They were perfectly prepared to experiment in the interest of improving quality, saving money or solving the age-old problem of vermin. The records are full of suggestions received, trials being organised and reported on. A few, such as iron water-tanks, were successful and wholesale changes were made. Others, and there were many more than the few recorded in these pages, were so weird that one has to wonder whether they really believed they might work, or were just paying lip-service to an influential idea-suggester. Contemplating such ideas as the lobsters as weevil-repellents, one realises the depth of the void between the Georgian world and our own; we are so bombarded by information on all possible topics that it would surely be difficult to find anyone today who would believe that a lobster could survive in a barrel of weevilly flour, let alone drive out the weevils.
So why, we might ask, if they were so happy to experiment and happy to adopt new things which had proved successful in trials, did they not immediately adopt the new technology of food canning? Mainly because the concept came too late. The inventor of the process, the Frenchman Nicolas Appert, had offered samples to the French navy for trial in 1803 and they had responded with enthusiasm, as did the government committee appointed to investigate. He was awarded 12,000 francs to publish details of his process, but these were not available until 1810. The process was then patented in Britain and the Dartford firm of Donkin & Hall developed the process. After sending samples to Sir Joseph Banks and Lord Wellesley, they persuaded the Victualling Board to give their canned food a sea trial. The three captains who performed the trial in 1813 were also enthusiastic but the Victualling Board was not happy about the high price of canned food (nor, it should be said, was the general public when cans were put on general sale). Although it was supplied to ships bound on polar and other voyages of exploration from 1814, tinned food did not become a standard part of the ordinary ship’s provisions until 1847.3 It might have gained a wider and faster use if the invention had come ten years earlier but by the time those trials were completed, it was becoming obvious that the long war was coming to an end. The Victualling Board’s attention was increasingly focused on running down and then disposing of the food stocks they did have, and innovations were a long way down their priority list. So they cannot be blamed for not trying to fix something that showed no signs of being broken.
What about improving the seaman’s diet? Should they not have been doing something about that? Actually, no: the Victualling Board’s job was not to act as dietary consultants, even had the concept existed at the time. Their task was one of pure logistics – to obtain good-quality supplies and deliver them to the end user without delay, to get value for money and generally to see that the rules were complied with. When the rules were changed, for instance when it was decreed that fresh meat and vegetables should be supplied, they quickly set up systems to do so. It certainly was no fault of the Victualling Board that it took the medical profession so long to accept that citrus fruit was the answer to scurvy.
Could they have done a better job if they had done it differently? By the end of the Napoleonic War they were doing it differently from the way they had been doing it seventy years earlier. Although in some areas they had to be pushed by the Parliamentary Commissioners, in general they regularly refined and improved their systems and thus the effectiveness of what they achieved. They had gone from a situation where almost everything was supplied by outside contractors to a point where the greatest proportion was supplied by the Victualling Board itself. As the theatres of war expanded and shifted, so the Victualling Board organised local collection points for supplies and when those were not easily reachable, they provided the pursers with cash and a system which allowed them to buy supplies wherever they found themselves.
It is hard to see how they could have done anything else differently, allowing for the available technology and the administrative systems of the day. Reading about some modern examples of supplying fighting forces far from home, those of Vietnam, the Falklands campaign and the Gulf wars, one soon realises that modern technology does not make that much difference. The problem with modern technology is that it only works properly when a complex infrastructure exists: big aircraft need proper airports, big transport ships need proper unloading facilities, and both need proper storage facilities to put the goods in and road or rail transport systems to move the goods from the port to the user, all of which are vulnerable to enemy action.4 At the end of the day, you can use computers, aircraft and container ships but you are still at the mercy of the sea and the weather, the co-operation of the locals, and above all, the competence and drive of your personnel. And in the set of wars we are discussing, while those last two factors may not have been perfect, they were well above the average and well above that of the competition, and that made all the difference.
So, allowing for the fact that sometimes the desire to get value for money moved higher up the priority list than was strictly necessary, and allowing also for the fact that any government trough will always attract a number of opportunist snouts, we have to come to the conclusion that the Victualling Board and everyone else involved in the supply and delivery chain did a pretty good job most of the time. By reliable and regular deliveries of food and drink to the British fleet, that fleet was enabled to remain at sea, to reach its destinations and to remain on station, month after month, year after year, throughout all the long years of struggles against the French and Spanish, the Dutch and Americans, and all the other nations which threatened British freedom.
Appendix 1
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
______
Few of the forms of measurement used in Georgian times are in use today. The following will, I hope, clarify matters for those who are not familiar with the old forms of British weights, measures and money.
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
1 ton equals 2240 pounds (not to be confused with the metric measure of 1 tonne, which is 1000 kilograms).
1 hundredweight (cwt) equals 112 pounds.
1 pound (lb) avoirdupois equals 454 grams.
16 ounces equals 1 pound.
1 ounce equals 28.375g (but is generally converted as 25g in recipes).
An English pint is 20 fl oz (560ml), an American pint is 16 fl oz (448ml). In both cases, 8 pints equals 1 gallon.
‘Wine measure’ is slightly less than the usual English liquid measure ‘Beer measure’. The wine measure, which is ⅚ of beer measure, equates to the modern American liquid measure. This difference dates from 1844, when the British dropped the old Queen Anne measure but the Americans retained it.1
BARREL SIZES
‘Barrel’ and ‘Cask’ are both general terms and both refer to the old wooden, roughly round, containers which were used for both liquids and dry stuffs.
A tun, also known as a leaguer, contains approximately 250 gallons.2
A pipe contains approximately 105 gallons, and is generally used only for wine.
A hogshead contains 52½ gallons; a half-hogshead, about 26 gallons.
A butt contains 108 or 126 gallons (depending on whether the content is wine or beer).
A firkin contains 56 pounds of butter or 9 gallons beer.
A puncheon could contain anything from 70 to 120 gallons, but was more likely to contain dry stuffs. Half-puncheons were also used.
A bushel is a dry measure of volume containing 8 gallons.
MONEY
It is almost impossible to calculate modern value equivalents of Georgian money; all one can do, therefore, is explain how the currency worked.
One pound sterling, written £1, or £1.0s.0d, consisted of 20 shillings, or 240 pennies. Thus 1 shilling consisted of 12 pennies, and was written as 1s, or 1/-. Its modern decimal equivalent is 5 pence.
Pennies could be divided into halfpence and farthings and were written as 1d, ½d or ¼d. The decimal equivalent, as such, does not exist, but to put it the other way round, 1 decimal penny is worth 2.4 old pennies.
Other coins included the crown, w
hich was worth 5 shillings (25 decimal pence); half a crown, which was worth two shillings and sixpence (12½ decimal pence), the florin, which was worth two shillings (sometimes referred to as ‘two bob’ and now worth 10 decimal pence), the sixpence (a ‘tizzy’ or later, a ‘tanner’ and now worth 2½ decimal pence) and the threepenny piece or ‘thruppenny bit’.
1 guinea was worth £l.1s.0d, or 21 shillings.
Appendix 2
OFFICIAL SUBSTITUTES FOR
SPECIES OF PROVISIONS1
_____
‘When it may be found necessary to issue any other Species of Provisions or Substitutes for the above, it is to be observed that they are to be furnished in the following proportions, viz.
A pint of Wine, or half a pint of Spirits, is equal to a Gallon of Beer, and when Wine or Spirits are demanded, one fourth part only of the whole proportion is to be issued in Wine.
Four pounds of Flour, or three pounds thereof, with one pound of Raisins, are equal to a four-pound piece of Salt Beef. Half a pound of Currants, or half a pound of Beef Suet, is equal to one pound of Raisins. Four pounds of Fresh Beef, or three pounds of Mutton, are equal to four pounds of Salt Beef; and three pounds of Fresh Beef, or Mutton, to a two-pound piece of Salt Pork, with Pease.
One pint of Calavances, or Doll, is equal to a pint of Pease.
Whenever Rice is issued for Bread, Pease, Oatmeal, or Cheese, one pound of Rice is to be considered as equal to one pound of Bread, a pint of Pease, a quart of Oatmeal, or a pound of Cheese.
A pint of Wheat, or of Pot Barley, is equal to a pint of Oatmeal; five pounds and three-quarters of Molasses are equal to one gallon of Oatmeal.
When Sugar is substituted for Oatmeal, Butter, or Cheese, one pound of Sugar is equal to two quarts of Oatmeal, one pound of Butter, or one pound of Cheese.
A pint of Oil is equal to a pound of Butter, or two pounds of Cheese; and half a pound of Cocoa, or a quarter of a pound of Tea, is equal to one pound of Cheese.’
Appendix 3
CALORIFIC VALUES OF
NAVAL FOODSTUFFS
______
The figure of 4500 calories usually quoted for the naval diet appears to be derived from a chart which is seriously flawed in several respects: first by reading ‘bisket’ as ‘brisket’ in the document from which the list of food was taken (the difference in calories per 100g between the two foodstuffs being 290 calories), secondly by faulty conversions from eighteenth-century weights to grams/millilitres, and thirdly for several inaccurate calorie-counts.1
A more accurate calculation is as follows:2
As can be seen from the notes, it is difficult to be exact on some items, since the modern calorie counts are calculated on modern types of beer and specific cuts of meat; the Georgian sailor could not know which cut of meat he was going to get until it arrived on his plate.
However, even as calculated, the amounts of total calories issued is still subject to many possible variations, not least of these being the official recommendation that on one day each week, the issue of beef should be replaced with 1½ lbs of flour and ½ lb of raisins. This substitution alone would bring the weekly ration up to 35,560 calories, and thus a daily average of 5080. Substitute suet for the raisins and the daily average goes up to 5134. The following table gives the calorie counts of the other types of food and drink used as substitutes. Note that there is a considerable difference between beer, wine and spirits; a man on red wine receives 624 calories less per day, one on spirits 420 less per day than those on beer.
Appendix 4
VITAMIN CONTENT OF NAVAL FOOD
______
The table below gives the Vitamin A and C content of naval foodstuffs which contained them. Where an item is not listed, it is because it contained neither. Some other items which are now known to be high in those vitamins are also listed. However, it should be noted that the figures given are close approximations only and cannot be as accurate as those obtained from modern commercially-produced products; the amount of vitamin (or any other property) in foodstuffs varies according to the variety of the plant, the soil conditions on which it was grown, the weather conditions during its growth and, particularly with Vitamin C, how and for how long it has been stored since harvesting. The same applies to animal products: breed, age, feeding, as well as the cut and storage of meat all give varied readings to the end product.
Vitamin A is necessary for vision in dim light; prolonged deficiency causing night-blindness. It is present in liver (including fish liver), kidneys, dairy produce and eggs, and to a certain extent in carrots, dark green or yellow vegetables, the amount of vitamin increasing with the darkness of the colour of the vegetable. The Vitamin A in meat and dairy products is of a type called retinol, that in vegetables of a type called beta-carotene, which the body converts into retinol and which is usually presented (as here) in ‘retinol-equivalent International Units’, shown as µg. The recommended daily allowance for a man between 19 and 50 is 1000 µg per day. The only standard species of official provisions containing Vitamin A were butter and cheese which would deliver weekly amounts of 1507 µg (butter), 1234 µg (cheese). The substitute items delivered hardly any.
Vitamin C is necessary for the maintenance of healthy connective tissue. Humans are among the few animals which cannot form their own Vitamin C. Prolonged deficiency causes bleeding, especially from capillary blood vessels and the gums, and wounds heal more slowly. If uncorrected, scurvy follows and eventually death. There is some in fresh meat (best is kidney or liver) but most in fruit and vegetables. The recommended daily allowance for a man between 19 and 50 is 90mg per day. Note that although the amount of Vitamin C shown in the table is less in cooked vegetables than raw, this is because the vitamin has leached out into the cooking water; where the end product is soup, the vitamin is still available to the eater.1
Vit.A (retinol equivalent units) µg per 100g Vit. C. mg per 100g
Apples (eating) 0 2
Apricots 91 6
Bananas 0 11
Blackcurrants 0 200 raw, 150 cooked2
Butter 887 0
Cabbage (average) 35 49 raw, 20 boiled
Carrots 1260 6 raw, 2 boiled
Cheese (Cheddar) 363 0
Cocoa (powder) 7 0
Cod liver oil 18,000 0
Eggs (boiled) 190 0
Grapes 0 4
Kidney, pigs (raw) 160 14
Lemon juice 0 40–60
Lime juice 0 25–30
Liver, lambs, fried 20,600 12
Liver, ox, stewed 20,100 15
Mangoes 300 37
Milk (whole) 55 1
Onions 2 10 raw, 6 boiled
Orange juice 0 40–50
Plums 49 4
Potatoes3 0 9
Raisins 2 0
Rosehip syrup 0 200
Sauerkraut 0 10–15
Scurvy grass4 0 200
Suet 52 0
Watercress 420 662
Wort 0 0.1
Appendix 5
BILLS OF EXCHANGE
_____
‘FORM OF A BILL OF EXCHANGE1
(Place & Date)
£ Sterling Exchange at per cent
Premium at per cent
Discount at per cent
Thirty days after sight of this my first (second, etc) Bill of Exchange pay to the order of (A. B.) the sum of (expressed in words) Sterling for value received by me, in the currency of this place, amounting to (expressed in words) and no more, according to the Rate of Exchange, Premium, or Discount above stated, and charge the same to my Account, for the services of His Majesty’s Victualling Establishment as per Advice.
…………………… Agent
To the Commissioners for Victualling
His Majesty’s Navy
________________
We do hereby certify that the Rate of Exchange, Premium, or Discount upon Bills drawn on London, drawn for the Public Service, were precisely as stated, on the ………. Day of …………. 18.… At this place
I hereby certify the Truth of what is above stated, and that the two Merchants are Persons of Respectability, and considered capable of judging what they have certified.
…………… (Collector of the Customs)
I approve of this Bill, and believe the Rate of Exchange, Premium, or Discount to be correctly stated.
………………… (Commissioner or Commander-in-chief)’
HOW BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND IMPREST ACCOUNTS WORKED
Bills of Exchange are an ancient form of what are now known as ‘negotiable instruments’ which can be passed from hand to hand without the consent of the person or body on whom they are drawn. They are simply a promise to pay a stated sum of money at a stated time. Bank notes and cheques are types of Bills of Exchange.
So if a purser were to give a merchant a Bill drawn on the Victualling Board for £100, that merchant could expect to present it to the Victualling Board and exchange it for that £100. That scenario would require the Bill to say ‘Pay on sight’, or as modern bank notes do, ‘Pay on demand’. More often they would say, as does the example on page 181, ‘Pay thirty days after sight’, which meant that the Victualling Board would not pay out until thirty days after the merchant presented it to them. Some Bills were ‘ninety-day’ Bills or, rarely, even longer periods. Merchants would not be very keen to accept such delayed payments unless there were a guarantee of some interest in compensation for the delay. On the other hand, they may have needed to get some money in their hands quickly, and thus would be prepared to sell the Bill to someone else at a discount. This was the common method of paying for all business transactions at the time, and the system worked very well. There were groups of British merchants all over the world who would buy such Bills at appropriate discounts, and many foreign merchants would happily accept them as well, unless their country was at war with Britain; even then they could cope with the situation by charging a bigger discount.
Feeding Nelson's Navy Page 22