HMCo #1053s Puffin

"The next year, 1927, he [NGH] designed another 'R' for Junius Morgan. This one was named 'Puffin' and had these dimensions: L.O.A., thirty-eight feet three inches; L.W.L., twenty-six feet six inches; beam, six feet six inches; draft, five feet eleven inches; and with her smaller beam was a good all-around boat though perhaps not in the class with some of the 'R's' that had improved sail plans, box section masts, and neat rigging. [Note that Puffin was apparently designed by Junius Morgan himself and not by NGH." (Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. The Wizard of Bristol. The Life and Achievements of Nathanael Greene Herreshoff, together with An Account of Some of the Yachts he Designed. New York, 1953, p. 310.)

"No. 1053.
Dec[ember] 1, 1926.
R Class boat for J. S. Morgan.
Frame spaces .85' = 10 3/16".
Sheer heights are to upper side of deck 7/8".
In making molds allow 13/16" for planking and for timbers 1 1/4" at head increasing 1/16" per foot. [N.G.H. was in Coconut Grove at the time this was written.]" (Source: Herreshoff, A. Sidney DeW.? [Penciled note in Offset Booklet HH.4.194.] Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection, MIT Museum, Cambridge, MA.)

"... The R Class has fallen off [compared to previous seasons], with only one new yacht added, Puffin, designed by her owner, Junius S. Morgan, and built by Herreshoff. The honors of the season were divided very equally between her and Bob-Cat, the rest of the class merely trailing along. Yankee [the sensational R-boat designed by L. F. Herreshoff in 1925], brought to Long Island Sound from Marblehead, added nothing to her old reputation; Doress was handicapped by the loss of two masts, Gamecock [#932s], Fifi [designed by Fife], Grayling [#966s], Astrild and Alarm were raced intermitttently and made but indifferent showing. The class has lost popularity on the Sound and the present outlook for 1928 is not promising. ..." (Source: Stephens, W. P. "Yachting Showed Slow Recovery From World War." Brooklyn Daily Eagle, December 25, 1927, p. C5.)

"20-Rating Class.
...
[#932s] R 40, Gamecock, Geo. Nichols
...
[#1053s] R 54, Puffin, Junius S. Morgan, Jr. ..." (Source: Anon. "Racing Numbers Long Island Sound Yacht Racing Association." Rudder, August 1928, p. 103.)

"1927. ... The Spring was a busy season with the builders and there was considerable buying and selling. Herreshoff's was building a mast for the big cutter Katoura [#1050s], said to be the tallest ever made at the plant. ...
In different stages of construction were a Newport 29 for William H. Vanderbilt [#999s Paddy], another R boat for Junius Morgan [#1053s Puffin], an S for I. B. Merriman [#1020s Vanessa], a 41-foot cutter for Elihu Root [#1057s Ti Navire], a 54-foot sloop for a New York yachtsman [#1058s Prestige], two of the Fisher's Island 31's [apparently #1054s Cyrilla IV and #1055s Judy] and the usual flock of 12 1/2-foot Bullseyes. ..." (Source: Davis, Jeff. Yachting in Narragansett Bay. Providence, 1946, p. 35.)

"[Item Transcription:] As I do not know what your address is I am mailing the enclosed blue print to you at the N. Y. Y. C. This shows more or less the type or boat which I would design for you if you give me the order [which will eventually be #1053s PUFFIN designed by Junius Morgan and not by LFH].
If you write me that you are interested in having me make you a design I should like to have all of your requirements and suggestions before I start the work. My charge for an 'R' boat design is $750.
I expect to start designing the new 'R' boat for Mr. Welch in about a month. I might be able to do both designs at the same time economically. I will, however, make the two boats different in shape and proportions if you like.
I am a very slow worker and probably would not complete all the details of Mr. Welche's[sic] design until February or later. The lines and sail plan are easy to do and I might have them completed in a few weeks after starting.
If there are any questions you would like to ask about the enclosed blue print please do so. Will you kindly keep this drawing confidential and also the design I may prepare especially for you.
I hope I may have the pleasure of receiving your order for this design and think you would find it quite interesting,
Yours very truly, ..." (Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. Letter to Morgan, Junius S. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.100. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1926-09-28.)
①

"[Item Transcription:] [Typewritten unsigned carbon copy:] I am greatly obliged to you for your letter of September 28th, and the blueprint. You may be sure that I will keep the drawing confidential and not show it to anyone who might infringe on your patents. As to the drawing itself I have comparatively few comments to make. The suggestions and comments for my own design [which will eventually be #1053s PUFFIN designed by Junius Morgan and not by LFH] would be somewhat as follows:-
(1) Hull --- It might be advantageous to take a little more beam, thereby making lines which might be somewhat better for fast going off the wind. Your design looks to me to tend towards a boat which would be extremely fast to windward, but I have some doubt as to her ability to go on a reach, or before the wind. This criticism may not be justified, but I am giving you my own ideas. The canoe stern does not appeal to me for various reasons, chief of them being, I think, the more standard type of stern would produce easier diagonals at after end of the boat. There should, of course, be no penalties either in displacement or q.b.l. I should prefer not to use the wet frame construction, and it may therefore be necessary to do away with the rounded corner at the deck. I should prefer also not to use the rubber fairing strips on either side of the rudder, but am willing to try your three piece rudder, if yon really wish to use it.
(2) Rig --- The sail plan you have worked out is extremely interesting, but it is such a radical departure from standard practice, that I hesitate to try it for the reason that I really have not got the time to devote to tuning up, and it would call for more time and attention than I can give to it to make the double surface sail fit well. Would it be possible to use a rotating mast, having a pear shaped section and put on it a track and single surfaced sail, as at present in general use? I think the forward strut to carry the jib is an excellent idea and in other ways entirely approve of the rig, but our opportunities for sailing and perfecting the details of our boats in this part of the country are so limited that I would prefer not to go to the extreme development at once. It may be, too, that you could give the jib a loose foot and lengthen it on the luff.
If you would like to go ahead on the basis of these suggestions and draw me a set of lines and a sail plan, I should like very much to have you do it and then finish up the design of the boat as quickly as your time allows. It might, of course, not be possible to have the design finished in time to build the boat for next season, but I should like to have you undertake the work for me and should buy the plans from you for #$750, as you suggest, when they are done. Will you let me know if this is in accord with your ideas?" (Source: Morgan, Junius S. Letter to Herreshoff, L. Francis. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.99. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1926-10-04.)
① ②

"[Item Transcription:] [Typewritten signed 8-page letter:] All the suggestions in your letter seem very reasonable to me and I am very willing to incorporate them in a design for you [that will eventually become #1053s PUFFIN --- to Junius Morgan's own design]. You must understand however that with these modifications you will not get the extreme clipper which I may make for some one else, I will not take an order from any one else for an 'R' boat down the Sound though unless you definitely decide not to build.
I am now going to discuss some of your suggestions but only in hope that it will be of interest to you and not in an attempt to influence you to change your requirements. I will take them up in the order they are mentioned in your letter of Oct. 4.
# 1 Hull- If the hull is given a larger beam-length ratio it will give the boat more wetted surface compared to lateral resistance,- it will decrease the percentage of ballast weight, (the hull wood work will weigh more). Increase in beam makes it much harder to get the Q. B. L. [Quarter Beam Length] in comfortably.
If the W. L. beam is 6ft-6in or more it will be necessary to use the conventional transom but as your boat would be kept in a part of the country where people christen anything new as a freak it may be well to stick to the conventional.
The reasons for the pointed stern are that it [p. 2] in creases the length of the immersed displacement when sailing, (these boats sail on quite a level keel and make a large wave under the quarter). This is particularly so when reaching and the YANKEE did not at all take advantage of this following quarter wave.
The pointed stern is cheaper to build and lighter. When people get accustomed to it I am sure they will think it also much handsomer. As for sea-worthiness the double-ender is far superior in a following sea as it resists pooping. This may make someone laugh who has not had this experience but I was once washed right away from the tiller and knocked down in the cockpit of a small boat by a following coamer. These things make an impression on one. In every way I consider a length to beam ratio of more than 4 a mistake when a boat is to have a high, narrow rig for if the beam is more than that the hull will not have enough tendency to swing off to counteract the strong luffing tendency the high narrow rig has. The wide boat when knocked down will at times get out of control and come up in the wind. In fact experience and careful observation show that the narrow boat is the safest, dryest, cheapest and fastest. The narrow boat under either the Universal or International rule has the most headroom. This is unquestionably the most necessary dimension for comfort.
Of late years there have been numerous people who have preached the desirability of great beam. They have spoken of Capt. Slocum's SPRAY, whaling ships, etc.
[p. 3] They never seem to mention Capt. Voss' TILIKUM with length to beam ratio of almost 8 or speak of how much more comfortable one of our modern destroyers would be than a whaling ship if traveling at the rate of 10 miles per hour against a full gale. I believe that the ease with which a boat can be handled is nearly in direct proportion to its sail area, all other things being equal. If this is so it is interesting to note that in the R and Q classes the S. A., and beam have remained the same since since before leg-o-mutton sails were adopted; the length and room (displacement) though, have been greatly increased making the boats much better than they were. If some new invention is made which increases the efficiency of sails for their measured area, the boats will again make an increase in length and room. I thank the Lord we have a rule which allows a hull which can be changed to best fit the requirements of sail plan. Some people think that a woman and a sail boat must be short, homely and heavily built to have good qualities; I don't belong to this school.
The web frame construction used on YANKEE was worked out after considerable study to make it possible to build a boat which would retain her designed shape during and after construction. It is also much stronger, slightly lighter and cheaper to build. It also holds a much smoother bottom. I am now designing a power boat which is being built with this construction and I shall probably use it in all types of boats, cruising or racing later. I think it will work out fine in big boats.
If you have your boat built at Bristol it will [p. 4] probably be best to use the old fashioned construction for they use a mold for every frame which is a help in holding shape, at least during the first part of the time. Also at Bristol there is no one of intelligence actively in charge of construction now so that to use anything new would be practically impossible.
Rig- For several years I have been trying to work out a stream-lined shape mast either swiveling or stationary. So far the only solution to the problem I have been able to make has been the one I sent you. This is principally on account of construction reasons. I will try again to work out something along the line you suggest but it will probably be necessary to use a mast almost exactly like YANKEE's but with a strut for forestay. I approve of making the fore triangle larger as you suggest but I do not at all approve of the loose footed jib which necessitates cutting the foot very high to make it set. With a jib like the GAMECOCK [#932s] carried at Newport it is useless to think of trying to race for the amount of wind which escapes down and under it as appalling. Of course driving force is only acquired from wind driven toward the stern and any that escapes is a loss. The boom on the YANKEE was designed to stop the down-flow of air and I noticed that you had one on GRAYLING [#966s] which was similar but not quite as efficient for the purpose.
In your letter you did not suggest any dimensions. This being the case how do you like these which I am giv[ing] beside those of YANKEE?
[p. 5] New Boat; YANKEE
L.W.L.; 26.25ft; 26ft
L.O.A.; 38.ft; 37ft
W.L. Beam; 6.50ft; 6.42ft
Ex. Beam; 7ft; 6.75ft
Measured S. A.; 590 sq.ft.; 592
Actual S. A.; 625; 622
When I consider all the things which we are not going to do in this new boat it seems as if we were leaning backward when we are trying to go ahead. Nevertheless I am willing to try this practically impossible proposition of trying to gain speed without decreasing resistance or increasing driving power. Of course the boat will have to have perfect sails and be well sailed or she won't beat YANKEE.
I hear that Mr. Mallory and his followers are making another attempt to have the Universal rule discarded and the International rule adopted for the measurement of racing boats in this country. If they are successful I am afraid the result will be a great disaster to yachting in general for the following reasons:-
(1) Uncertainty about the rule is discouraging many people and keeping some I know of from building.
(2) The building of boats under Lloyds rule is so complicated that their cost will be prohibitive.
(3) Lloyds rules were originally gotten up by a body of men who are principally familiar with ship construction. There are so many alternatives in them that it is practically impossible to have two boats by different designers come anywhere near the same weight and strength. A designer will have to become a sea-lawyer, politician and grafter [p. 6] to get any satisfaction from their stupid inspectors.
(4) It will be easy to build terrible freaks and unsafe boats which will win under the International rule.
(5) The International rule being an addition rule, it is possible to build boats with large sails and small hulls or others with large hull measurements and small sails so that the boats never finish close together in different weather conditions. In fact the rule is so poor that the British do not even use it in their large classes. (Note: the BRITANIA, LULWORTH, WHITE HEATHER, SHAMROCK AND WESTWARD [#692s] raced together under arbitrary handicaps with no measurement all summer.)
(6) If the Sound clubs adopt this foolish International rule they probably will have to race with themselves for it is unlikely that any other locality will actually build boats to it even if their representatives are misguided and do vote for its adoption.
If some one could only explain to these people that our Universal Role is developing a type of boat which is as large, safe, dry, comfortable for its sail area and that all good boats which are well sailed always finish close together in any breeze, they might realize the great harm they are doing in stopping this good development.
Some bolshevists down the sound have started the cry that the Universal rule is developing an unwholesome type of boat. The common people who do not stop to think have taken up the cry and are making great heroes of anyone who can think of new imaginary complaints against it.
[p. 7] So far their complaints are that the the freeboard is too small, the beam too narrow and length too great. Before they had run amock some one should have explained to them that freeboard is only required to keep the boat dry and to keep the lee rail from going under water. In these respects the 'R' boats are superior to any other type of boat. Beam and length I have discussed above.
Some of them have said the 'R' boats would not make a desirable type of boat if scaled up to 50ft rating. Of course large boats are always built [to] different proportions from small ones, besides the rule calls for different proportions but at any rate if a large boat were made as much like an 'R' boat as possible under the rule she certainly would be a beautiful thing and have accommodation enough to comfortably carry all her gear and live aboard of. In other words she would have the same S. A. and freeboard as present fifties, her displacement or room might be 40% more, she would be stiffer, dryer and faster, much easier in a sea and practically never have to shorten sail, in fact a far superior yacht to any we have ever had. Another complaint they make is that the boats are getting bigger and bigger every year. This of course is only because the driving power per square foot of sail has been increased. I consider this a fine thing and hope it will increase still more. If the boats in a certain class have increased in expense more than a certain person's pocket book can stand he should go into the next smaller class. It is high time an open designed 'S' class was started on the Sound anyway, as they would have slightly larger hulls than 6 metre [p. 8] boats, be cheaper, faster and in every way better, our rule cannot be beaten and we cannot increase our sail area for rating. (See table of S. A. for classes 'S', 'R' and 'Q' on page 154 of 'Elements of Yacht Design').
I beg your pardon for writing you this long drawn-out letter but some of the subjects touched on excite me particularly at this time when I have just heard that the Advisory Committee of the N. Y. R. A. is going to put a vote before the next meeting to adopt the International rule.
As soon as I get a reply to this letter I will start on some drawing for you and am agreeable to the understanding in the last paragraph of your letter of Oct. 4.
Yours very truly, ..." (Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. Letter to Morgan, Junius S. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.97. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1926-10-07.)
① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧

"[Item Transcription:] [Typewritten unsigned carbon copy.] I am greatly obliged to you for your extremely interesting letter of October 7th. I was anxious to see what you would say to my objections and am very glad to have your comment.
As to the new design, the dimensions look to me about right. I am perfectly willing to have the waterline [of what will become #1053s PUFFIN --- to Junius Morgan's own design] up to 26ft 6in or even 26ft 9in. The beam can be 6ft 6in or less, if you think it advisable; and I should be very much interested to see how the lines work out for the pointed stem, with the idea that if the boat is built, that kind of stern will be used. So you have practically a free hand as to the hull, except for the type of construction, and my reason for objecting to the web-frame is chiefly due to the fact that it occupies so much of the available space below. As the 'R' Class is supposed to be a cabin class, this construction would, in my opinion, make the boat open to protest under the spirit of the rule if not the letter. I quite understand the reasons in favor of that construction and it might be possible to use it in part. I am not one of those who favor using great beam merely for the sake of having it, for I agree with you that the narrow boat has every advantage; but it seemed to me that easier sailing lines for running and reaching might be produced by taking a little more beam. But you can make the design as narrow as you please.
As to the rig, I quite understand your objection to the loose footed jib and am prepared to abide by your judgment in it. I still prefer to stick to the more conventional rig, as suggested in my letter, if you can work it out.
[p. 2] Your remarks on rules are of great interest to me, but it looks to me as if any radical change from what we now have is very unlikely for the present. I think myself, with you, that the present measurement rule is very satisfactory.
I hope the foregoing remarks will help you in forming your ideas for a design and shall look forward with much interest to seeing the lines and sail plan when you are ready to send them to me.
Sincerely yours, ..." (Source: Morgan, Junius S. Letter to Herreshoff, L. Francis. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.98. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1926-10-14.)
① ②

"[Item Transcription:] [Typewritten, signed letter. It appears Junius S. Morgan had arranged with LFH for the design of an R-boat at the same time (or a bit earlier) that he was beginning to design his own R-boat #1053s PUFFIN.] It is very nice to have a complete understanding with an owner before designing a boat for him. I think we now understand each other and I will soon send you some lines.
I think I can arrange some method of construction allowing all steam bent frames above the floor for 6ft-6in in the region of the cabin house and will try and arrange the interior of the boat to have the maximum amount of room. I will send you sketch of this later.
I do not want to contradict you on your theory that the lines of a boat are made easier (straighter) by increasing the beam, but if you take a compass and place its stationary leg on the intersection of center line and waterline and make a semi circle of radius of 1/2 beam on the midship section you will see how much greater curve there is in the lines sideways than up and down. Of course this is not considering the keel which is somewhat of an appendage.
There may have been some boats which were fast off the wind that were wide but it may have been some other factor than width that made them so.
I believe the low sharp stern is going to greatly increase the speed when running. Besides this if you are desiring a boat to be particularly fast off the wind I will do several things to make her so.
The sail plan, spars and rigging I will try to make as conventional as I can but I think about as much of a designer who copies other people's work as the artists think of a painter who copies previous pictures.
I certainly am very much pleased to hear that there will probably not be much change made in our present measurement rule.
I hope you will ask as many questions about your design when you get it as you can because by so doing we may both learn something, I hope you will give me an opportunity to explain my reasons for all eccentricities for I will not make any departure from the conventional unless I have some reason for so doing.
Yours very truly, ..." (Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. Letter to Morgan, Junius S. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.93. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1926-10-15.)
① ②

"[Item Transcription:] [Unsigned typewritten letter marked 'File Copy':] I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter [about what will become #1053s PUFFIN] of October 15th addressed to Mr. Junius S. Morgan, Jr.
Mr. Morgan is away on a holiday, but I shall bring your letter to his attention upon his return to the office on Monday next.
Yours faithfully,
Secretary." (Source: Morgan, Junius S. (secretary). Letter (copy) to Herreshoff, L. Francis. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.94. Correspondence, Folder 30, formerly 179. 1926-10-18.)
①

"[Item Description:] Set of glued-together sections for #1053 PUFFIN. Apparently to facilitate displacement and center of buoyancy calculations." (Source: Morgan, Junius (???) (creator). Sections. MIT Museum, Hart Nautical Collections, Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection Item HH.6.024. Box HAFH.6.1B, Folder Hull No. 1053s. No date (1927-11 ???).)
① ② ③ ④ ⑤

"[Item Transcription:] I am very much interested to hear that you are having an 'R' [#1053s PUFFIN] built and, only from the motive of curiosity, I suppose, I am interested to know who is the designer [Junius S. Morgan himself].
I do not at all blame you for being a little uneasy about the time factor, but as I had understood from you before you were in no hurry. At any rate I trust that there is no other thing that has dissatisfied you.
If it is agreeable to you, I should like to continue our previous agreement until I am able to get some one else to take over your commission. The reason for this is financial. You probably can realize this when I tell you that my only resources are from what I have saved when a draftsman working for someone else. Last summer I was practically forced to start up in business for myself on account of changes in the concern for which I worked, so that for some time I have to lay my work out carefully to meet expenses. At any rate if I get another order for an 'R' from anywhere I shall consider it to annul your order.
In the meantime I can hardly tell you how pleased I am that you really are building for should enough yachtsmen build and maintain interest in our rule I believe it will continue in spite of some movement against it. I want you to believe that I shall be glad to help you if I can or the designer of your new boat with information or dimensions of 'R' boats which I am familiar with.
In fact I shall be disappointed if we do not have some discussion on the art of designing this type of boat for I had looked forward to it this winter, and if you are interested I will send you from time to time some of the plans developed during the winter, besides yours with which I will go along as planned.
[p. 2] I believe the development of racing, sailing yachts has been extremely slow compared with other arts like aeroplane design. There seem to be only a few of us now who want to make advancement. We must stick together and work together or we shall be overpowered by those who apparently want to dictate that yachts must be like some previous type or else slower.
I hope some yachtsmen will get together soon and form a society for the development of yachts. It seems that many yacht clubs and organizations, including some publications, are trying to prohibit advancement and development and would like to have rules to prevent yachts from being different from some existing ones. Can you imagine what yachts would be like if such rules were put into force an hundred years ago?
Each year now new materials and new, sound ways of construction are developed. If some one in the future can devise a way of making yachts stronger, longer lived and cheaper he should not be prevented from so doing.
It is well known that practically all the characteristics of a modern cruising boat are the development of things first used on racing yachts. This includes model, rig, spars and fittings; and particularly methods of building. There are so many things in naval architecture of which nothing is known (ie. great difference of opinion) that our only hope is to do some methodical experimenting.
Our Universal Rule, and particularly the 'R'-class, seems to allow latitude for development and if we could do away with all scantling rules and substitute for them by not allowing more than 75% ballast we would have more leeway and undoubtedly would develop boats both strong and cheaper than now is the case. To weigh the keel (during construction) and other ballast of a boat would be a very easy and accurate operation.
As it is now, mahogany varies in weight over 30%. No one knows exactly what hard pine is. (One man's definition of it was that it was all hard pine which was not soft pine). There is no simple way to check what weight of wood is actually used in a boat by the measure.
I want to thank you for what you have done in standing up for our rule, and hope you will have pleasure and success with your new boat.
Yours very truly, ..." (Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. Letter to Morgan, Junius S. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.95. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1926-11-22.)
① ②

"[Item Transcription:] I am much pleased that you will allow me to continue with the designs of an 'R' boat, and I was much surprised to learn who your designer is. I congratulate you for having confidence enough to go ahead with the work yourself for it is very seldom, I find, that yacht owners dare to do this. I think you will have lots of fun out of it and am sure it will increase your general interest in 'R' boats. I shall be very much interested to see the boat [#1053s PUFFIN] later on and if I get a chance I will go to Bristol and see her when she is set up.
In regard to the amount of ballast-some of the recent 'R' boats have, it might interest you to know that the 'YANKEE' had over eighty percent of lead ballast. That is why I suggested 75% as a reasonable limit. Of course you understand that I believe the 'YANKEE's' structure, in spite of its lightness, is about fifty percent stronger than any other 'R' boat I know of, with the possible exception of the 'GOSSOON', the construction of which was a copy. This statement about the strength of this construction may seem to you very bold, but if you were to study all of it very carefully you might credit it with even the greatest strength.
No doubt you have heard that the 'YANKEE' has been sold to Mr. [James] Alker. Mr. Welch is now going right ahead with his boat [LIVE YANKEE] so that I shall be hard at work on her very soon now. If it is agreeable to you I will make your drawings after his.
I have planned to have considerable accomodation in your boat which I will later describe to you. I shall be glad later on to do anything I can to help you in tuning up your new boat. Possibly later on I will write you a letter telling something about the care of new sails." (Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. Letter to Morgan, Junius S. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.96. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1926-11-24.)
①

"[Item Description:] Notes and sketches regarding #1053 PUFFIN. Possibly a work list and mentioning "Boat to be in Glen Cove 1st of May" [1927]. Possibly written by Junius Morgan." (Source: Morgan, Junius S. (?). Correspondence (notes and sketches) to Herreshoff Manufacturing Co. (?). MIT Museum, Hart Nautical Collections, Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection Item HH.6.024. Box HAFH.6.1B, Folder Hull No. 1053s. No date (1927-04 ?).)
① ②

"[Item Description:] Calculations regarding #1053 PUFFIN. Apparently rating related." (Source: MIT Museum, Hart Nautical Collections, Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection Item HH.6.024. Calculations. Box HAFH.6.1B, Folder Hull No. 1053s. No date (1927-04 ?).)
①

"[Item Description:] Dimensioned sketch titled 'Jib Sheet Attachment for # 15429 [for #1053s PUFFIN]'." (Source: MIT Museum, Hart Nautical Collections, Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection Item HH.6.024. Sketch. Box HAFH.6.1B, Folder Hull No. 1053s. No date (1927-04 ???).)
①

"[Item Transcription:] Herreshoff Mfg. Co., Bristol, R. I., May 4, 1927
Shop Order No 1053 [#1053s PUFFIN] To Drafting Room
For Mr. Junius S. Morgan, Jr.
1. Shorten pins in all spreaders.
2. Install cleats for spinnaker halyard
3. Fix tiller.
4. Cleats for Jib sheets.
5. Secure mast collar.
6. Make truck on mast head.
7. Put removable bronze pin in bow chock.
8. Put capstan handle on board.
9. Install Compass in cockpit floor.
10. Install locks on doors and catches on hatches.
11. Put corks in holes in deck plate.
12. Fasten deck plate around collar.
13. Put on racing marks.
14. Paint boot top." (Source: Herreshoff Manufacturing Co. (creator). Work Order. MIT Museum, Hart Nautical Collections, Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection Item HH.6.024. Box HAFH.6.1B, Folder Hull No. 1053s. 1927-05-04.)
①

"[Item Transcription:] It is some time since I have written you. About half a year ago I was going to draw an 'R' boat for you. On account of several other things coming up I never got very far with the design.
Don't you think now that, if you are still interested in an 'R' design, we had better wait until your new 'R' boat [#1053s PUFFIN] and Mr. Welch' new 'R' boat [LIVE YANKEE] have been tried out; and, too, I will try to make observations of Mr. Paine's new boat. In the meantime, if this meets with your approval, I will send you some photographs of the latest 'R' boats.
Just now I am making some plans of a semi-cruising sloop, 27ft 9in on the water line for the man who now owns the 'R' boat SCAPA [#729s]. I am going to try to make this new boat rate in the 'R' class and am certainly sorry there is a limit to the amount of benefit the rule at present allows for displacement; otherwise I believe this boat could be made a wholesome cruiser with more sail area than the rule now allows so that she might race on even terms with the present type of 'R' boat.
If any changes are contemplated, for the Universal Rule I wish they could change the rule back to the way it was originally, then large displacement, bulky boats would be allowed large sail and could race with some chance with their leaner sisters which, of course, would be required to have much less sail area.
Yours very truly, ..." (Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. Letter to Morgan, Junius S. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.2. Correspondence, Folder 34, formerly 183. 1927-05-24.)
①

"[Item Transcription:] I do not know how George Cormack got the impression I have made a model for M class racing, for I have made none for that class since the ADVENTURESS, now KALINGA [#685s]. Perhaps George had in mind a model I made before the [New York] 50s of the 20 rating class to be sent to England [#624s SONYA], which is I think about 53ft l.w.l. This however is not a suitable model for M class. The 50s are better.
It is interesting to know you are thinking of building in the M class and that you are working on lines &c. If you succeed as well as you did in the R class with PUFFIN #1053s it will be a great credit to you.
I am no longer interested in racing models, and do not expect to do any more in that line of designing.
With kindest regards, ..." (Source: Herreshoff, N.G. Letter to Morgan, Junius S. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Acc. 98.56. Correspondence, Folder 31, formerly 180. 1928-01-13.)
①

"[Item Description:] HMCo 4-page promotional pamphlet with photos of #1053s PUFFIN ('built by the Herreshoff Manufacturing Company to lines and instructions from her owner' [Junius Morgan]), #385p VARA, #1058s PRESTIGE, #384p SHUTTLE, #377p ARA, [#1074s] SHEERNESS, [#1131s] ISTALENA" (Source: Herreshoff Manufacturing Co. (creator). Pamphlet. Herreshoff Marine Museum Collection Item LIB_6790. HMM Library Rare Books Room (Box 5), Folder 179A. No date (1930).)
① ② ③

Note: This list of archival documents contains in an unedited form any and all which mention #1053s Puffin even if just in a cursory way. Permission to digitize, transcribe and display is gratefully acknowledged.

• Puffin (MIT Museum-made index card)
• Puffin (MIT Museum-made index card)
• Note: The vessel index cards comprise two sets of a total of some 3200 cards about vessels built by HMCo, with dimensions and information regarding drawings, later or former vessel names, and owners. They were compiled from HMCo's early days until 1920 and added to in later decades, apparently by Hart Nautical curator William A. Baker and his successors. While HMCo seems to have used only one set of index cards, all sorted by name and, where no name was available, by number, later users at MIT apparently divided them into two sets of cards, one sorted by vessel name, the other by vessel number and greatly expanded the number of cards. Original HMCo cards are usually lined and almost always punched with a hole at bottom center while later cards usually have no hole, are unlined, and often carry substantially less information. All cards are held by the Francis Russell Hart Nautical Collections of the MIT Museum in Cambridge, Mass.

Name: Puffin
Type: J & M R
Length: 26'6"
Owner: Morgan, Junius S., Jr.

Source: Herreshoff Manufacturing Company. "A Partial List of Herreshoff Clients." In: Herreshoff Manufacturing Company. Herreshoff Yachts. Bristol, Rhode Island, ca. 1931.

• Puffin
• Wampus ex-Puffin
• Note: The L. Francis Herreshoff index cards comprise a set of some 1200 cards about vessels built by HMCo, with dimensions and / or ownership information. Apparently compiled in the early 1930s, for later HMCo-built boats like the Fishers Island 23s or the Northeast Harbor 30s are not included. Added to in later decades, apparently by L. F. Herreshoff as well as his long-time secretary Muriel Vaughn and others. Also 46 cards of L. F. Herreshoff-designed vessels. The original set of index cards is held by the Herreshoff Marine Museum and permission to display is gratefully acknowledged.

Name: Puffin
Type: "R" boat
Owner: Junius S. Morgan, Jr.
Year: 1927
Row No.: 551

Source: Herreshoff, L. Francis. "Partial List of Herreshoff-Built Boats." In: Herreshoff, L. Francis. Capt. Nat Herreshoff. The Wizard of Bristol. New York, 1953, p. 325-343.

Month: Nov
Day: 20
Year: 1926
E/P/S: S
No.: 1053
Name: Puffin
LW: 26' 6"
Rig: J & M
K: y
Ballast: Lead Outside
Amount: Cost Plus
Notes Constr. Record: "R" Class
Last Name: Morgan
First Name: J. S.

Source: Vermilya, Peter and Maynard Bray. "Transcription of the HMCo. Construction Record." Unpublished database, ca. 2000.

Note: The transcription of the HMCo Construction Record by Peter Vermilya and Maynard Bray was performed independently (and earlier) than that by Claas van der Linde. A comparison of the two transcriptions can be particularly useful in those many cases where the handwriting in the Construction Record is difficult to decipher.

"[See also:] Sketches of rigging, models, hardware details - Calculations - Lists. In: Technical and Business Records pertaining to the Herreshoff Manufacturing Company, Series VI, Folder HH.6.24 (Hull No. 1053), Box HAFH.6.1B." (Source: Hasselbalch, Kurt and Frances Overcash and Angela Reddin: Guide to The Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection. Francis Russell Hart Nautical Collections, MIT Museum, Cambridge, Mass., 1997, p. 63-79.)

"Universal Rule Class R." (Source: van der Linde, Claas. March 7, 2009.)

"Sail no. R54." (Source: van der Linde, Claas. March 9, 2009.)

"Date of delivery estimated from note 'boat to be in Glen Cove 1st of May' [1927] work list held by the MIT Museum (Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection item no. HH.6.24)." (Source: van der Linde, Claas. September 10, 2018.)

"Built in 161 days (contract to delivered; equivalent to 66 lbs displacement/day)." (Source: van der Linde, Claas. January 16, 2024.)

"Sail area 593 sq. ft. from pencilled notes on plan 130-153." (Source: van der Linde, Claas. November 22, 2014.)

"W[eigh]t of hull without mast 10,613 [lbs]. [Note, this figure underestimates final displacement which was probably more than 11,000lbs.." (Source: Anon (Herreshoff Manufacturing Company or Junius S. Morgan?). Construction plan 76-159, HH.5.5596, Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection. Francis Russell Hart Nautical Collections, MIT Museum, Cambridge, Mass.)

Note: Research notes contain information about a vessel that is often random and unedited but has been deemed useful for future research.