the new railroad; and this expectation suffered a serious blow when the
horse cars failed to pay expenses; the operation of the line was
suspended; the directors lost faith in the enterprise; and many of the
principal stockholders declared that they would rather lose the
investment made so far than "throw good money after bad." For the hope
that the new agency of steam might help them out was blighted by the
news from England that Stephenson had said that steam could not be used
as a motive power on a road having curves of less than 900 feet radius;
and this road had, at Point of Rocks, a necessary curve with a radius of
only 150 feet!
The situation presented exactly the sort of challenge calculated to
arouse the courage and ingenuity of Peter Cooper, besides appealing to
another of his personal characteristics, namely, his undying and
unalterable faith in his own ideas and conclusions, whether they had
achieved recognition or not. He could lay aside a scheme which had not
found immediate and successful application, and turn his attention, with
undiminished vivacity, to something else; but he never owned to a real
defeat. And now the problem presented at Baltimore seemed to him a
providential call for his intervention. If the English engineers could
not run their locomotives around sharp curves, it must be because they
persisted in using the vicious crank, which he had already superseded by
his (temporarily unappreciated) invention! And, with unshaken faith in
that device, he informed the Baltimore and Ohio directors (to use the
words in which, long afterwards, he told the story) that he thought he
"could knock together a locomotive which would get a train around the
Point of Rocks."
It is a curious circumstance that, ever since that day, the
characteristic difference between English and American locomotives has
been the ability of the latter to pass curves of shorter radius than the
former can safely follow. The reason, as all railway engineers know, is
that the usual English construction involves a rigid frame, while the
American has a movable truck or "bogie" under the front part of the
engine. This solution of the problem was not reached by Mr. Cooper. What
he, in fact, accomplished was simply a piece of audacity, which
encouraged the enterprise of his countrymen, by proving that the dictum
of limited experience abroad was not conclusive. Two features of his
Baltimore experiment were characteristic of him. The first was that he
undertook it, not merely in order to vindicate his invention, but to
effect a practical result, namely, to make his land speculation pay. And
the second was that when he found it difficult to operate his pet
invention in this experiment, he laid it aside at once,--without losing
an atom of faith in it, but also without persisting (as a typical
enthusiast would have done) in risking upon the vindication of his
personal opinion in one matter the success of another undertaking, more
immediately important.
Mr. Cooper's own recollection of this event deserves to be told in his
own words. He says:[4]--
"I came back to New York for a little bit of a brass engine of
mine--about one horse power (it had a 3 1/2 in. cylinder and 14 in.
stroke)--and carried it back to Baltimore. I got some boiler iron and
made a boiler about as high as an ordinary wash boiler; and then how to
connect the boiler with the engine I didn't know. I couldn't find any
iron pipes. The fact was that there were none for sale in this country.
So I took two muskets, broke off the wooden parts, and used the barrels
for tubing, one on one side and the other on the other side of the
boiler. I went into a coach-maker's shop and made this locomotive, which
I called the Tom Thumb, because it was so insignificant. I didn't intend
it for actual service, but only to show the directors what could be
done. I meant to test two things: first, I meant to show that short
turns could be made; and secondly, that I could get rotary motion
without the use of a crank. I effected both of these things very nicely.
I changed the movement from a reciprocating to a rotary motion.
"I got up steam one Saturday night. The president of the road and two or
three other gentlemen were there. We got on the truck and went out two
or three miles. All were delighted; for it opened new possibilities for
the railroad. I put up the locomotive for the night in a shed, and
invited the company to ride to Ellicott's Mills on Monday. Monday
morning, what was my chagrin to find that some scamp had been there,
and chopped off all the copper from the engine,--doubtless in order to
sell it to some junk dealer!
"It took me a week or more to repair the machine; then some one got in
and broke a piece out of the wheel, in experimenting with it; and then
two wheels, cast one after the other, were damaged by the carelessness
of the turner. I was thoroughly disgusted and discouraged; but, being
determined that I would not be balked entirely, I changed the engine so
that the power could be applied through the ordinary connection with a
crank.[5]
"At last all was ready; and, on a Monday, we started,--six in the
engine, and thirty-six on the car which I took in tow. We went up an
average grade of eighteen feet to the mile; made the thirteen miles to
Ellicott's Mills in one hour and twelve minutes; and came back in
fifty-seven minutes. The result of that experiment was that the bonds
of the railroad company were sold at once, and there was no longer any
doubt as to the success of the road."
The Tom Thumb continued for several weeks to make trips to Ellicott's
Mills; and on one occasion (September 18, 1830) ran a race from Riley
House into Baltimore (about nine miles) with a light car, drawn on a
parallel track by a gray horse noted for speed and endurance. The
contest was planned by the stagecoach proprietors of Baltimore, with the
view of demonstrating that nothing could be gained by the substitution
of steam for horse power on the railroad. The gray horse won the race,
but not until after the Tom Thumb had passed him, and only by reason of
a temporary breakdown of the machine, which caused a delay too great to
be subsequently made up. Mr. Cooper's characteristic recollection of the
event, as given fifty-five years later, was that "they tried a little
race one day, but it didn't amount to anything. It was rather funny; and
the locomotive got out of gear."
Mr. Latrobe says of the Tom Thumb:--
"The machine was not larger than the hand cars used by workmen to
transfer themselves from place to place; and as the speaker now recalls
its appearance, the only wonder is that so apparently insignificant a
contrivance should ever have been regarded as competent to the smallest
results. But Mr. Cooper was wiser than many of the wisest around him.
His engine could not have weighed a ton; but he saw in it a principle
which the forty-ton engines of to-day have but served to develop and
demonstrate. The boiler of Mr. Cooper's engine was not as large as the
kitchen boiler attached to many a range in modern mansions. It was of
about the same diameter, but not much more than half as high. It stood
upright in the car, and was filled above the furnace, which occupied the
lower section, with vertical tubes. The cylinder was but three and one
half inches in diameter; and speed was got up by gearing. No natural
draft could have been sufficient to get up steam in so small a boiler;
and Mr. Cooper used, therefore, a blowing apparatus, driven by a drum,
attached to one of the car wheels, over which passed a cord, that, in
its turn, worked a pulley on the shaft of the blower. The contrivance
for dispensing with a crank, though its general appearance is
recollected, the speaker cannot describe with any accuracy; nor is it
important,--it came to nothing. . . .
"In a patent case, tried many years afterwards, the boiler of Mr.
Cooper's engine became, in some connection which has been forgotten,
important as a piece of evidence. It was hunted for, and found among
some old rubbish at Mount Clare. It was difficult to imagine that it had
even generated steam enough to drive a coffee mill, much less that it
had performed the feats here narrated."
After this experimental demonstration, the Tom Thumb retired into
honorable but obscure repose in its maker's warehouse at New York, from
which it emerged, fifty years later, to take part in the centennial
celebration of the beginning of the commercial history of Baltimore
(that place having been made a port of entry in 1780). According to a
contemporary report of the festival, "in the vast procession, Mr. Cooper
and his little Tom Thumb locomotive were the two most conspicuous
objects, and received all the honors which could be paid by a quarter of
a million of enthusiastic people."
FOOTNOTES:
[3] These and other statements in this chapter are taken from a lecture,
delivered March 23, 1868, before the Maryland Institute, by Hon. J. H.
B. Latrobe, giving his personal recollections of the early history of
the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad.
[4] Manuscript of his _Reminiscences_.
[5] This was the sacrifice of a favorite invention to immediate
practical considerations, which has been mentioned above as an instance
of Mr. Cooper's common sense.
VI
MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS
PETER COOPER'S acquaintance with the affairs of New York city ranged
from the time when, as a child, he was taken by his mother to see the
last remaining fragments of the stockade erected by the early
inhabitants for protection against the Indians, to the full metropolitan
glory of the decade of his death. This wonderful municipal history is
too commonly regarded from a special standpoint, as if it were but the
record of a continually renewed and often unsuccessful struggle against
corrupt and incompetent city government. Contests of this kind, under
democratic institutions, always occupy more space in the press, and make
more noise in public oratory, than the quiet but steady progress of
commercial undertakings, and the labors of unselfish citizens for
education, art, and social improvement, which go on beneath the
turbulent surface. Americans have long suffered under the unjust
imputation of peculiar devotion to "the almighty dollar." The fact is
that in no other country do individuals give so much or do so much
without pecuniary reward--whether for personal friendship or for public
spirit--as in the United States. The munificence of private benefactions
and endowments, far surpassing the government support given in other
nations to similar institutions, furnish an abundant proof of the first
half of this proposition; while the other half is proved by the
innumerable boards, committees, and other organized bodies, to which
active business men give time and thought without remuneration.
This spirit has never been wholly missed in public affairs, even in the
city of New York, so often charged with the lack of it. All the great
features of its municipal progress, even those which have been, at some
stage, tainted with lamentable corruption, have been originated or
supported by unselfish public spirit. It might even be said that
without this support, innocently given and deceitfully misused, the
schemers for private gain could not have achieved their periodical and
temporary successes.
Peter Cooper was an illustrious example of good citizenship in this
respect. First elected to public office as "assistant alderman," in
1828, he turned his attention immediately upon the subject most
important to the growth and welfare of a city, yet most likely to be
neglected until it is forced upon the community as an unwelcome
necessity,--namely, the water supply. Up to that time, New York had
depended upon the springs of Manhattan Island, some of which supplied
water, conveyed through the streets by means of wooden pipes (bored
logs), while most of them were utilized by means of pumps only, to which
the inhabitants sent for their supply.[6]
Mr. Cooper induced the water committee, of which he had been appointed a
member, to visit Philadelphia and inspect the works by which the water
of the Schuylkill was raised to a high reservoir, and thence distributed
in iron pipes throughout that city, and then to examine the Croton and
Bronx rivers, for the purpose of ascertaining what these streams could
supply. The season being dry, the rivers were so low that Mr. Cooper was
not satisfied of their capacity to furnish the needed quantity; so he
investigated further, on his own account, the watershed (then a
wilderness) of the Hackensack River in New Jersey, and subsequently
submitted to the board of aldermen plans and models, illustrating a
scheme for the supply of water to New York from that region, by means of
pipes laid under the North River.
To the end of his life, Mr. Cooper adhered to his preference for this
method of conveying water across river channels, as compared with
elevated aqueducts, like the "high bridge" subsequently constructed
across the Harlem River. And in this particular, his intuitive
engineer's judgment was not at fault, although the classic example of
the Romans, who spent untold labor and time in building aqueducts, where
buried conduits would have been both cheaper and better, still dominated
the professional world. But Peter Cooper furnished another example of
his practical wisdom, by sacrificing his superior theory for the sake of
the useful result contemplated. Thorough study showed that, although the
Croton region could not be relied upon at all times for an immediately
adequate water supply, yet its average through the year was sufficient
for the purpose, so that the creation, by means of higher dams, of
large storage reservoirs, would solve the pressing problem. This plan
was ultimately adopted, and has been pursued with suitable enlargements,
ever since. Peter Cooper was made chairman of the water committee,--a
position which he retained until some years after the Croton system was
completed.
In the procurement of iron pipes for the system of distribution, and
their proper testing before acceptance, his integrity and intelligence
were specially effective in protecting the interests of the city, by
securing the best material at the lowest cost. While Mr. Cooper was a
strong "protectionist," favoring the encouragement of American
industries, he never recognized any distinctions among Americans. In his
patriotic thought, the unit to be regarded was not the city or the State
of New York, but the United States of America; and he earnestly opposed
the contention of the New York iron founders, that contracts for the
pipe of the Croton system ought not to be made with inhabitants of
another State. His arguments prevailed; and the pipe was ordered from a
Philadelphia manufacturer, who offered a better article at a lower
price.
During Mr. Cooper's official service, and not without his active aid and
advice (though his personal attention was mainly given to the water
department), the beginnings of an organized police and fire service were
established. When he was first elected to office the city was guarded by
watchmen, who served four hours every night for seventy-five cents.
Every householder was expected to have leathern buckets in his hall, and
in case of an alarm of fire to throw them into the street, so that the
citizens voluntarily running to the rescue could form a line to the
nearest pump, and, passing the water by means of the buckets, supply the
tank of the small hand-engine, which then squirted it upon the burning
building. It is needless to detail here the steps by which out of this
crude beginning the present effective New York Fire Department has been
perfected. Suffice it to say that the beginning itself was promoted,
and its future importance was foreseen, by Peter Cooper and his
public-spirited colleagues.
But a still more profoundly important element of municipal and national
progress, in which the participation of Peter Cooper was active and
influential, was the free public school system in New York. This system
was originally planted by the great mayor and governor, De Witt Clinton,
to whom the State is indebted for the Erie Canal, and for many other
plans and impulses scarcely less significant. While Clinton was an
advocate of universal suffrage, he perceived the danger of granting this
power to an ignorant and largely foreign population; and in 1805 he
secured a charter for "The Society for Establishing a Free School in the
City of New York for the Education of Such Poor Children as do not
Belong to, or are not Provided for by, Any Religious Society."
The appeal of this society to "the affluent and charitable of every
denomination of Christians" was liberally answered, and by December,
1809, a school capable of accommodating five hundred children had been
erected upon a purchased site. This was the beginning in New York city
of the free school system, over which for twenty-five years De Witt
Clinton presided. During that period the schools, supported by generous
private contributions, and also after a while by a state tax, steadily
increased in number, efficiency, and public favor. Peter Cooper had been
always a zealous supporter of these schools, but not until 1838 did he
become--by election as a trustee of the Free School Society--officially
connected with them. It was a critical period in their history. The
original national debt of the Union had been recently extinguished, and
a considerable surplus had been returned to the contributing States, of
which New York devoted its share to educational purposes, thus largely
increasing the fund for the city. In 1822, sixteen years before, the
common council had made the free schools "unsectarian," excluding from
the benefits of the fund all institutions of denominational character.
The various sects had submitted reluctantly to this decision so long as
the fund was too small to be divided among them; but its sudden
enlargement encouraged an attempt to secure appropriations for parochial
schools.
In his first annual message Governor Seward recommended to the
legislature the establishment of schools in which the children of
foreigners might be "instructed by teachers speaking the same language
with themselves and professing the same faith." The Roman Catholic
community, acting at once upon this suggestion, sent a deputation to the
New York common council demanding for their schools "a pro rata share"
of the educational fund, to which as taxpayers they contributed.
In the resistance made to this claim by the Free School Society Mr.
Cooper took a prominent and ardent part. The advocates of unsectarian
public schools were victorious; but the controversy continued to agitate
the State until the passage by the legislature in 1842 of an act
establishing in New York city a new board of education to control the
schools supported from the funds of the State, and at the same time
forbidding the support from this fund of schools in which "any religious
sectarian doctrine or tenet shall be taught, inculcated, or practiced."
The Free School Society, resenting and distrusting this new (and in some
respects complicated) arrangement, continued its separate activity for
eleven years; but in 1853, the unsectarian character of the public
schools of New York having been established beyond question, the society
and the board of education were by common consent amalgamated by
statute. At the final meeting of the society Peter Cooper delivered the
valedictory address, the language of which indicates that not without
apprehension did he contemplate the surrender of the public schools to
the exclusive control of a body of officials likely to be more or less
influenced by partisan or political considerations.
Yet his characteristic common sense came again in this instance to the
front. The moral which he drew from his doubts and fears was that "the
stewardship we are about to resign is not a reprieve from the
responsibilities of the future." And in obedience to this conviction he
accepted, with fourteen of his old colleagues, membership in the board
of education, of which he served for two years as vice-president,
resigning in January, 1855, at which time he had formed and begun to
carry out the great plan of an institution for free popular education
with which his name is now forever associated.
Many years later Mr. Cooper became the president of the Citizens'
Association of New York, which he supported with untiring enthusiasm and
lavish expenditure, and which in its day did good work in securing for
the city an efficient fire department, boards of health, docks, and
education, and an improved charter. Mr. Cooper retired in 1873, and the
association died soon after, to be revived in other organizations, which
have from time to time continued the perennial battle for good
government in New York begun by him.
FOOTNOTE:
[6] A curious survival of this state of things is the Manhattan Company,
which secured from the legislature a perpetual charter, so skillfully
framed (by Aaron Burr) that, although it grants much more extensive
powers than could now be obtained by a corporation, it cannot be
successfully assailed so long as the fundamental condition is
fulfilled,--namely, that the company shall be prepared to furnish water
at all times, on demand. It is said that, in compliance with this
requirement, a small steam pump is kept continually running, in
connection with a short system of pipes, somewhere near the City Hall,
and that the company stands ready to furnish water to any
applicant--only, the charter does not fix the price which it may exact!
So far as I know, the only use now made of the extensive powers granted
by this famous charter is the maintenance of the Manhattan Bank. A few
years ago, excavations in lower Broadway brought to light bored logs,
which were supposed to be relics of the old "Manhattan" system.
VII
THE COOPER UNION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE AND ART
IN many respects the industrial conditions under which Peter Cooper
began his career had been revolutionized before he finished it. The
apprentice system has well-nigh passed away; and the old freedom with
which an intelligent, industrious, and ambitious young man could turn
from one occupation to another, seeking that road which offered greatest
promise of preferment, is greatly hampered by the modern regime of
"organized labor," which, whatever its advantages, presents its own
peculiar perils for the workingman. But it remains forever true that
under either of these systems, or any others that can be evolved or
invented, knowledge is power, and the bestowal of it is the one gift
which neither pauperizes the recipient nor injures the community.
As a struggling young apprentice, Peter Cooper regarded with intense
sympathy the needs and limitations of the class to which he belonged.
But his notion of a remedy was not that of paternal legislation, or
belligerent organization, or social reconstruction. To his conception
the atmosphere of personal liberty and responsibility furnished by the
new democratic republic, offering free scope to individual endeavor and
rewarding individual merit, was the best that could be asked.
What he dreamed of doing was simply to assist these social conditions by
providing for those who were handicapped by circumstances the means of
power and opportunity, to be utilized by their own assiduity. This plan
included not only what he then thought to be the most effective system
for intellectual improvement, but also provision for such innocent
entertainment as would supersede the grosser forms of recreation, which
involved the waste of money and health.