
which people were dying.
10. Based on Graunt’s mortality table:
a. What proportion of people survived to age 6?
b. What proportion survived to age 46?
c. What proportion died between the ages of 6 and 36?
 CHAPTER 2

Descriptive statistics

2.1 Introduction

In this chapter we introduce the subject matter of descriptive statistics, and in

doing so learn ways to describe and summarize a set of data. Section 2.2 deals
with ways of describing a data set. Subsections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 indicate how
data that take on only a relatively few distinct values can be described by using
frequency tables or graphs, whereas Subsection 2.2.3 deals with data whose set
of values is grouped into different intervals. Section 2.3 discusses ways of sum-
marizing data sets by use of statistics, which are numerical quantities whose
values are determined by the data. Subsection 2.3.1 considers three statistics
that are used to indicate the “center” of the data set: the sample mean, the
sample median, and the sample mode. Subsection 2.3.2 introduces the sam-
ple variance and its square root, called the sample standard deviation. These
statistics are used to indicate the spread of the values in the data set. Subsection
2.3.3 deals with sample percentiles, which are statistics that tell us, for instance,
which data value is greater than 95 percent of all the data. In Section 2.4 we
present Chebyshev’s inequality for sample data. This famous inequality gives
an upper bound to the proportion of the data that can differ from the sample
mean by more than k times the sample standard deviation. Whereas Cheby-
shev’s inequality holds for all data sets, we can in certain situations, which are
discussed in Section 2.5, obtain more precise estimates of the proportion of
the data that is within k sample standard deviations of the sample mean. In
Section 2.5 we note that when a graph of the data follows a bell-shaped form
the data set is said to be approximately normal, and more precise estimates are
given by the so-called empirical rule. Section 2.6 is concerned with situations
in which the data consist of paired values. A graphical technique, called the
scatter diagram, for presenting such data is introduced, as is the sample corre-
lation coefficient, a statistic that indicates the degree to which a large value of
the first member of the pair tends to go along with a large value of the second.
Section 2.7 is concerned with the income distribution of a population. It intro-
duces the Lorenz curve L(p), which gives the proportion of the total income of
a population that is earned by the lower 100p percent of wage earners. Also in-
troduced is the Gini index, which is a measure of the inequality of the income
distribution. Section 2.8 shows how to use R to analyze data sets. 11

Introduction to Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824346-6.00011-9

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
12 CHAPTER 2: Descriptive statistics

2.2 Describing data sets

The numerical findings of a study should be presented clearly, concisely, and in
such a manner that an observer can quickly obtain a feel for the essential char-
acteristics of the data. Over the years it has been found that tables and graphs
are particularly useful ways of presenting data, often revealing important fea-
tures such as the range, the degree of concentration, and the symmetry of the
data. In this section we present some common graphical and tabular ways for
presenting data.

2.2.1 Frequency tables and graphs

A data set having a relatively small number of distinct values can be conve-
niently presented in a frequency table. For instance, Table 2.1 is a frequency table
for a data set consisting of the starting yearly salaries (to the nearest thousand
dollars) of 42 recently graduated students with B.S. degrees in electrical engi-
neering. Table 2.1 tells us, among other things, that the lowest starting salary
of $57,000 was received by four of the graduates, whereas the highest salary
of $70,000 was received by a single student. The most common starting salary
was $62,000, and was received by 10 of the students.

Table 2.1 Starting Yearly Salaries.

Starting Salary Frequency
57 4
58 1
59 3
60 5
61 8
62 10
63 0
64 5
66 2
67 3
70 1

Data from a frequency table can be graphically represented by a line graph that
plots the distinct data values on the horizontal axis and indicates their fre-
quencies by the heights of vertical lines. A line graph of the data presented in
Table 2.1 is shown in Figure 2.1.
When the lines in a line graph are given added thickness, the graph is called a
bar graph. Figure 2.2 presents a bar graph.
Another type of graph used to represent a frequency table is the frequency poly-
gon, which plots the frequencies of the different data values on the vertical axis,
 2.2 Describing data sets 13

FIGURE 2.1
Starting salary data.

FIGURE 2.2
Bar graph for starting salary data.
14 CHAPTER 2: Descriptive statistics

FIGURE 2.3
Frequency polygon for starting salary data.

and then connects the plotted points with straight lines. Figure 2.3 presents a
frequency polygon for the data of Table 2.1.

2.2.2 Relative frequency tables and graphs

Consider a data set consisting of n values. If f is the frequency of a particular
value, then the ratio f/n is called its relative frequency. That is, the relative fre-
quency of a data value is the proportion of the data that have that value. The
relative frequencies can be represented graphically by a relative frequency line
or bar graph or by a relative frequency polygon. Indeed, these relative frequency
graphs will look like the corresponding graphs of the absolute frequencies ex-
cept that the labels on the vertical axis are now the old labels (that gave the
frequencies) divided by the total number of data points.
Example 2.2.a. Table 2.2 is a relative frequency table for the data of Table 2.1.
The relative frequencies are obtained by dividing the corresponding frequencies
of Table 2.1 by 42, the size of the data set. 

A pie chart is often used to indicate relative frequencies when the data are not
numerical in nature. A circle is constructed and then sliced into different sec-
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
[299] Mr. Gray, the Assistant-Secretary to the Board of Trade, stated (Question
10,088) that the Board had received a letter from Mr. Plimsoll, suggesting that the
Department should employ the staff of ‘Lloyd’s Register’ to assist in the survey of
certain merchant ships.
[300]
In going carefully through the evidence taken before the
Opinion of Mr. Royal Commission on Unseaworthy Ships, I cannot find that
Charles McIver. any witness objects to the principle that no ship should be
allowed to proceed to sea that is unseaworthy, nor do I find
that any Shipowner would object to a survey of his ship for the purpose of
ascertaining her seaworthiness. Indeed, Mr. Charles McIver, of Liverpool, the senior
partner of the Cunard Company, and a gentleman of great experience, though he
does not class any of his ships for somewhat the same reason as I have stated,
considers it advisable that all ships should be classed—not merely certified as
seaworthy, but classed. The Chairman (Question 9245, p. 331) remarked: “You
said you would not have any objection to have your vessels classed;” and then he
asked, “Do you think it advisable that all ships should be classed?—I think so, from
what I have seen in the last two or three years. If you will allow me, I will give
another reason. I once got nearly cast away in an unclassed vessel about forty
years ago. I was going to the States. She was a wooden vessel. I had taken a
passage in her along with my sister, because I knew the captain of the ship. She
was loaded with steam-engines and coals. I shall not mention the ports or the
owners, because they are all dead and gone, the captain included. Off the Azores
we fell in with a gale of wind. It only lasted for twelve hours; but, if it had lasted
for twenty-four hours, she would have gone down. The captain came to me, and
said, ‘If I had known that she was as bad as this, I would not have let you come.’
He said, ‘Her beams are away from the sides.’ I said, ‘I know that she is making
water very rapidly, because it is coming out as clear as it went in,’ and they were
pumping every two hours, and so forth. Now, I do not mean to say that there may
not be culpability in the owner, but, sometimes, it is ignorance. So it was in that
case; they did not believe that the ship was as bad as she was. My remark to the
captain was, ‘When you go home you had better throw up command of this vessel
or you will lose your life.’ He did so; but, in some way or other, he mixed up Mr.
McIver’s name with it. The owner said, ‘Mr. McIver is frightened.’ The captain said,
‘No, he is not frightened, but he knows too much.’ He said, ‘I will give up the ship.’
Now, to show you that I did not think that there was any intentional culpability on
the part of the owner, but simply ignorance, or simply that they could do what I
could not do, because I knew too much, they gave that ship to the mate, and sent
that vessel away in his charge for a long voyage abroad, and she did it safely. The
next voyage she was never heard of. Now, any sort of classing, I think, would have
prevented that ship from going to sea.”
[301] Appendix No. 12, p. 624.
[302] The writer of a letter which appeared in the ‘Nautical Magazine,’ headed
“‘Lloyd’s Register’ and the Great Steam Lines,” and which was afterwards published
separately (Pewtress & Co. London. 1872), says, “It is very remarkable that the
classing of large steamers with Lloyd’s was nearly wholly omitted until 1870;”
arising, I may add, from the fact that the ‘Liverpool Register’ allowed, in such
ships, scantlings and arrangements of which Lloyd’s surveyors disapproved. “But,”
continues the same writer a little further on, “it is much more remarkable that
February 1870 is the date of Lloyd’s new rules, which are, it is supposed, an
abandonment of the principle and scantlings of the old rules.” We have here
exemplified in the most forcible manner the evils of competing classification
associations.
[303] Safety depends much more on the nature of the cargo, and the manner in
which it is stowed, than most people, or even some shipowners, suppose. Dead
weight, when stowed close and very low, while it makes a vessel stiff—that is,
“stand up” to a heavy pressure of canvas, makes her roll in a calm when there is a
heavy swell (like the pendulum of a clock), to the injury of her spars and rigging,
and, not unfrequently, to roll her masts overboard. Railway and other bar iron,
which is now a very common description of cargo, should always be stowed in a
triangular form, and the heavier the bars the wider should be the angles. Ores of
every description, on an oversea voyage, should be stowed in a boxed hold, or on
platforms in the centre of the ship, thoroughly blocked from the sides. In a word,
the proper stowage of a ship, whether as regards her form or the nature of her
cargo, is a science which has not been sufficiently studied.
[304] We must ever remember that although, since we relieved our Shipowners of
all the restrictions to which they were subjected by the Navigation Laws, they have
advanced above all other nations, the shipping of many of those nations are now
running them a very close race. If we burden them with load-lines, which prevent
them from carrying as much cargo with safety as a foreign vessel would be
allowed to do—half a foot, or even three inches less depth may deprive them of all
their profit—or saddle them with charges for surveys and so forth, already very
heavy, and to which their competitors are not subjected, we, in either case, drive
them from the trade. We must further, if we adopt the principle of a certificate of
seaworthiness, recollect the interests of a great number of small coasters, and
carefully consider if it would not seriously affect them.
[305] See ‘Final Report of Royal Commissioners on Unseaworthy Ships,’ p. 15.
[306] The following graphic description of the state of too many of our ordinary
merchant vessels when they sail is so true that I do not hesitate to transfer it to
these pages. I do so with the hope that the Legislature may direct its earliest
attention to the improvement of the lamentable state of things here described, and
with the conviction that the first step towards that improvement would be the
abolition of the system of advances to seamen: “The ship is about to leave the
dock, when the crew, generally of a very inferior description, are brought on
board, and, frequently, in such a state of intoxication that they are worse than
useless during that day, and the ship must anchor for the night. Next day the
motley crew commence work reluctantly, in a thoroughly strange ship, under
strange officers, and are strangers to each other. The chief officer has the
unenviable task of getting them into order, not having a man that he can depend
upon. Yet it is from that strange crew he must select look-out men, helmsmen, and
leadsmen during the ten or twelve hours’ darkness of the following night.”—Extract
of letter from Captain H. A. Moriarty, R.N., to the ‘Nautical Magazine’ for November
1875.
[307] My readers should be informed that a premium of insurance on chartered
freight out and home is much higher in proportion, than if insured out only, and
then, after arrival at port of destination, home only.
[308] Royal Commission on Unseaworthy Ships, Appendix to the Report No. 51,
and Questions 11,516 and 13,072.
[309] See ‘Final Report,’ p. 16.
[310] See ante, p. 318, note, and p. 480.
[311] See ante, p. 321. The Merchant Shipping Act of 1854, which is quite as large
as the Merchant Shipping Code Bill, now ready, passed through Committee in one
forenoon sitting.
[312]

Ships belonging to the British Empire British Steam Vessels Entered and Cleared in
Years. at the end of each Year, 1850 to 1874 the Foreign Trade in the United Kingdom,
inclusive. 1850 to 1874 inclusive.
Number. Tons Number. Tons.
1850 34,281 4,232,962 8,350 1,802,955
1852 34,402 4,424,392 7,059 1,980,473
1860 38,501 5,710,968 12,777 4,186,620
1862 39,427 6,041,358 15,201 5,239,493
1870 37,587 7,149,134 29,369 13,341,058
1872 36,804 7,213,829 35,570 17,430,029
1873 36,825 7,294,230 37,175 18,943,653
1874 36,935 7,533,492 37,606 19,408,527

[313] See Appendix No. 14, p. 637. Tonnage entered and cleared in the United
Kingdom, United States, France, Holland, Norway, Prussia, and Sweden,
distinguishing between national and foreign ships from 1850 to 1873.
 APPENDICES.
No. Page
1. 563
Convention of Commerce between Great Britain and
France, 1826

2. 567
Letter from Mr. W. S. Lindsay to Lord Lyons, Boston,
U.S., 1860

3. 571
Correspondence with the Foreign Office respecting the
Liability of British Shipowners in the Courts of the
United States of America

4. 582
Letter to the Emperor of the French on the subject of the
Navigation Laws of France, 10th January, 1861

5. 590
Letter from M. Fleury and Reply, 17th and 23rd June,
1862

6. 596
Letter to the Commercial Association, Lisbon, 28th
January, 1863

7. 600
Summary of the Acts passed for the Regulation of
Passenger Ships

8. 611
Passages of Clipper Ships engaged in the Trade with China

9. 613
Log of the Sailing Ship ‘Thermopylæ’

10. 618
Statistics of Tonnage belonging to Great Britain, United
 States, France and Holland, from 1821 to 1874

11. 620
Exemption in favour of certain British Ships from Local
Port Charges in 1852

12. 624
History of Lloyd’s Register of British and Foreign
Shipping

13. 634
Acts ofParliament passed between 1849 and 1875,
inclusive, relating to British Ships and Seamen, and other
Parliamentary Papers referring thereto

14. 637
Tonnage of Shipping Entered and Cleared in the United
Kingdom, United States, France, Holland, Norway,
Prussia, and Sweden, distinguishing between National and
Foreign Ships from 1850 to 1873
APPENDICES.
 APPENDIX No. 1.
Convention of Commerce between his Britannic Majesty
and the most Christian King, together with two additional
Articles annexed, signed at London, 26th January, 1826.
Article 1.—French vessels coming from or departing for the ports of
France, or if in ballast, coming from or departing from any place,
shall not be subject in the ports of the United Kingdom, either on
entering into or departing from the same, to any higher duties of
tonnage, harbour, lighthouse, pilotage, quarantine, or other similar
or corresponding duties, of whatever nature, or under whatever
denomination, than those to which British vessels, in respect of the
same voyages, are or may be subject, on entering into or departing
from such ports; and, reciprocally, from and after the same period,
British vessels coming from or departing for the ports of the United
Kingdom, or if in ballast, coming from or departing for any place,
shall not be subject, in the ports of France, either in entering into or
departing from the same, to any higher duties of tonnage, harbour,
lighthouse, pilotage, quarantine, or other similar or corresponding
duties, of whatever nature, or under whatever denomination, than
those to which French vessels, in respect of the same voyages, are
or may be subject on entering into or departing from such ports,
whether such duties are collected separately or are consolidated in
one and the same duty, his most Christian Majesty reserving to
himself to regulate the amount of such duty or duties in France,
according to the rate at which they are or may be established in the
United Kingdom, at the same time, with a view of diminishing the
burdens imposed upon the navigation of the two countries. His most
Christian Majesty will always be disposed to reduce the amount of
the said burdens in France in proportion to any reduction which may
hereafter be made of those now levied in the ports of the United
Kingdom.
2. Goods which can or may be legally imported into the ports of the
United Kingdom from the ports of France, if so imported in French
vessels, shall be subject to no higher duties than if imported in
British vessels; and, reciprocally, which can or may be legally
imported into the ports of France from the ports of the United
Kingdom, if so imported in British vessels, shall be subject to no
higher duties than if imported in French vessels. The produce of
Asia, Africa, and America, not being allowed to be imported from the
said countries, nor from any other in French vessels, nor from
France in French, British, or any other vessels into the ports of the
United Kingdom for home consumption, but only for warehousing
and re-exportation, his most Christian Majesty reserves to himself to
direct that in like manner the produce of Asia, Africa, and America
shall not be imported from the said countries, nor from any other, in
British vessels, nor from the United Kingdom in British, French, or
any other vessels into the ports of France for the consumption of
that kingdom, but only for warehousing and re-exportation.
With regard to the productions of the countries of Europe, it is
understood between the high contracting parties that such
productions shall not be imported in British ships into France for the
consumption of that kingdom, unless such ships shall have been
laden therewith in some port of the United Kingdom; that his
Britannic Majesty may adopt, if he shall think fit, some
corresponding restrictive measure with regard to the productions of
the countries of Europe imported into the ports of the United
Kingdom in French vessels, the high contracting parties reserving to
themselves the power of making by mutual consent such relaxation
in the strict execution of the present article as they may think useful
to the respective interests of the two countries upon the principle of
mutual concessions, affording each to the other reciprocal or
equivalent advantages.
3. All goods which can or may be legally exported from the ports of
either of the two countries shall on their export pay the same duties
of exportation, whether the exportation of such goods be made in
British or French vessels, provided the said vessels proceed,
respectively, direct from the ports of the one country to the other.
And all the said goods so exported in British or French vessels shall
be reciprocally entitled to the same bounties, drawbacks, and other
allowances of the same nature which are granted by the regulations
of each country respectively.
4. It is mutually agreed between the high contracting parties that in
the intercourse of navigation between the two countries the vessels
of any third power shall in no case obtain more favourable conditions
than those stipulated in the present convention in favour of British
and French vessels.
5. The fishing-boats of either of the two countries which may be
forced by stress of weather to seek shelter in the ports or on the
coast of the other country shall not be subject to any duties or port
charges of any description whatever; provided the said boats when
so driven in by stress of weather shall not discharge or receive on
board any cargo, or portion of cargo, in the ports or on the parts of
the coast where they shall have sought shelter.
6. It is agreed that the provisions of the present convention between
the high contracting parties shall be reciprocally extended and in
force in all the possessions subject to their respective dominions in
Europe.
7. The present convention shall be in force for a term of ten years
from the 5th April of the present year; and further, until the end of
twelve months after either of the high contracting parties shall have
given notice to the other of its intention to terminate its operation;
each of the high contracting parties reserving to itself the right of
giving such notice to the other at the end of the said term of ten
years, and it is agreed between them that at the end of twelve
months’ extension agreed on both sides this convention and all the
stipulations thereof shall cease and determine.
8. The present convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged in London within the space of one month, or sooner if
possible.
In witness whereof, the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the
same, and have affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
Done at London on 26th day of January, 1826.
George Canning.
William Huskisson.
Le Prince de Polignac.
Additional Articles.
Article 1.—French vessels shall be allowed to sail from any port
whatever of the countries under the dominion of his most Christian
Majesty, to all the colonies of the United Kingdom (except those
possessed by the East India Company) and to import into the said
colonies all kinds of merchandise (being productions the growth or
manufacture of France) with the exception of such as are prohibited
to be imported into the said colonies, or are permitted to be
imported only from countries under the British dominion; and the
said French vessels, as well as the merchandise imported in the
same, shall not be subject in the colonies of the United Kingdom to
other or higher duties than those to which British vessels may be
subject, or importing the same merchandise from any foreign
country, or which are imposed on the merchandise itself.
2. French vessels shall be allowed to export from all the colonies of
the United Kingdom (except those of East India Company) all kinds
of merchandise which are not prohibited to be exported from such
colonies in vessels other than those of Great Britain; and the said
vessels, as well as the merchandise exported in the same, shall not
be subject to other or higher duties than those to which British
vessels may be subject on exporting the said merchandise, or which
are imposed on the merchandise itself, and they shall be entitled, to
the same bounties, drawbacks, and other allowances of the same
nature to which British vessels would be entitled on such
exportation. These two additional articles shall have the same force
and validity as if they were inserted word for word in the convention
signed this day. They shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be
exchanged at the same time.
In witness whereof, the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the
same, and have affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
Done at London, 26th January, 1826.
George Canning.
Le Prince de Polignac.
William Huskisson.
A Treasury letter, dated 28th March, 1826, directs that French
vessels and their cargoes legally imported or exported on board the
same, according to the terms of the convention in the preceding
pages, are from 5th April, 1826, to be charged with such and like
duties only of whatever kind they may be that are charged on British
vessels and similar cargoes laden on board thereof, and in like
manner the same bounties, drawbacks, and allowances are to be
paid on articles exported in French vessels that are paid, granted, or
allowed on similar articles exported in British vessels. And the
necessary instructions are to be transmitted to the officers in the
colonies for carrying into effect the stipulations contained in the two
additional articles of the said convention respecting French vessels
and their cargoes from 1st October, 1826.
 APPENDIX No. 2.
Boston, United States,
21st September, 1860.
My Lord,
Mr. Hammond was good enough to read to me a letter which Lord
John Russell had addressed to your Lordship on the subject of my
visit to the United States. As reports have been current since then
that my visit to this country was one of a semi-official character, I
may remark that I am here merely in search of a little recreation
after the labours of the session. But as I am intimate with many of
the leading Shipowners and merchants of this country, Lord John
Russell was pleased to furnish me with copies of the correspondence
which had passed between our own Government and that of the
United States with regard to various maritime questions (to which,
as your Lordship may be aware, my attention has for some years
been directed), in the hope that I might be able to aid your Lordship
in their settlement.
These papers I have studied on the passage to this place. I see they
deal with questions of very considerable importance to both
countries; but there are also others which equally impede our
commercial intercourse, and all these various questions are well
worthy of consideration, and should be adjusted as soon as possible.
They are:—
1st. The rules of the road at sea and collisions.
2nd. Signal lights.
3rd. Limitation of Shipowners’ liability.
4th. The Foreign Deserter’s Act.
5th. The punishment of offences committed on the high seas.
6th. The settlement of disputes between the masters of ships and
their crews in foreign ports; and the extension of the use of our
shipping offices to the vessels of the United States.
There are, besides these questions, others of a much more difficult
and delicate character, such as belligerent rights of sea, the coasting
trade of the United States, and the registration in America of British-
built ships, all of great political as well as commercial importance,
and therefore I fear my services in their solution can be of little
value. It is, however, my intention to enter into conversation bearing
upon all these questions with the leading merchants and Shipowners
to whom I am known; and with the Presidents of the Chambers of
Commerce of this and other places, including New York,
Philadelphia, Baltimore, Portland, and various seaports in the New
England States to whom I have letters of introduction. I shall at least
ascertain their views, and may thus be enabled to pave the way to
the settlement of some of those questions. And if I find that their
views can be brought into harmony with those entertained by our
own Government, I shall endeavour to prevail upon the different
bodies to memorialise their Government on the subject.
My first, and I fear imperfect, impressions in regard to the questions
I have named may be briefly stated as follows:—
1st. The rules of the road at sea.—I think these rules should be the
same for the vessels of all nations. Different opinions prevail in
regard to our own rules; but, though they differ from the old
maritime law (acted upon by almost every other nation and at times
by ourselves), and are an improvement upon it, the decisions in our
Admiralty Courts are too often conflicting. Our rules, as a whole, are
perhaps, however, more satisfactory than those of any other. But be
that as it may, it would be most desirable if all nations would agree
to adopt one and the same rule of road at sea, and would tend
greatly to the safety of life and property.
2nd. Signal lights.—Our recent regulations in regard to lights have
answered very well, and have been adopted by the owners of
steam-vessels belonging to the United States. The application of
these rules to sailing vessels is all that is now necessary, and is very
desirable.
3rd. The limitation of shipowners’ liability.—This is a question of
great importance, and the laws in regard to it are in an
unsatisfactory state. May I refer your Lordship to the evidence taken
last session before the select committee on merchant shipping on
this subject, and to their report? From the correspondence I have
read I think the Government of the United States might be induced
to adopt the principles laid down in that report. If so, it might then
(as the laws of each country are similar) be mutually arranged by a
convention, or otherwise, to place our ships and those of the United
States respectively, on an equal footing with regard to claims raised
in the courts of either country in respect of any loss of life or
personal injury arising from collisions at sea, so as to limit such
claims to the same extent in each case, and also that the mode of
procedure shall be as provided by the laws of the country where the
claim is made.
4th. The application of our Foreign Deserter’s Act to the ships of the
United States.—As your Lordship is aware, the United States
Government has positively declined to become a party to this Act,
because it contains the words “not being slaves,” which were
inserted, I believe, after the Bill was introduced. Now it appears to
me that there is no necessity for these words. The Act is meant to
deal solely with voluntary agents, who, having of their own free will
entered into an agreement, break it at foreign ports. I think the case
would be met if instead of the words “not being slaves” there were
substituted the following words—“seamen who have voluntarily
engaged themselves in, or apprentices duly indentured to, the sea
service.” I question if there are any cases on record where slaves
have been shipped as seamen to English ports.
5th. Offences committed on the high seas.—Your Lordship cannot
fail to be aware of the unsatisfactory state of the law in regard to
these offences. Why, on the representation of the ministers or
consuls, should the courts of England and of the United States not
have jurisdiction over offences committed on board of vessels of the
respective countries? I ask this question because I can at present
see no objection to the principle I have ventured to lay down,
though the mode of putting it into practice would require some
consideration, and could best be dealt with by the legal authorities
of the two countries. The same may be said with regard to the
settlement of disputes between masters and crews in the ports of
either country.
6th. The extension of our shipping offices to the vessels of the
United States.—If the Government of the United States would not
agree to establish similar offices and a machinery somewhat in
accordance with our own (I see no reason why such offices which
have answered so well in England should not be adopted), then we
might stipulate that all British seamen entering the service of
American Shipowners in the ports of Great Britain should be
engaged before our shipping masters, and we might grant to
American shipowners the privilege of engaging all the seamen their
vessels required (when in any of the ports of Great Britain), through
the medium of our offices, on the same conditions as our own
shipowners now engage their seamen. This would pave the way to
an international arrangement, and tend to abolish the system of
crimpage which still prevails to a great extent in our ports, and is
alike injurious to the interests of British and American shipowners.
Though belligerent rights, the coasting trade, and the admission of
British-built ships to American registration are difficult questions for
me to deal with, involving as they do the policy of the respective
nations bearing upon other interests than those of commerce, I may
remark that it is easy of proof in regard to the two latter that the
policy of the United States, while it is unjust towards England, is
injurious to the people of America, and contrary to the principles laid
down by their own most eminent statesmen in their intercourse with
other countries. Nevertheless, I fear the Government of the United
States will not be disposed to make concessions unless we are
prepared to make a bargain with them. With that object in view, I
think if we agreed to relieve the shipowners of the United States
from the charge of light dues on our coast (which have been the
source of great complaint), and also from compulsory pilotage as
recommended in the merchant shipping report; provided they
opened to us the trade between their eastern and western ports, viâ
Panama and round Cape Horn, if not prepared to throw open
entirely their coasting trade, some progress might be made. The
Government of the United States might also be induced to make
some concession with regard to the registration of British-built ships,
for through the want of iron screw vessels (which cannot be
produced at as moderate a price in the States) they are fast losing
the most valuable portion of the trade between England and this
country. And their coasting trade (especially that on the inland lakes)
is not developed to one-half the extent it would be if the Shipowners
of America were allowed to own the description of vessels I have
named. They are also losing the share they once had of the
Newfoundland fisheries from the fact that we can produce in the
colonies vessels adapted for that trade at 25 per cent. less cost than
they can build and equip similar vessels.
I daresay your Lordship can form little idea of the hindrance to
commerce and the constant irritation the questions I have named
create on both sides of the Atlantic; and I hope by holding
intercourse with the people of this country to pave the way, as I
have said, for the settlement of at least some of them. With that
object I shall take notes of the opinions entertained by the members
of the different Chambers of Commerce and Boards of Trade
throughout this country, and also the views of those members of the
government whom I may meet, and which I shall forward to your
Lordship, and if you think any satisfactory results are likely to follow,
you may then deem it desirable to communicate with Lord John
Russell, with a view of entering into formal negotiations with the
Government of the United States. I have for many years anxiously
desired to see settled these various questions, considering their
settlement of great importance to both countries; and if I can, in the
way I propose, aid your Lordship in this good work, my long
promised visit to this country, though made with no such object, will
not be made in vain.
I am, my Lord,
Your faithful and obedient servant,
(Signed) W. S. Lindsay.
To His Excellency Lord Lyons,
H. B. Majesty’s Minister,
&c. &c. &c.,
Washington.
 APPENDIX No. 3.
Foreign Office, 21st September, 1866.
Sir,
I am directed by Lord Stanley to acknowledge the receipt of your
letter of the 31st ultimo, in which you call his Lordship’s attention to
the state of relations existing between this country and the United
States with regard to the Navigation Laws; and in expressing to you
Lord Stanley’s thanks for this further communication, I am to inform
you that the same has been referred to the Board of Trade, whose
observations thereupon will be communicated to you as soon as
their answer shall have been received; and the delay in receiving
their report is the reason for your letter not having been sooner
acknowledged.
I am, Sir, your most obedient humble servant,

E. C. Egerton.
To W. S. Lindsay, Esq.,
Manor House, Shepperton.

Foreign Office, 26th September, 1866.

Sir,
With reference to my letter of the 21st instant, I am directed by Lord
Stanley to state to you that his Lordship is fully alive to the
importance of the points on which you have urged that a satisfactory
understanding is desirable with the United States, but that since the
date of your letter to Lord Lyons of the 21st of September, 1860, the
first two of the seven questions enumerated in it have been settled
by the adoption of one uniform system of rules of the road, and of
lights to be carried at sea by maritime nations generally, including
the United States.
As regards the third question, viz., the limitation of shipowners’
liability, the Lords of Trade have pointed out to Lord Stanley that the
law of this country has undergone some modification since 1860. By
the Merchant Shipping Acts Amendment Act, 1862, the limit of such
liability was readjusted, and the limitation was extended to foreign
ships in cases arising in British courts concerning matters within their
jurisdiction.
Inasmuch, however, as this extension was not made specially for the
benefit of foreigners, but with the view of establishing a just and
uniform rule of law, no steps were taken to secure reciprocal
legislation in foreign countries.
If the law at present in force in the United States is liable to the
same objection as the law formerly in force in this country, and is
found to be attended with the inconveniences which were
experienced here, it may be presumed that the United States
Government will probably find it for their interest to amend it in a
similar sense and on similar grounds; but Lord Stanley sees no
reason at present for opening special communications with that
Government on the subject.
With respect to the remaining four questions alluded to in your
letter, I am to state to you that the matters to which they relate are
under consideration.
I am, Sir, your most obedient, humble servant,

E. C. Egerton.
To W. S. Lindsay, Esq.,
Manor House, Shepperton.

Manor House, Shepperton, Middlesex,

29th September, 1866.
My Lord,
I have to acknowledge receipt of your letters of 21st and 26th inst.,
and I am glad to learn that two of the questions to which I ventured
to direct your Lordship’s attention have, since 1860, been settled in a
satisfactory manner.
As regards the third, viz., the limitation of shipowners’ liability, may I
trouble you with an extract herewith[314] from the ‘New York Herald’
of 10th October, 1860, as the question is therein, I think, correctly
stated. Since then I am aware that there has been an amendment in
our law relating to the liability of Shipowners; but it would appear
from the communication you have received from the Lords of Trade
that while we have extended the limitation to foreign ships in cases
arising in British courts, we have overlooked altogether the still more
important part of the question so far as this country is concerned,
and that is the unlimited liability of British shipowners in cases
arising in foreign courts. If such is the fact, then we, I fear, have
neglected a favourable opportunity of inviting foreign nations to
place our ships in their courts on the same terms as we had placed
their ships when thrown into our courts. Had we done so, I think the
Government of the United States would have readily met us in so
just and reasonable a request.
Considering, then, the position in which British shipowners would be
placed if an action was raised against them in foreign courts for the
recovery of claims arising through a collision at sea, your Lordship
will perceive that this is not a question in which foreigners alone are
interested, for we have given them all they asked in our courts, but
one which deeply affects the interests of British subjects, and which,
now more than ever, requires adjustment by special communication
with the United States and those other countries where the
responsibility of British shipowners is still unlimited. Since we have
conceded all they require, it may be found more difficult now to
obtain the necessary alterations in their law than it would have been
at the time to which my previous communications referred; but I
daresay that when the justice of our claim is represented, steps will
still be taken to grant in their courts the same limitation of
responsibility to our Shipowners as we have granted to their
Shipowners in our courts.
I am gratified, to learn that the other questions are under
consideration, and
I remain, my Lord,
Your most obedient humble servant,
W. S. Lindsay.
To the Right Hon. Lord Stanley, M.P.,
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,
&c. &c. &c.

Foreign Office, 3rd October, 1866.

Sir,
I am directed, by Lord Stanley, to acknowledge the receipt of your
letter and its inclosure of the 29th ultimo, respecting the liability of
British shipowners in suits arising in foreign courts out of collisions at
sea; and I am to acquaint you in reply, that Lord Stanley will not fail
to give this question due consideration, and will communicate with
you further on the subject after he has consulted the Lords of the
Committee of Privy Council for Trade.
I am, Sir, your most obedient humble servant,
E. C. Egerton.
To W. S. Lindsay, Esq.

Foreign Office, 14th November, 1866.

Sir,
With reference to your letter of the 29th September last regarding
the laws of the United States and of other foreign countries, with
regard to the liability of British shipowners in cases of loss by
collisions at sea, I am directed by Lord Stanley to inform you that his
Lordship learns from the Lords of Trade that, by the common law of
this country, and by the maritime law, as administered in our
Admiralty Courts, the Shipowner was formerly personally liable to
the whole extent of his fortune for any damage done by his ships
through default of his servants. The legislature, however, long since
passed statutes limiting the liability, and the limitation, with some
variations, still continues.
It was, however, held that the statutes being municipal laws, did not
affect cases where foreign ships were concerned, and where the
collision or casualty happened on the high seas, but that such cases
must be governed by the general maritime law of the world, which
was assumed to be the same with our common law. This was,
perhaps, too hastily assumed, inasmuch as most maritime countries
adopted the principle of limiting the Shipowners’ liability much
earlier, and to a greater extent than Great Britain.
The consequence was, that if a collision happened between two
British ships, the British law of liability applied, and whichever might
be in fault, the liability was limited. On the other hand, if a collision
happened between a British and a foreign ship on the high seas, or
between two foreign ships on the high seas, and the case came into
our courts, then whichever was in fault, the liability was unlimited.
This law was unequal, but in no way specially injurious to the
foreigner. The British ship, if in fault, was equally liable with the
foreigner; and as the British ship is generally to be found at home,
and as the British shipowner resides here, the British shipowner
being thus more likely to be the defendant, was likely the more often
to suffer.
The law was consequently altered by making the limitation of liability
apply in all cases coming into our courts, whether the ships were
both British or both foreign, or one British and one foreign.
And as the change was simply an improvement of our own law, and
conferred no especial advantage upon foreigners, it was not thought
necessary or desirable to delay it for the purpose of obtaining similar
changes when desirable in the laws of foreign nations.
I am, Sir, your most obedient humble servant,
James Murray.
To W. S. Lindsay, Esq.

Manor House, Shepperton, Middlesex,

28th November, 1866.
My Lord,
I received in due course your Lordship’s letter of the 14th inst.,
which does not, however, appear to me to touch the main point of
my previous communication, viz., the unlimited liability to which our
Shipowners would still be subjected in cases of collision arising in
various foreign courts. For instance, if one of our Transatlantic steam
ships engaged in the conveyance of our mails came into collision—a
very possible event—with one of the numerous steam vessels owned
in the United States, freighted with passengers, cargo, and specie,
of great value, the consequences, under the existing law of that
country, might prove not only most disastrous to the owners of the
British ship, but also very detrimental to the public service.
As I understand the law of the United States, the owners of our mail
steamer, if at fault, would be responsible to the full extent of their
means for all the loss the owners of the American steamer had
sustained; if so, the result would be the seizure of the British
steamer whenever she reached an American port; and, possibly, if
the loss sustained was very great, the seizure of all the vessels in
port belonging to the same owner, and thus our mail service for the
time might be suspended.
It is to this grave contingency I am anxious to direct your Lordship’s
attention, in the hope that you may see the urgent necessity of
taking such steps as you may deem most expedient to induce the
Government of the United States to place our vessels in their courts
on the same footing in regard to the limitation of liability as we now
place the owners of their vessels in our courts.
I am, my Lord, your most obedient humble servant,
W. S. Lindsay.
To the Right Hon. the Lord Stanley, M.P.,
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,
&c. &c. &c.

Board of Trade, Whitehall,

25th February, 1867.
Sir,
With reference to your letter of the 29th September, 1866,
addressed to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and to
previous correspondence upon the subject of the law of the United
States as affecting the liability of the Shipowner in cases of loss by
collision at sea, I am now directed by the Board of Trade to transmit
to you the accompanying copy of a despatch and inclosures received
through the Foreign Office from her Majesty’s Minister at Washington
upon this subject.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Thomas Gray.
To W. S. Lindsay, Esq.,
Manor House, Shepperton.

(Copy.—M. 1268.)
Washington, 23rd January, 1867.
My Lord,
In reply to your Lordship’s despatch, marked “Commercial No. 7,” of
the 14th November last, on the liability imposed by the laws of the
United States on Shipowners in cases of collision, I have the honour
to enclose copy of an opinion of Mr. Carlisle, the legal adviser of this
Legation.
Your Lordships will gather from it that the principle of limited liability
has been adopted by the laws of the United States, and is applied in
the Federal courts. But the injured party may apply to a State court
if the defendant is within its jurisdiction, and bring an action on the
case, and it is doubtful whether such a court would limit the
measure of damages by the principles contained in the Act of
Congress.
I have, &c.,
(Signed) F. W. A. Bruce.
To Lord Stanley,
&c. &c.

(Copy.)
Washington, 22nd January, 1867.
Sir,
I have the honour to return herewith the papers in relation to the
question of the liability of Shipowners in cases of collision.
The only Act of Congress touching the subject is that of March 3rd,
1851, which in its third section limits the liability in such cases. A
copy of this section is enclosed herewith. This language is explicit
and comprehensive, making no distinction on account of the
nationality of the ship; nor have I been able to find that such a
distinction has been suggested in any adjudicated case under this
statute.
For my own part I entertain no doubt that the limitation of liability
which it prescribes would be held in all courts of the United States as
applying equally to foreign as to American ships.
The Courts of Admiralty are, by the constitution of the United States,
exclusively of the Federal Government. If therefore the remedy in
cases of collision were exclusively in Admiralty Courts, the Act of
1851 would completely cover the question.
But there is a remedy at common law, which is open to the injured
party at his election. He may maintain his action on the case, which
is a transitory action, wherever he can find the owner of the
offending vessel, in the same manner and to be determined by the
same principles as if the plaintiff’s coach or his person had been
injured by a collision occasioned by the unskilful driving of the
defendant’s coach.
Such an action may be brought in any court of general jurisdiction in
any of the States of the Union; and it may be doubted whether this
Act of Congress would be available to limit the measure of damages
in these courts, though undoubtedly a convention between Great
Britain and the United States, with a proper Act of Congress to carry
it into effect, would accomplish the object.
I have, &c.,
(Signed) J. M. Carlisle.
To Sir F. Bruce, S.S.B.,
&c. &c. &c.

(Copy.)
An Act to limit the Liability of Shipowners and for other purposes.
(Approved March 3, 1851.)
Section 3.—And be it further enacted, That the liability of the owner
or owners of any ship or vessel for any embezzlement, loss, or
distinction by the master, officers, mariners, passengers, or any
other person or persons of any property, goods, or merchandise
shipped or put on board of such ship or vessel, or for any loss,
damage, or injury by collision, or for any act, matter, or thing, loss,
damage, or forfeiture, done, occasioned, or incurred without the
privity or knowledge of such owner or owners, shall in no case
exceed the amount or value of the interest of such owner or owners
respectively in such ship or vessel, and her freight then pending.
IX. Statutes at Large, ch. xliii., page 635.

(M. 1266.)
Manor House, Shepperton, Middlesex,
26th February, 1867.
Sir,
I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of yesterday’s date, with
copy of a despatch and inclosures, received through the Foreign
Office from her Majesty’s Minister at Washington. By these
documents it would appear that the laws of the United States of
America, so far as regards the responsibility of British Shipowners in
their courts, are the same as they were in 1860, and that, practically,
our responsibility is there still unlimited. This is a very unsatisfactory
state of things, and, as I have already explained to the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs, might produce the most disastrous results
to some of our Shipowners in their intercourse with the United
States. I, therefore, trust that the Board of Trade may be induced to
use its best efforts to obtain as soon as possible a convention,
whereby our ships frequenting the ports of the United States may, so
far as regards responsibility, be placed upon the same footing as we
have now placed in all our courts the vessels belonging to that
country.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
W. S. Lindsay.
To the Assistant Secretary,
Marine Department, Board of Trade.

(M. 1766.)
 Board of Trade, Whitehall,
6th March, 1867.
Sir,
I am directed by the Board of Trade to acknowledge the receipt of
your letter of the 26th ultimo, stating, with reference to the question
of the liability of British Shipowners in the United States, that that
liability appears to be practically unlimited, and trusting that this
Board may take steps to obtain complete reciprocity.
In reply, I am to point out to you that the principle of limited liability
has been adopted in the Federal Courts, and is applied in all the
Federal Courts of the United States—i.e. in all Admiralty and Vice
Admiralty Courts, to foreign as well as American ships.
It seems true, however, that an injured person may possibly
maintain an action against the owner of an offending vessel in a
State Court, and it must depend on the law of each State in that
case, whether the measure of damages would be limited. But not to
mention the difficulty of first ascertaining, and procuring the
alteration of the law of each State, it is to be observed that to
maintain such action the owner of the offending vessel must be
found within the jurisdiction of the State Court. This, in fact,
amounts to a practical limitation, seeing that he has all the
advantages of limited liability so long as he keeps away from the
United States, or is not to be found within the jurisdiction of the
court in question.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
Thomas Gray.
To W. S. Lindsay, Esq.,
Manor House, Shepperton, Middlesex.

(M. 1766.)
Shepperton, Middlesex, 14th March, 1867.
Sir,
I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 6th inst., but it is
very little satisfaction to know that the principle of limited liability is
applied in all the Federal Courts of the United States to British
Shipowners, whilst in all the State Courts of that country their
responsibility is altogether unlimited. To say that they have the
advantages of limited liability, so long as they keep away from the
ports of that country, is to suggest that if we wish to avoid unlimited
responsibility, we must renounce our carrying-trade with America.
The Board of Trade would also appear to be under the impression
that there is so little chance of any serious claim ever being made,
that the alteration of the law of the States is of little consequence to
us, and that it is not worthy of the trouble it would involve; but a
case in point has just come under my notice which signally illustrates
the force of the remonstrative observations I have ventured to
make.
The screw steam-ship Keder, belonging to Messrs. G. and I. Burns,
of Glasgow, and their partners, sailed from New York 31st August,
1864, and on the following day came into collision with the Czarina,
an American barque, of from 500 to 600 tons, which had on board a
cargo of sulphur, shumac, and fruit. The Czarina was abandoned in a
sinking state. As the evidence shows that the Keder was not to
blame, the owners of that vessel hoped that nothing more would be
heard of the matter; but only a few days ago they received a letter
from Sir Edward Cunard, their correspondent at New York, stating
that he had just been called upon to give bond for one hundred and
twenty-five thousand dollars, on account of the cargo of the Czarina,
and adding that he had also been called upon to give bond for the
vessel, though the amount in the latter case is not mentioned. It is
estimated that the value put on the Czarina and cargo will be
something like 40,000l. Supposing the Keder to be in fault, her
liability, according to British law, would be restricted to 8l. per ton of
her own gross tonnage, viz. 14,264l., whereas, according to the law
of the State of New York, she may be held liable in this case for
40,000l., being more than double her value; and if the Czarina and
cargo had been more valuable than they are stated to be, the
liability of the owner of the Keder would of course have been
correspondingly increased. In a word, it would have been practically
without limit.
I am aware that there may be some difficulty in obtaining an
alteration of the law, but this ought not to be any obstacle when the
interests at stake are so very large and of so grave a character. If
the proper representation is made, I think the Government of the
United States cannot now hesitate to place our vessels in all their
courts on the same terms as we have recently placed their vessels in
all our courts, and if the executive is prepared to enter into a
convention, having that object in view, it will no doubt be confirmed
by Congress.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
W. S. Lindsay.
To the Assistant Secretary,
Marine Department, Board of Trade.

Note.—This correspondence was not at all satisfactory to

me, but as I was then in a very precarious state of health,
I sent copies of it to Mr. John Burns, whose firm (the
Cunard Company) was more deeply interested in the
matter to which it refers than any other. He followed it up
with his usual energy and ability, and through his
exertions the responsibility of British Shipowners has now
been limited in the States, as well as in the Federal Courts
of the United States of America, to the same extent as the
Shipowners of that country would be held liable in an
action, through loss at sea by collision or otherwise,
brought against them in this country. See Parliamentary
Papers, ‘British Ships in American Waters,’ No. 236, 17th
May, 1871; and ‘United States Liability of Shipowners’
Collision,’ No. 173, 18th May, 1874.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com