APPLICATION OF STEAM-POWER TO NAVIGATION--MILLER AND SYMINGTON--BOULTON
AND WATT’S ENGINE ADOPTED BY FULTON.
It will be remembered that one of the early speculations of Roger Bacon
related to the employment of engines of navigation without oarsmen, “so
that the greatest river and sea ships, with only one man to steer them,
may sail swifter than if they were fully manned,”--that one of the uses
to which Papin proposed to apply the steam-engine was to “propel ships
against the wind and tide,” in illustration of which he constructed his
model steamboat,--and that, shortly after Newcomen’s engine had become
generally introduced as a pumping power, Jonathan Hulls took out a patent
with the object of applying it to tow ships into and out of harbours.
Hulls was followed, after a long interval, by Jouffroy in France and by
Fitch in America, but none of their experiments proved successful; and
it was not until Watt invented the condensing engine that it was found
practicable to employ steam as a regular propelling power in navigation.
It was natural that the extraordinary success of Watt’s invention should
direct attention anew to the subject. The engine, in the powerful,
compact, economical, and manageable form, into which he had brought
it, was found able to effect rotary motion in the various processes of
manufacture; and, in a maritime country like England, the thought that
would naturally occur to many minds would be this: If the steam-engine
can drive mill-wheels, why may it not in like manner be employed to drive
the wheels of carriages by land and the paddle-wheels of vessels by sea?
The subject was, indeed, often brought under the notice of both Boulton
and Watt; but the anxiety, annoyance and expense to which they had been
subjected in defending their original patent, deterred them from venturing
on this new field of enterprise. Watt never made his proposed locomotive
engine for running on common roads; and the model constructed by Murdock
at Redruth in 1784, remained a model still.
The subject was, however, shortly after taken up by William Symington, at
Wanlockhead, in Scotland, where his father was employed as engineman in
superintending the working of one of Boulton and Watt’s pumping-engines.
The sight of this engine, and his father’s employment upon it, had
probably the effect of first directing his attention to steam-power and
its extended uses; and having heard of Murdock’s ingenious design from
Boulton and Watt’s men, who were constantly visiting and inspecting
the pumping-engine,[364] it occurred to him to try whether he could not
himself construct the model of a steam-carriage for use on common roads.
He succeeded in making his model, and when it was finished, Mr. Meason,
the manager of the Wanlockhead Lead Mines, was so much pleased with it
that he asked the young man to accompany him to Edinburgh, to show it
to the leading men of science in that city. Mr. Meason allowed it to
be exhibited at his own house, Symington being in attendance to give
explanations. Some of the Edinburgh professors, who came to see the model,
were so much pleased with the youthful inventor (then only about twenty
years of age), and the indications of mechanical genius which his machine
displayed, that they strongly recommended Mr. Meason to enter him as a
student at the University, which he readily assented to, and Symington
accordingly matriculated at Edinburgh College in 1786, and, amongst
other lectures, attended those of Dr. Black on Chemistry in the following
session.
[364] The Symingtons, father and son, began at an early period
to design improvements on Watt’s pumping-engine, and took out a
patent for a fire-engine on a new principle as early as the year
1785. Watt heard of its progress from time to time; but he had
no great opinion of the Symingtons, and treated their alleged
invention with indifference. On the 28th September, 1787, he
wrote Boulton,--“Isaac Perrins [a fitter] is returned from
Scotland. He says Symington has invented a new engine, which
is to work under 12½ lbs. on the inch and has got a patent for
it, which Mr. M[eason] has paid for. By his account it seems
to be on the same principle as the Trumpeters. As soon as they
can rely fully on the new engine, the old one is to be pulled
down, and Symington is to put up one of his in the house, and,
on that answering, ours is to be stopped!”
The Scotch roads were in too bad a condition at the time to admit of
their being run over by a locomotive, and Symington eventually abandoned
his proposed scheme. But he had also an idea that the steam-engine might
be economically applied to the working of boats on canals, or ships at
sea; and with that object he invented an engine specially adapted for
the purpose. This clearly appears from his correspondence with Thomas
Gilbert, M.P., brother to the Duke of Bridgewater’s land steward. Mr.
Gilbert had inspected the model of the steam-carriage while on a visit to
Edinburgh, and at the same time had some conversation with Symington as to
the employment of the steam-engine in hauling canal-boats, the result of
which was that Symington promised to write him more fully on both topics.
He proceeded to do so in a letter dated Wanlockhead, 24th September, 1786;
in which, after describing the dimensions, power, mode of working, and the
probable price (about 70_l._) of a full-sized locomotive, he proceeded--
“But an engine of the same power and apparatus for working boats
on canals, will only coast about fifty pounds, and will only
weight 110 st. Each strock of the engine will have a force equall
to 160 st. weight when applied, which undoubtedly will be able
to drag a great weight upon water, when we run the proportion
between it and what a man can do in a boat with common oars,
whose exertion does not exceed more than 7 stones; but of this
you will be a better judge than me. The engine we propose for
working the land-carriage is Mr. Watt’s, with some very material
alterations; and before we can use it we must make an agreement
with him, which we intend to propose immediately. But the engine
we propose to work boats or ships with is an engine intirely
of our own invention, and more powerful and better adapted for
the purpose than Mr. Watt’s engine. This engine of our own we
have presently at worke here is a large moddle, by which we have
properly ascertained its power, and found it exceed Mr. Watt’s
engine nearly two pounds upon each square inch on the piston,
without any greater consumpt of coals. Another advantage attending
our engine is its being little more complicated than the old
engine that works with an atmospheric pressure. We are to use our
endeavours immediately for a patent for this engine as well as our
carriage; your assistance, when we get application made, will be
of great service to us, and thankfully received by, Sir, &c. &c.,
WILLIAM SYMINGTON.”[365]
About the same time that Symington was exhibiting his model carriage in
Edinburgh, Mr. Miller of Dalswinton was trying experiments at Leith in
propelling boats by paddle-wheels worked by men at a capstan. He had a
triple vessel built, with wheels placed inside, on turning which the
vessel was impelled forward. It will be observed that this was but a
repetition of the old experiment of Blasco Garay at Barcelona, and of
Savery on the Thames. The experiments were on the whole successful, but
the power employed in propelling the vessel was felt to be defective, and
the turning of the capstan was very hard work, at which men could not be
brought to work continuously for any long period.
[Illustration: MILLER’S TRIPLE VESSEL.]
[365] This interesting letter, so important as regards the
early history of the invention of the steamboat, appeared for
the first time in the supplementary volume to the ‘Official
Description and Illustrated Catalogue of the Great Exhibition
of 1851,’ to which it was contributed by Mr. W. C. Aitkin of
Birmingham.
Mr. Miller, being curious as to all mechanical novelties, went, amongst
others, to see Symington’s model locomotive; and in the course of
conversation with the inventor informed him of his own project, describing
the difficulty he had experienced in getting his paddles turned for
lack of power. The immediate remark of Symington was, “Why don’t you
use the steam-engine?” He proceeded to show how easily the engine
might be connected with the wheels of the boat, using the model of the
steam-carriage before him to explain his meaning. Mr. Miller appeared to
have been struck by the suggestion, and in the pamphlet which he shortly
after published describing his new vessel, he referred to the probable
employment of steam-power for the purpose of driving the paddles. “I
have reason to believe,” he said, “that the power of the steam-engine may
be applied to work the wheels, so as to give them a quicker motion, and
consequently to increase that of the ship. In the course of this summer,
I intend to make the experiment; and the result, if favourable, shall be
communicated to the public.”[366]
[366] ‘The Elevation, Section, Plans, and Views, of a Triple
Vessel, and of Wheels, with Explanations of the Figures in the
Engraving, and a short Account of the Properties and Advantages
of the Invention.’ By Patrick Miller, Esq., of Dalswinton,
Edinburgh, 1787.
Mr. Miller subsequently contrived and constructed a double vessel, 60
feet in length, worked by a paddle-wheel placed amidships between the
two halves of the ship, with a clear waterway in the middle in which
the paddle was worked, propelling the vessel. An experiment with this
new ship was tried in June, 1787, which was considered successful. “The
vessel being put in motion by the water-wheel, wrought by five men at
the capstern, was steered so as to keep the wind right ahead, and her
rate of going was found by the log to be three and a half miles in the
hour.”[367] A sailing-match was arranged by Mr. Miller, in which he was
to run his vessel from Inchcolm (a small island in the Frith of Forth) to
Leith, against a Custom-house wherry which was reckoned a fast sailer.
In this race the double vessel beat by a few minutes. A young man named
James Taylor, who officiated in Mr. Miller’s family as tutor to his two
younger sons, was on board the vessel, and took his turn in working the
wheels, which he found to be “very severe exercise.” In consequence of
this trial and its results, Taylor became persuaded that unless a more
commanding power than that of men could be applied, the invention of the
paddle-ship would prove of little use; and on turning the matter over in
his mind, he suggested to Mr. Miller the use of the steam-engine. This,
however, was no new idea, as, from what we have already stated, it is
clear that it had already occurred to Symington, who had even contrived an
engine for the express purpose of propelling ships. As Taylor was intimate
with Symington, and a fellow-student with him at Edinburgh College in the
session of 1786–7, it is probable that Taylor obtained from him his first
idea of the application of the steam-engine to Mr. Miller’s paddle-boat.
[367] Mr. Miller’s statement to the Royal Society, 20th December,
1787.
The result of Symington’s and Taylor’s suggestion was, that Mr. Miller
resolved to make a further experiment; and he ordered a double boat to be
built and fitted with a steam-engine for trial on Dalswinton Loch, near
his country-seat in Dumfriesshire, in the course of the following summer.
Symington prepared the plans of the engine, the castings of which were
executed by George Watt, an Edinburgh founder; and when the parts were
ready, Symington and Taylor went together to Wanlockhead, in the summer
of 1788, to have the engine erected and placed in the boat in readiness
for the proposed trial.
In the mean time, other projects of a similar kind were afoot; and Boulton
and Watt continued to be solicited from different quarters on the subject
of engines for sailing ships. To these they continued to turn a deaf
ear. They were willing to execute engines to order, but they declined to
undertake them as speculations. Thus, in the spring of 1788, we find Sir
John Dalrymple, one of the barons of the Court of Exchequer at Edinburgh,
addressing Boulton on the subject of the proposed application of the
steam-engine to the propulsion of ships, and the reply of the latter
clearly shows what were then the views of the Soho firm on the subject:--
“SIR,--I have just received the honour of your letter of the 23rd
inst., by which I observe you are intent upon applying the power
of steam to the navigation of ships, boats, &c.
“It is one of the applications of our engine which Mr. Watt and
I have often talked of, but we were deterred from the prosecution
of it more from political than mechanical difficulties, as well as
from some prudential reasons; besides which, we thought we could
be more useful to the public and to ourselves by confining our
attention to such subjects as were within the limits of our own
powers and our own country. We still continue of that opinion, and
are persuaded that it would be folly in us (who have our hands and
heads full of solid and important business) to engage in any set
of new experiments, or, like Charles XII., go in quest of conquest
in foreign kingdoms, and leave our own to be conquered.
“If you or your friends want any of our steam-engines for any
purpose you may think proper to apply them to, we shall be very
glad to serve you upon the usual terms; although I must confess
that I should be sorry to see them applied to _one_ purpose which
perhaps may be of as much importance to this country some time or
other as Admiral Drake’s fire-ship was on a former emergency.
“I beg the favour of you not to consider me or Mr. Watt as
schemers or projectors, but as men who are following their regular
established trade and manufactures of great extent,--amongst
others that of steam-engines,--and engineers, in which capacity
we shall always be found attentive to your commands.”[368]
[368] Boulton to Sir John Dalrymple, 26th March, 1788. The “one
purpose” alluded to by Boulton is supposed to have been the
Torpedo, then a favourite scheme with French inventors for
blowing up English ships.
Symington had many difficulties to encounter in erecting his engine at
Leadhills. Though it was of very small size, being of only about two
horses power, with a four-inch cylinder, it required as much skill to
construct as a much larger engine would have done. The arrangement of
the power was new, as well as the application; and, as in the case of
every new machine, where unforeseen defects were brought to light, new
expedients had to be contrived for the purpose of overcoming them. Mr.
Miller became impatient for its completion, and repeatedly wrote from
Edinburgh urging despatch, fearing lest some other projector should get
the start of him in applying the steam-engine to the driving of ships.
Taylor, who managed the corresponding part of the enterprise, replied,
“You need be under very little apprehension as to any person getting
before you in this. It is easy in conversation, but very different in
execution. However, as such a circumstance would be equally unpleasant
to us, to prevent it you may depend upon the greatest expedition being
used.”[369]
[369] Taylor to Miller, 20th August, 1788. ‘Supplementary Vol. to
Official Description and Illustrated Catalogue of the Exhibition
of 1851,’ p. 1473.
[Illustration: SYMINGTON’S FIRST STEAMBOAT ENGINE.]
Taylor being further urged by his employer, again wrote from Leadhills
on the 12th September, 1788,--“Mr. Symington and I are as busy here as we
possibly can be. We work from six o’clock in the morning till dark in the
evening, without losing a moment; also, to forward us the more, we have
called in the aid of a watchmaker here, who works along with us. We are
now in great forwardness, and will not be long of finishing. I could not
ascertain to a day when it will happen, but believe we shall have it at
Dalswinton some time before the end of the month.”[370]
[370] Taylor to Miller, 20th August, 1788. ‘Supplementary Vol. to
Official Description and Illustrated Catalogue of the Exhibition
of 1851,’ p. 1473.
The engine was shortly after finished, mounted in a strong oak frame,
and taken to Dalswinton. It was then placed on the deck of Mr. Miller’s
double pleasure-boat, twenty-four feet long and seven broad, which had
been prepared for its reception.
[Illustration: MR. MILLER’S EXPERIMENTAL STEAMBOAT.]
The engine was placed on one side of the boat, the boiler on the other
side to balance it, and the paddle-wheels in the middle; the rotary
motion being obtained from the engine by chains, ratchet-wheels, and
catches. The first experiment was tried on the 14th of October, 1788, and
proved successful, the engine being propelled at the rate of five miles
an hour.[371] Among the persons present on the occasion, besides Miller,
Symington, and Taylor, were Alexander Nasmyth, the landscape painter, and
Robert Burns, the poet, then a tenant of Mr. Miller on the neighbouring
farm of Ellisland. After a few further experiments the engine was taken
out of the boat and carried into Mr. Miller’s house, where it remained
for many years, and was eventually deposited in the Museum of Patents at
Kensington, where it is now to be seen.
[371] The following contemporary account of the trial appeared
in the ‘Scots Magazine’ for November, 1788:--“On October 14th,
a boat was put in motion by a steam-engine upon Mr. Miller of
Dalswinton’s piece of water at that place. That gentleman’s
improvements in naval affairs are well known to the public.
For some time past his attention has been turned to the
application of the steam-engine to the purposes of navigation.
He has now accomplished, and evidently shown to the world, the
practicability of this, by executing it upon a small scale.
A vessel, 25 feet long and 7 broad, was, on the above date,
driven with two wheels by a small engine. It answered Mr.
Miller’s expectations fully, and afforded great pleasure to the
spectators. The success of this experiment is no small accession
to the public. Its utility in canals, and all inland navigation,
points it out to be of the greatest advantage, not only to this
island, but to many other nations of the world. The engine used
is Mr. Symington’s new patent engine.”
The experiments made with this first steamboat were so satisfactory that
Mr. Miller resolved to try one upon a larger scale. By this time Messrs.
Allen and Stewart, of Leith, had built for him another double vessel,
ninety feet in length; and he wrote to Symington, requesting his estimate
of the cost of fitting it with a suitable steam-engine. Symington’s reply
was to the effect that a proper-sized engine for such a vessel would, in
his opinion, be about 250_l._, including the float-wheels. The necessary
order was given, and Symington proceeded to the Carron Ironworks for the
purpose of constructing it. The vessel arrived at Carron on the 24th June,
and by the month of November following the engine was finished and put
on board ready for trial.[372] The result was not so satisfactory as in
the case of the experiment on Dalswinton Loch. The paddle-wheels were too
weak; first one float and then another broke off; and the trial had to be
suspended until the defects were remedied. The next trial was, however,
more satisfactory. The vessel reached a speed of seven miles an hour;
and this was repeated with the same result. There must, however, have
been some defect in the engine performances; for, in a letter written by
Miller to Taylor, who was present throughout, he expressed the opinion
that Symington’s engine was altogether unsuitable for giving motion to a
vessel.[373] He accordingly ordered the engine to be taken out and placed
in the Carron Works, and the vessel itself to be laid up at Bruce Haven.
[372] From a memorandum found amongst Mr. Boulton’s papers,
we learn that the following were the details of Symington’s
engine:--“Engine hath two cylinders of 18 inches diameter each
and 2 feet stroke. The rods of each piston are connected to a
circular barrel of cast iron by means of chains, so that whilst
one piston moves down the other ascends, and so gives the barrel
a reciprocating motion. Upon the axis of the barrel is an arm
or lever which works the plug and working gear. Each of the
cylinders hath 2 pistons, one at top and the other at bottom;
the 2 bottom pistons have their rods moving in stuffing-boxes
and are connected together by a beam. The steam is admitted
into the cylinder at its side, between the 2 pistons, and moves
the one up and the other down; but the motion of the upper is
greater than the under. When the upper piston is got to the top
and the under one to the bottom, the steam valve is shut and the
exhaustion one opened; by which the steam is admitted into the
bottom of the cylinder, and is in its way met by a jet of cold
water, which condenses it, and then it is squeezed out by the
under piston, which in fact makes the bottom of the cylinder
an air-pump. Whilst this condensation is going forward in the
one cylinder, the steam is operating in the other, and _vice
versâ_.”
[373] “I am now satisfied,” he said, “that Mr. Symington’s
steam-engine is the most improper of all steam-engines for
giving motion to a vessel, and that he does not know how to
calculate frictions or mechanical powers. By means of a new
well-constructed valve-wheel, and the pinion being doubled in
diameter, I doubt not that the velocity of the vessel’s motion
will be increased; but, do as you will, a great deal of power
of the engine must be lost in friction. I remember well that
when the small engine was wrought in the boat at Dalswinton, I
had formed the same idea, and that I told you so; but not having
studied the subject, I gave up my own common sense. This is now
past remedy. As the engine cannot be of use to me now, I hope,
with the aid of Mr. Tibbets and Mr. Stainton, you will get it
sold before you leave Carron.”--Miller to Taylor, 7th December,
1789.
Thus matters remained until the spring of the following year, when Mr.
Miller decided on applying to Boulton and Watt for an engine of a proper
construction, offering at the same time to associate them with him in his
enterprise. The negotiation was opened by Robert, afterwards Lord Cullen,
who addressed Watt on the subject; but his reply was not encouraging. Like
his partner, Watt was averse to new speculations; and he had had too much
anxiety and worry in connexion with his original enterprise to enter upon
any new one. It will also be observed that he entertained doubts as to
the eventual success of ocean navigation by steam. The following was his
reply:--
“DEAR SIR,--We have heard of Mr. Miller’s ingenious experiments
on double ships from Sir John Dalrymple, and also some vague
accounts of the experiments with the steam-engine, from which we
could gather nothing conclusive, except that the vessel did move
with a considerable velocity.
“From what we heard of Mr. Symington’s engines, we were disposed
to consider them as attempts to evade our exclusive privilege; but
as we thought them so defective in mechanical contrivance as not
to be likely to do us immediate hurt, we thought it best to leave
them to be judged by Dame Nature first before we brought them to
any earthly court.
“We are much obliged to Mr. Miller for his favourable opinion of
us and of our engines, which we hope experience would more and
more justify. We are also fully sensible of his kind intentions
in offering to associate us with him in his scheme; but the time
of life we have both arrived at, and the multiplicity of business
we are at present engaged in, must plead our excuse for entering
into any new concern whatever as partners; but as engineers
and engine-makers we are ready to serve him to the best of our
abilities, at our customary prices, for rotative engines, and to
assist in anything we can do to bring the scheme to perfection.
“We conceive that there may be considerable difficulty in making
a steam-engine to work regularly in the open sea, on account of
the undulating motion of the vessel affecting the _vis inertiæ_
of the matter; however, this we should endeavour to obviate as
far as we could.
“It may not be improper to mention that Earl Stanhope has lately
taken a patent for moving a vessel by steam, but not by wheels.
His Lordship has also applied to us for engines; but we believe
we are not likely to agree with him, as he lays too much stress
upon his own ingenuity.
“We cannot conclude without observing, that were we disposed to
enter into any new concern whatever, there is no person we should
prefer to Mr. Miller as an associate, being fully apprised of his
worth and honour, and admirers of the ingenuity and industry with
which he has pursued this scheme.
“Permit me now, Sir, to return you my thanks for your obliging
attention to me, and for the trouble you have taken in this
affair, and to ask the favour of your presenting Boulton and
Watt’s respectful compliments to Mr. Miller.--I remain, dear Sir,
&c. &c.,
“JAMES WATT.”[374]
[374] J. Watt to R. Cullen, 24th April, 1790, ‘Supplementary
Volume to Official Descriptive and Illustrated Catalogue of the
Exhibition of 1851,’ p. 1475.
Mr. Miller proceeded no further with his experiments, on which he had
already expended a large sum of money. He seems to have lost faith in the
applicability of the steam-engine to the propulsion of ships, and reverted
to his original idea, as we find him taking out a patent in 1796 for a
new kind of flat-bottomed ship, which he proposed to impel during calms
by means of wheels worked by capstans; but he makes no mention whatever
of the use of the steam-engine.
Symington was greatly disappointed with the result of his experiments.
Being without the means of carrying the steamboat further, he feared that
all his past labours would prove in vain, and that some more fortunate
speculator would carry off the prize that seemed almost within his grasp.
The subject was not, however, allowed to sleep. Fitch and Evans were
pursuing the invention in America; Rumsey, another American, came over to
England in 1788, with a scheme for propelling boats by steam; and Fourness
and Earl Stanhope were making experiments in the same direction; but none
of them had yet succeeded in constructing a practicable working steamboat.
Thus ten more years passed, during which other inventors came forward,
took out patents, made their trials, failed, and disappeared.
In the year 1801 Symington had another chance. Lord Dundas, Governor of
the Forth and Clyde Canal Company, had been revolving in his mind whether
some more expeditious and economical method than horse-power might not be
contrived for hauling the boats along the canal; and, being aware of the
experiments made by Miller and Symington ten years before, he determined
to give Symington’s engine another trial. A boat was accordingly built for
the purpose of the experiment, and named the ‘Charlotte Dundas,’ after his
Lordship’s daughter. For this vessel Symington contrived a steam-engine
of a greatly improved character. It was a direct-acting engine, the steam
acting on each side of the piston, after the method invented by Watt,
whose patent had now expired; the rotary motion of the paddle-wheels being
secured by means of a connecting-rod and crank, instead of by chains and
ratchet-wheels, as in the first two boats.
[Illustration: MACHINERY OF THE ‘CHARLOTTE DUNDAS.’]
The first trial of the vessel was perfectly satisfactory. After making a
trip to Glasgow, she was employed in towing vessels along the canal. She
was also occasionally sent down the Frith to bring up ships detained by
contrary winds to the canal entrance at Grangemouth.[375]
[375] One day in March, 1802, on the occasion of a strong west
wind blowing, when the canal-boats could with difficulty be
moved to windward, the steamer took in tow two laden sloops, the
‘Active’ and ‘Euphemia,’ of seventy tons each, from Lock 20 to
Port Dundas, Glasgow, a distance of 19½ miles, in six hours.
Fortune at length seemed to smile on poor Symington, and his spirits were
proportionately elated at the result of these important experiments. He
had, in fact, achieved a decided success in the ‘Charlotte Dundas,’--in
which he combined together, for the first time, those improvements which
constitute the present system of Steam Navigation. Indeed Mr. Woodcroft,
a competent judge, says that “the vessel might, from the simplicity of
its machinery, have been at work at this day with such ordinary repairs
as are now occasionally required to all steamboats.”[376]
[376] ‘A sketch of the Origin and Progress of Steam Navigation.’
By Bennet Woodcroft. London, 1848.
Lord Dundas was so well satisfied with the performances of the vessel
that he proposed to introduce the inventor to the Duke of Bridgewater,
the great canal proprietor, who had expressed to him his wish to employ
some method of hauling his boats more effective than horse-power. His
Lordship accordingly directed Symington to have a model of his steamboat
constructed for the purpose of showing it to the Duke. Symington went
up to London himself to explain its mechanical arrangements, and the
Duke was so much pleased with it that he ordered eight boats of the same
construction to be made as speedily as possible for use upon his canal.
Symington returned to Scotland to proceed with the execution of this
important order.
But in the moment of his apparent triumph fate again proved hostile to the
inventor. Though Lord Dundas was fully satisfied with the performances of
the ‘Charlotte Dundas,’ and hailed the use of steam as the beginning of
a new era in navigation, the proprietors of the canal became seriously
alarmed lest the banks should be washed away by the waves which the
steamboat raised in its wake, and they came to the resolution of
prohibiting all further experiments. To add to Symington’s vexation, the
very same day on which this adverse decision of the canal managers reached
him, he received intelligence of the death of the Duke of Bridgewater,
and an order to suspend the erection of the eight steamboats until fresh
instructions had been given. By this time Lord Dundas had expended about
7000_l._ on his experiments, and was not disposed to proceed any further
with them. The ‘Charlotte Dundas,’ the first successful steamboat, was
accordingly laid up at Bainsford, in a creek of the canal; and the attempt
to introduce steam navigation on canals was from that time suspended.[377]
[377] Symington continued to struggle for many years under the
burden of debt which he had incurred by his experiments; and
though a sum of 100_l._ was granted him from the Privy Purse
in 1824, and 50_l._ a year or two afterwards, he remained in
a state of poverty during the rest of his life. He died on
the 22nd March, 1831, and was buried in the churchyard of St.
Botolph, Aldgate, London.
Symington’s experiments, though they proved most unfortunate as respected
himself, nevertheless led to the adoption of the system of navigation by
steam both in America and Scotland. Among the many visitors who inspected
the ‘Charlotte Dundas’ were Fulton the American artist, and Andrew Bell
the engineer, of Glasgow. Fulton was on board the first vessel in the
month of July, 1801, when she made a run of eight miles on the Forth
and Clyde Canal in an hour and twenty minutes; on which occasion he
narrowly inquired into the action of the engine and paddle-wheels, and
made careful sketches of the vessel and her machinery.[378] Andrew Bell
also made frequent visits to the ‘Charlotte Dundas,’ as well as to the
pattern shop where the models of the machinery were kept; and there is
little doubt that, like Fulton, he obtained his ideas of steam navigation
principally from what Symington had accomplished. Fulton and Bell were
well acquainted with each other,[379] and kept up a correspondence on the
subject of steamboats. Bell, according to his own account, supplied Fulton
with information and drawings of steamboat machinery; and it was by his
recommendation that Fulton ordered the engine for his first successful
steamboat from Boulton and Watt.
[378] The following deposition was made on oath by Robert Weir of
Kincardine, before Robert Dundas J. P. for the county of Perth,
at Blair Castle, on the 23rd October, 1824:--“That, in the
year 1801, he remembers of Mr. Symington erecting a boat, and
fitting a steam-engine into it, and dragging two vessels along
the Forth and Clyde Canal by means of the said steamboat. That
the deponent was employed as engine-fireman on board of the said
boat. Deposes that the following persons, now living, were also
on board, viz., Alexander Hart and John Allen, ship-builders,
Grangemouth, and John Esplin and William Gow, shipmasters there.
That some time after the first experiment, while the boat was
lying upon the canal at Lock 16, it was visited by a stranger,
who requested to see the boat worked. That the said William
Symington desired the deponent to light the furnace, which was
done, and the stranger was carried about four miles along the
canal, and brought back. That this stranger made inquiries both
as to the mode of constructing and of working the boat, and
took notes of the information given him by the said William
Symington. That the deponent heard the stranger say his name
was Fulton, and that he was a native of the United States of
America. That the deponent remembers Mr. Symington remarking
that the progress of the boat was much impeded by the narrowness
of the canal, to which Mr. Fulton answered that the objection
would not apply to the large rivers of North America, where he
thought the boat might be used to great advantage.”--From copies
of affidavits in the ‘Biography of William Symington.’ By J.
and W. R. Rankin, Engineers, Falkirk, 1862.
[379] In one of his letters, Bell says--“Fulton came at different
times to the country and stopped with me for some time.”--‘Life
of Henry Bell,’ p. 74.
With the information obtained at Grangemouth, Fulton proceeded to Paris,
where we shortly find him in communication with Mr. Livingstone, the
United States’ envoy, who, like Fulton, took much interest in the subject
of steam navigation. They had a model steamboat built for trial on the
Seine; but when on the point of making the first experiment, the weight
of the machinery broke the boat in two, and the whole went down together.
Fulton’s greatest difficulty, as was to be expected, consisted in finding
a suitable engine to propel his proposed boat, and he wrote to his friends
in England on the subject. In March, 1802, we find him addressing Dr.
Cartwright, who had invented an improvement in the steam-engine, which
he thought would render it more suitable for driving vessels, requesting
to be informed of the cost of one of six horse power, with particulars
of its size and weight. Fulton communicated to his correspondent that,
besides his proposed steamboat, he was experimenting on his ‘Nautilus’
or diving-boat for navigating under water; the object of this invention
being to blow up the English ships of war which were then blockading the
French ports. The experiments with the ‘Nautilus’ under water were said
to have proved tolerably successful, though it had not yet succeeded in
blowing up any of the English ships.
Not being able to obtain any satisfactory information from Dr. Cartwright,
Fulton addressed a letter to James Watt, jun., of Soho, requesting to
be informed of the price of a light and compact engine for his proposed
vessel. “The object of my investigation,” he said, “is to find whether
it is possible to apply the engine to working boats up our long rivers
in America. The persons who have made such attempts have commenced by
what they call improving Watt’s engine, but without having an idea of the
physics which lie hid in it from common observers; but such improvements
have appeared to me like the improvements of the preceptor of Alcibiades,
who corrected Homer for the use of his scholars. Their ill success, and
their never having found a good mode of taking a purchase in the water,
are the reasons why they have all failed. Having, during the course of my
experiments on submersive navigation, found an excellent mode of taking
a purchase on the water, I wish to apply the engine to the movement.
The only thing wanting is to arrange the engine as light and compact as
possible.”[380]
[380] Cited in Muirhead’s ‘Life of James Watt,’ 2nd ed. p. 426.
The information asked for was duly communicated to Fulton, and a few
months later he sent Boulton and Watt the drawings of parts of an
engine which he requested them to make for him. By this time the rumour
had gone abroad of the destructive powers of the ‘Nautilus,’ and Lord
Stanhope publicly called attention to the subject in the House of Lords,
representing the dangerous character of the invention. On Fulton’s order
reaching Soho, Boulton suspected that it might really be intended for the
‘Nautilus,’ and he at once communicated with Government on the subject.
To Lord Hawkesbury he wrote,--
“I presume your Lordship is not unacquainted with the name of
Fulton. I mean Fulton the engineer and pretended inventor of an
infernal machine for destroying the British Navy. He is the same
person whom Lord Stanhope alluded to in some of his speeches in
the House of Peers.
“I never had any transaction or acquaintance with him. However,
he has written to my house (Boulton and Watt) from Paris, and
has transmitted drawings of sundry parts of a steam-engine. The
remainder, he says, is to be executed under his own directions,
and though he orders them to be shipped for America, it is not
impossible but they may be transhipped before they reach there.
“The drawings and letter were delivered to my house in
London-street by a Mr. Barlow; and as he refers to Sir Francis
Baring for payment, I directed my agent (Mr. John Woodward) to
call upon Sir Francis, and in consequence thereof he wrote to my
house a letter, of which I enclose a correct copy as well as of
Mr. Fulton’s.
“Whatever doubts we may have of his project, we have none
respecting the propriety of acquainting your Lordship with every
particular as to this matter that has come to our knowledge.”[381]
Boulton concluded by requesting instructions how to act; but all necessity
for further caution was shortly after removed by Fulton coming over to
England and imparting his secret to the British Government. An old Danish
brig was placed at his disposal in Walmer Roads, and after two days’
effort, during which he was assisted by Sir Home Popham, he eventually
succeeded in blowing up the vessel; but he accomplished his purpose with
so much difficulty, that from that time no further fears were entertained
of the much dreaded ‘Nautilus.’
[381] Boulton to Lord Hawkesbury, 22nd August, 1803. Boulton MSS.
In the following year the steam-engine ordered by Fulton for his proposed
boat was proceeded with at Soho. It was of about nineteen horse power.
The cylinder was 24 inches in diameter, and the stroke four feet. The
dimensions were as nearly as possible the same as those of Symington’s
‘Charlotte Dundas’ engine; and Mr. Woodcroft pertinently remarks that
“such similarity in the dimensions cannot easily be imagined to have been
accidental.” The engine, when finished, was sent to America early in
1805. She was there fitted on board the vessel which had been prepared
for her reception; and the first voyage of Fulton and Livingstone’s
‘Clermont’ was made in August, 1807, when a speed of nearly four miles
an hour was attained. This was the first vessel that ran regularly for
commercial purposes and for the benefit of her owners; and though Fulton
neither invented the ship, nor the engine by which she was driven,
nor the combination of the two, he was entitled to every merit for the
perseverance and ability with which he carried his important enterprise
to a successful issue.
A few years later Henry Bell, in like manner, introduced steam navigation
on the Clyde. He had at an early period pressed the subject on the
consideration of the Government, but failed to induce them to take up
the scheme.[382] He then resolved himself to start a steamboat, as the
best and most practical method of exhibiting its powers; and the ‘Comet,’
of thirty tons burthen, was built to his order by Messrs. John Wood
and Company, of Port Glasgow. The vessel began to ply regularly between
Glasgow and Greenock in August, 1812;[383] and before long Clyde steamers
were known all over the world.
[382] It is stated in the ‘Life of Henry Bell,’ that he applied
to Mr. Watt in the year 1801, for his advice as to a suitable
engine for a steamboat; but Watt gave him no encouragement
to proceed with his design. “How many noblemen, gentlemen,
and engineers,” he wrote to Bell, “have puzzled their brains,
and spent their thousands of pounds, and none of these,
nor yourself, have been able to bring the power of steam in
navigation to a successful issue.”--‘Life of Bell.’ By E.
Morris, Glasgow, 1844, p. 30.
[383] The starting of the ‘Comet’ naturally excited great interest
along the Clyde. In the evenings, thousands of spectators lined
the banks as far as Govan to see her pass up from Greenock. The
masters of the old sailing craft, however, regarded the ‘Comet’
with apprehension and dismay. The old Highland gabert men were
especially hostile, denouncing the new vessel as being impelled
by the “teevil’s wun” (devil’s wind). The story is told of
the steamer one day coming up with a fly boat tacking against
the tide, when the crew began to jeer the skipper of the fly,
calling upon him to come along with his lazy craft. “Get oot o’
my sight,” he cried, in reply, “I’m just gaun as it pleases the
breath o’ the Almichty, and I’ll ne’er fash my thumb how fast
ye gang wi’ your blasted deevil’s reek.”
[Illustration: THE ‘COMET’ PASSING DUMBARTON.
[By R. P. Leitch.]]
It will thus be observed how very gradual has been the invention of the
steamboat. It has been made step by step, by many men living in many
ages. First, we have Blasco Garay making experiments with paddle-wheels
in the harbour of Barcelona three hundred years ago, the revival probably
of some old and half-forgotten method of propelling ships; then the
repetition of the experiment by Prince Rupert and Savery in the Thames
more than a hundred and fifty years later; next Savery’s invention of
his steam-engine, followed by Papin’s idea of combining the engine
with the paddles, and his construction of a model to illustrate its
practicability. Later, we have Jonathan Hulls’s patent for his steamboat,
in which the engine was worked by atmospheric pressure, followed by
numerous experiments with a like object, in England, France, and America.
The invention of the condensing engine of Watt, and its application
to rotary motions, was the next great step. Miller’s revival of the
experiments with paddle-wheels led to the application by Symington of
Papin’s idea of combining the steam-engine with the paddles, which he at
length successfully worked out in the ‘Charlotte Dundas.’ And finally the
invention was applied to practical purposes by Fulton and Livingstone in
America, and by Bell in Scotland.
And thus became established, in the eloquent words of George Canning, “the
new and mighty power, new at least in the application of its might, which
walks the waters like a giant rejoicing in its course, stemming alike the
tempest and the tide, accelerating intercourse, shortening distances,
creating, as it were, unexpected neighbourhoods, and new combinations
of social and commercial relations, and giving to the fickleness of
winds and the faithlessness of waves the certainty and steadiness of
a highway upon the land.” But it is a noteworthy fact, that it was not
until the invention of James Watt was applied to the purposes of steam
navigation that its practicability was established and its success
secured. Until then, all the experiments which had been made were regarded
as comparatively fruitless, though they were leading step by step to
the great result; and to this day the engines constructed after Watt’s
principle continue to be the great motive power alike of river and ocean
navigation.
[Illustration: WATT’S HOUSE, HEATHFIELD.
[By Percival Skelton.]]