THE EXHIBITION OF 1862.
“En administration, toutes les sottises sont mères.”—_Maximes_, par M.
G. De Levis.
“An abject worship of princes and an unaccountable appetite for
knighthood are probably unavoidable results of placing second-rate men
in prominent positions.”—_Saturday Review_, January 16, 1864.
“Whose fault is this? But tallow, toys, and sweetmeats evidently stand
high in the estimation of Her Majesty’s Commissioners.”—_The Times_,
August 13, 1862.
Mr. Gravatt suggests to King’s College the exhibition of the
Difference Engine No. 1, and offers to superintend its Transmission
and Return — Place allotted to it most unfit — Not Exhibited in 1851
— Its Loan refused to New York — Refused to the Dublin Exhibition
in 1847 — Not sent to the great French Exhibition in 1855 — Its
Exhibition in 1862 entirely due to Mr. Gravatt — Space for its
Drawings refused — The Payment of Six Shillings a Day for a competent
person to explain it refused by the Commissioners — Copy of Swedish
Difference Engine made by English Workmen not exhibited — Loan of
various other Calculating Machines offered — Anecdote of Count
Strzelecki’s — The Royal Commissioners’ elaborate taste for Children’s
Toys — A plan for making such Exhibitions profitable — Extravagance of
the Commissioners to their favourite — Contrast between his Treatment
and that of Industrious Workmen — The Inventor of the Difference
Engine publicly insulted by his Countrymen in the Exhibition of 1862.
_Circumstances connected with the Exhibition of the Difference Engine
No. 1 in the International Exhibition of 1862._
When the construction of the Difference Engine No. 1 was abandoned by
the Government in 1842, I was consulted respecting the place in which
it should be deposited. Well aware of the unrivalled perfection of its
workmanship, and {148} conscious that it formed the first great step
towards reducing the whole science of number to the absolute control
of mechanism, I wished it to be placed wherever the greatest number of
persons could see it daily.
〈ENGINE No. 1 IN KING’S COLLEGE.〉
With this view, I advised that it should be placed in one of the
much-frequented rooms of the British Museum. Another locality was,
however, assigned to it, and it was confided by the Government to the
care of King’s College, Somerset House. It remained in safe custody
within its glass case in the Museum of that body for twenty years.
It is remarkable that during that long period no person should have
studied its structure, and, by explaining its nature and use, have
acquired an amount of celebrity which the singularity of that knowledge
would undoubtedly have produced.
The College authorities did justice to their charge. They put it in the
place of honour, in the centre of their Museum, and would, no doubt
have given facilities to any of their members or to other persons who
might have wished to study it.
〈THE GOVERNMENT IGNORE IT.〉
But the system quietly pursued by the Government, of ignoring the
existence of the Difference Engine and its inventor doubtlessly
exercised its deadening influence[27] on those who were inclined, by
taste or acquirements, to take such a course. {149}
[27] An illustration fell under my notice a few days after this
paragraph was printed. A _new_ work on Geometrical Drawing,
commissioned by the Committee of Council on Education, was
published by Professor Bradley. I have not been able to find in it
a single word concerning “Mechanical Notation,” not even the very
simplest portion of that science, namely, the Art of Lettering
Drawings. It would seem impossible that any _Professor_ of so
limited a subject could be ignorant of the existence of such an
important addition to its powers.
I shall enumerate a few instances.
1. In 1850, the Government appointed a Commission to organize the
Exhibition of 1851.
The name of the author of the _Economy of Manufactures_ was not thought
worthy by the Government to be placed on that Commission.
2. In 1851, the Commissioners of the International Exhibition did
not think proper to exhibit the Difference Engine, although it was
the property of the nation. They were as insensible to the greatest
mechanical as to, what has been regarded by some, the greatest
intellectual triumph of their country.
3. When it was decided by the people of the United States to have an
Exhibition at New York, they sent a Commissioner to Europe to make
arrangement for its success. He was authorized to apply for the loan of
the Difference Engine for a few months, and was empowered to give any
pecuniary guarantee which might be required for its safe return.
That Commissioner, on his arrival, applied to me on the subject. I
explained to him the state of the case, and advised him to apply to the
Government, whose property it was. I added that, if his application was
successful, I would at my own expense put the machine in good working
order, and give him every information requisite for its safe conveyance
and use. His application was, however, unsuccessful.
4. In 1847, Mr. Dargan nobly undertook at a vast expense to make an
Exhibition in Dublin to aid in the relief of his starving countrymen.
It was thought that the exhibition of the Difference Engine would be a
great attraction. I was informed at the time that an application was
made to the Government for its loan, and that it was also unsuccessful.
{150}
5. In 1855 the great French Exhibition occurred. Previously to its
opening, our Government sent Commissioners to arrange and superintend
the English department.
These Commissioners reported that the English contribution was
remarkably deficient in what in France are termed “instruments de
précision,” a term which includes a variety of instruments for
scientific purposes. They recommended that “a Committee should be
appointed who could represent to the producers of Philosophical
Instruments how necessary it was that they should, upon an occasion of
this kind, maintain their credit in the eyes of Europe.” The Government
also applied to the Royal Society for advice; but neither did the Royal
Society advise, nor the Government propose, to exhibit the Difference
Engine.
6. The French Exhibition of 1855 was remarkable beyond all former
ones for the number and ingenuity of the machines which performed
arithmetical operations.
Pre-eminently above all others stood the Swedish Machine for
calculating and printing mathematical Tables. It is honourable to
France that its highest reward was deservedly given to the inventor
of that machine; whilst it is somewhat remarkable that the English
Commissioners appointed to report upon the French Exhibition omitted
all notice of these Calculating Machines.
〈MR. GRAVATT SUCCEEDS IN EXHIBITING IT IN 1862.〉
The appearance of the finished portion of the unfinished Difference
Engine No. 1 at the Exhibition of 1862 is entirely due to Mr. Gravatt.
That gentleman had a few years before paid great attention to the
Swedish Calculating Engine of M. Scheutz, and was the main cause of its
success in this country.
Being satisfied that it was possible to calculate and print all Tables
by machinery, Mr. Gravatt became convinced that {151} the time must
arrive when no Tables would ever be calculated or printed except by
machines. He felt that it was of great importance to accelerate the
arrival of that period, more especially as numerical Tables, which are
at present the most expensive kind of printing, would then become the
cheapest.
In furtherance of this idea, Mr. Gravatt wrote to Dr. Jelf, the
Principal of King’s College, Somerset House, to suggest that the
Difference Engine of Mr. Babbage, which had for so many years
occupied a prominent place in the museum, should be exhibited in the
International Exhibition of 1862. He at the same time offered his
assistance in the removal and reinstatement of that instrument.
The authorities of the College readily acceded to this plan. On further
inquiry, it appeared that the Difference Engine belonged to the
Government, and was only deposited with the College. It was then found
necessary to make an application to the Treasury for permission to
exhibit it, which was accordingly done by the proper authorities.
The Government granted the permission, and referred it to the Board of
Works to superintend its placement in the building.
The Board of Works sent to me a copy of the correspondence relative to
this matter, asking my opinion whether any danger might be apprehended
for the safety of the machine during its transport, and also inquiring
whether I had any other suggestion to make upon the subject.
Knowing the great strength of the work, I immediately answered that I
did not anticipate the slightest injury from its transport, and that,
under the superintendence of Mr. Gravatt, I considered it might be
removed with perfect safety. The only suggestion I ventured to offer
was, that as the Government possessed in the department of the {152}
Registrar-General a copy, made by English workmen, of the Swedish
Difference Engine, that it should be exhibited by the side of mine: and
that both the Engines should be kept constantly working with a very
slow motion.
〈SWEDISH ENGINE NOT EXHIBITED.〉
By a subsequent communication I was informed that the Swedish Machine
could not be exhibited, because it was then in constant use, computing
certain Tables relating to the values of lives. I regretted this very
much. I had intended to alter the handle of my own Engine in order to
make it moveable circularly by the same catgut which I had hoped might
have driven both. The Tables which the Swedish Machine was employed
in printing were _not_ of any pressing necessity, and their execution
could, upon such an occasion, have been postponed for a few months
without loss or inconvenience.
Besides, if the Swedish Engine had, as I proposed, been placed at work,
its superintendent might have continued his table-making with but
little delay, and the public would have been highly gratified by the
sight.
He could also have given information to the public by occasional
explanations of its principles; thus might Her Majesty’s Commissioners
have gratified thousands of her subjects who came, with intense
curiosity, prepared to be pleased and instructed, and whom they sent
away amazed and disappointed.
From the experience I had during the first week of the Exhibition, I am
convinced that if a fit place had been provided for the two Calculating
Machines, so that the public might have seen them both in constant but
slow motion, and if the superintendent had occasionally given a short
explanation of the principles on which they acted, they would have been
one of the greatest attractions within the building. {153}
On Mr. Gravatt applying to the Commissioners for space, it was stated
that the Engine must be placed amongst philosophical instruments, Class
XIII.
〈ENGLISH ENGINE POKED INTO A HOLE.〉
The only place offered for its reception was a small hole, 4 feet 4
inches in front by 5 feet deep. On one side of this was the _only_
passage to the office of the superintendent of the class. The opposite
side was occupied by a glass case in which I placed specimens of the
separate parts of the unfinished engine. These, although executed by
English workmen above thirty years ago, were yet, in the opinion of the
most eminent engineers, unsurpassed by any work the building of 1862
contained. The back of this recess was closed in and dark, and only
allowed a space on the wall of about five feet by four, on which to
place the _whole_ of the drawings and illustrations of the Difference
Engine. Close above the top of the machine was a flat roof, which
deprived the drawings and the work itself of much light.
The public at first flocked to it: but it was so placed that only three
persons could conveniently see it at the same time. When Mr. Gravatt
kindly explained and set it in motion, he was continually interrupted
by the necessity of moving away in order to allow access to the
numerous persons whose business called them to the superintendent’s
office. At a very early period various representations were made to the
Commissioners by the Jury, the superintendent, and very strongly by the
press, of the necessity of having some qualified person to explain the
machine to the public. I was continually informed by the attendants
that hundreds of persons had, during my absence asked, when they could
get an opportunity of seeing the machine in motion.
Admiring the earnestness of purpose and the sagacity with which Mr.
Gravatt had steadily followed out the convictions of {154} his own
mind relative to the abolition of all tables except those made and
stereotyped by machinery, I offered all the assistance in my power to
accelerate the accomplishment of his task.
I lent him for exhibition numerous specimens of the unfinished
portions of the Difference Engine No. 1. These I had purchased on the
determination of the Government to abandon its construction in 1842.
I proposed also to lend him the Mechanical Notations of the Difference
Engine, which had been made at my own expense, and were finished by
myself and my eldest son, Mr. B. Herschel Babbage.
I had had several applications from foreigners[28] for some account
of my system of Mechanical Notation, and great desire was frequently
expressed to see the illustrations of the method itself, and of its
various applications.
[28] One object of the mission of Professor Bolzani was, to take
back with him to Russia such an account of the Mechanical Notation
as might facilitate its teaching in the Russian Universities. I
regret that it was entirely out of my power to assist him.
These, however, were so extensive that it was impossible, without very
great inconvenience, to exhibit them even in my own house.
〈THE LOAN OF OTHER CALCULATING MACHINES OFFERED.〉
I therefore wrote to Mr. Gravatt to offer him the loan of the following
property for the Exhibition:—
1. A small Calculating Machine of the simplest order for adding
together any number of separate sums of money, provided the total was
under 100,000 _l._, by Sir Samuel Morland. 1666.
2. A very complete and well-executed Machine for answering all
questions in plane trigonometry, by Sir Samuel Morland. 1663. {155}
3. An original set of Napier’s bones.
4. A small Arithmetical Machine, by Viscount Mahon, afterwards Earl
Stanhope. Without date.
5. A larger Machine, to add, subtract, multiply, and divide, by
Viscount Mahon. 1775.
6. Another similar Machine, of a somewhat different construction, for
the same operations, by Viscount Mahon. 1777.
7. A small Difference Engine, made in London, in consequence of its
author having read Dr. Lardner’s article in the “Edinburgh Review” of
July, 1834, No. CXX.
_List of Mechanical Notations proposed to be Lent for the Exhibition._
1. All the drawings explaining the principles of the Mechanical
Notation.
2. The complete Mechanical Notations of the Swedish Calculating Engine
of M. Scheutz.
These latter drawings had been made and used by my youngest son, Major
Henry P. Babbage, now resident in India, in explaining the principles
of the Mechanical Notation at the meeting of the British Association
at Glasgow, and afterwards in London, at a meeting of the Institution
of Civil Engineers.[29]
[29] See Proceedings of British Association at Glasgow, 1855, p. 203;
also Minutes of Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, vol.
xv., 1856.
3. The Mechanical Notations of the Difference Engine No. 1. {156}
These had been made at my own expense, and were finished by myself
and my eldest son, Mr. B. Herschel Babbage, now resident in South
Australia.
4. A complete set of the drawings of the Difference Engine No. 2, for
calculating and printing tables, with seven orders of differences, and
thirty places of figures. Finished in 1849.
5. A complete set of the Notations necessary for the explanation and
demonstration of Difference Engine No. 2, finished in 1849.
These drawings and notations would have required for their exhibition
about seven or eight hundred square feet of wall. My letter to Mr.
Gravatt was forwarded to the Commissioners with his own application
for space to exhibit them. The Commissioners declined this offer; yet
during the first six weeks of the Exhibition there was at a short
distance from the Difference Engine an empty space of wall large enough
for the greater part of these instructive diagrams. This portion of
wall was afterwards filled up by a vast oil-cloth. Other large portions
of wall, to the amount of thousands of square feet, were given up to
other oil-cloths, and to numberless carpets. It is evident the Royal
Commissioners were much better qualified to judge of furniture for the
feet than of furniture for the head.
I was myself frequently asked why I did not employ a person to explain
the Difference Engine. In reply to some of my friends, I inquired
whether, when they purchased a carriage, they expected the builder to
pay the wages of their coachman.
〈FOREIGN VISITORS PUZZLED.〉
But my greatest difficulty was with foreigners; no explanation I could
devise, and I tried many, appeared at all {157} to satisfy their
minds. The thing seemed to them entirely incomprehensible.
That the nation possessing the greatest military and commercial marine
in the world—the nation which had spent so much in endeavouring to
render perfect the means of finding the longitude—which had recently
caused to be computed and published at considerable expense an entirely
new set of lunar Tables should not have availed itself _at any cost_
of mechanical means of computing and stereotyping such Tables, seemed
entirely beyond their comprehension.
At last they asked me whether the Commissioners were _bêtes_. I
assured them that the only _one_ with whom I was personally acquainted
certainly was not.
When hard pressed by difficult questions, I thought it my duty as an
Englishman to save my country’s character, even at the expense of my
own. So on one occasion I suggested to my unsatisfied friends that
Commissioners were usually selected from the highest class of society,
and that possibly four out of five had never heard of my name.
But here again my generous efforts to save the character of my country
and its Commissioners entirely failed. Several of my foreign friends
had known me in their own homes, and had seen the estimation in which I
was held by their own countrymen and by their own sovereign. These were
still more astonished.
〈CHINESE INQUIRE ABOUT IT.〉
On another occasion an anecdote was quoted against me to prove that my
name was well known even in China. It may, perhaps, amuse the reader.
A short time after the arrival of Count Strzelecki in England, I had
the pleasure of meeting him at the table of a common friend. Many
inquiries were made relative to his residence in China. Much interest
was expressed by several of the party to learn on {158} what subject
the Chinese were most anxious to have information. Count Strzelecki
told them that the subject of most frequent inquiry was Babbage’s
Calculating Machine. On being further asked as to the nature of the
inquiries, he said they were most anxious to know whether it would
go into the pocket. Our host now introduced me to Count Strzelecki,
opposite to whom I was then sitting. After expressing my pleasure at
the introduction, I told the Count that he might safely assure his
friends in the Celestial Empire that it was in every sense of the word
an _out-of-pocket_ machine.
At last the Commissioners were moved, not to supply the deficiency
themselves, but to address the Government, to whom the Difference
Engine belonged, to send somebody to explain it. I received a
communication from the Board of Works, inquiring whether I could make
any suggestions for getting over this difficulty. I immediately made
inquiries, and found a person who formerly had been my amanuensis, and
had, under my direction, worked out many most intricate problems. He
possessed very considerable knowledge of mathematics, and was willing,
for the moderate remuneration of six shillings a day, to be present
daily during nine hours to explain the Difference Engine.
I immediately sent this information to the Board of Works, with the
name and address of the person I recommended. This, I have little
doubt, was directly communicated to the Commissioners; but they did not
avail themselves of his services.
〈COMMISSIONERS INEXPLICABLE.〉
It is difficult, upon any principle, to explain the conduct of the
Royal Commissioners of the Exhibition of 1862. They were appointed by
the Government, yet when the Government itself became an exhibitor,
and sent for exhibition a {159} Difference Engine, the property of
the nation, these Commissioners placed it in a _small hole_ in a _dark
corner_, where it could, with some difficulty, be seen by six people at
the same time.
No remonstrance was of the slightest avail; it was “Hobson’s choice,”
that or none. It was represented that all other space was occupied.
A trophy of children’s toys, whose merits, it is true, the
Commissioners were somewhat more competent to appreciate, filled
one of the most prominent positions in the building. On the other
hand, a trophy of the workmanship of English engineers, executed by
_machine tools_ thirty years before, and admitted by the best judges
to be unsurpassed by any rival, was placed in a position not very
inappropriate for the authorities themselves who condemned it to that
locality.
But no hired aristocratic[30] agent was employed to excite the
slumbering perceptions of the Commissioners, who might have secured a
favourable position for the Difference Engine, by practising on their
good nature, or by imposing upon their imbecility.
[30] See “The Times,” 19 Jan., 1863, and elsewhere.
It has been urged, in extenuation of the conduct of these
Commissioners, that their duty as guardians of the funds intrusted
to them, and of the interests of the Guarantors, compelled them to
practise a rigid economy.
Rigid economy is to be respected only when it is under the control of
judgment, not of favouritism. If the machinery for making arithmetical
calculations which was placed at the disposal of the Commissioners
had been properly arranged, it might have been made at once a source
of high gratification to the public and even of _profit_ to the
Exhibition. {160}
〈A COURT FOR CALCULATING MACHINES.〉
Such a group of Calculating Machines might have been placed by
themselves in a small court capable of holding a limited number
of persons. Round the walls of this court might have been hung
the drawings I had offered to lend, containing the whole of those
necessary for the Difference Engine No. 2, as well as a large number
of illustrations for the explanation of the Mechanical Notation. The
Swedish Difference Engine and my own might have been slowly making
calculations during the whole day.
This court should have been open to the public generally, except at
two or three periods of half an hour each, during which it should have
been accessible only to those who had previously secured tickets at a
shilling apiece.
During each half hour the person whom I had recommended to the
Commissioners might have given a short popular explanation of the
subject.
This attraction might have been still further increased, and additional
profit made, if a single sheet of paper had been printed containing
a woodcut of the Swedish Machine, an impression from a page of the
Tables computed and stereotyped by it at Somerset House, and also an
impression from a stereotype plate of the Difference Engine exhibited
by the Government.
A plate of the Swedish Machine is in existence in London. I am
confident that, for such a purpose, I could have procured the loan of
it for the Commissioners, and I would willingly have supplied them
with the stereotype plate from which the frontispage of the present
volume was printed, together with from ten to twenty lines of necessary
explanation.
These illustrations of machinery used for computing and printing Tables
might have been put up into packets of dozens and half dozens, and
also have been sold in single {161} sheets at the rate of one penny
each copy. There can be no doubt the sale of them would have been
very considerable. As it was, I found the woodcut representing the
Difference Engine No. 1 in great request, and during the exhibition I
had numberless applications for it; having given away my whole stock of
about 800 copies.
〈AN ASSISTANT EXPLAINING.〉
The calculating court might have held comfortably from sixty to eighty
seats. Each lecture would have produced say 3 _l._ This being repeated
three times each day, together with the sale of the woodcuts, would
have produced about 10 _l._ per day, out of which the Commissioners
would have had six shillings per day to pay the assistant who gave the
required explanations.
If the dignity of the Commissioners would not permit them to make money
by such means, they might have announced that the proceeds of the
tickets would be given to the distressed population of the Manchester
district, and there would then have been crowds of visitors.
But the rigid economy of the Commissioners, who refused to expend six
shillings a day for an attendant, although it would most probably have
produced a return of several hundred pounds, was entirely laid aside
when their patronage was to be extended to a brother official.
Captain Fowke, an officer of engineers, whose high order of
architectural talent became afterwards so well known to the public,
and whose whole time and services were retained and paid for by the
country, was employed to make a design for the Exhibition Building.
〈THE COMMISSIONERS DO A JOB.〉
The Commissioners approved of this design, which comprised two lofty
domes, uniting in themselves the threefold inconvenience of being ugly,
useless, and expensive. They then proceeded to pay him five thousand
pounds for the job. {162} This system of awarding large sums of money
to certain favoured public officers who are already paid for their
services by liberal salaries seems to be a growing evil. At the period
of the Irish famine the under-secretary of the Treasury condescended
to accept 2,500 _l._ out of the fund raised to save a famished nation.
Some inquiries, even recently, were occasionally made whether any
similar deduction will be allowed from the liberal contributions to the
sufferers by the cotton famine.
The question was raised and the practice reprobated in the House of
Commons by men of opposite party politics. Mr. Gladstone remarked:—
“If there was one rule connected with the public service which more
than any other ought to be scrupulously observed, it was this, that the
salary of a public officer, more especially if he were of high rank,
ought to cover all the services he might be called upon to render. Any
departure from this rule must be dangerous.” Hansard, vol. 101, p. 138,
1848. Supply, 14 Aug. 1848. See also “The Exposition of 1851,” 8vo., p.
217.
〈THE ADMIRALTY REFUSE.〉
The following paragraph appeared in “The Times”[31] a short time since,
under the head Naval Intelligence:—
“A reply has been received to the memorial transmitted to the Admiralty
some few days since from the inspectors employed on the iron frigate
‘Achilles,’ building at Chatham dockyard, requesting that they may
be placed on the same footing as regards increased pay as the junior
officers and mechanics working on the iron frigate for the additional
number of hours they are employed in the dockyard. The Lords of the
Admiralty intimate that they cannot accede to the wishes of the
memorialists, who are reminded that, as {163} salaried officers of
the establishment, the whole of their time is at the disposal of the
Admiralty. This decision has caused considerable dissatisfaction.”
[31] About the 20th of May, 1863.
It appears that the Admiralty wisely adopted the principle enunciated
by Mr. Gladstone.
It may, however, not unreasonably have caused dissatisfaction to those
who had no interest to back them on finding that such large sums are
pocketed by those who are blessed with influential friends in high
quarters.
If the Commissioners had really wished to have obtained a suitable
building at a fair price their course was simple and obvious. They need
only have stated the nature and amount of accommodation required, and
then have selected half a dozen of the most eminent firms amongst our
great contractors, who would each have given them an estimate of the
plans they respectively suggested.
The Commissioners might have made it one of the conditions that they
should not be absolutely bound to give the contract to the author of
the plan accepted. But in case of not employing him a sum previously
stipulated should have been assigned for the use of the design.
By such means they would have had a choice of various plans, and if
those plans had, previously to the decision of the Commissioners, been
publicly exhibited for a few weeks, they might have been enlightened by
public criticism. Such a course would have prevented the gigantic job
they afterwards perpetrated. It could therefore find no support from
the Commissioners.
The present Commissioners, however, are fit successors to those
who in 1851 ignored the existence of the author of the “Economy of
Manufactures” and his inventions. They seem to have been deluded into
the belief that they possessed {164} the strength, as well as the
desire, quietly to strangle the Difference Engine.
It would be idle to break such butterflies upon its matchless wheels,
or to give permanence to such names by reflecting them from its
diamond-graven plates.[32] Though the steam-hammer can crack the
coating without injuring the kernel of the filbert it drops upon—the
admirable precision of its gigantic power could never be demonstrated
by exhausting its energy upon an empty nut-shell.
[32] For the purpose of testing the steadiness and truth of the
tools employed in forming the gun-metal plates, I had some dozen
of them turned with a diamond point. The perfect equality of its
cut caused the reflected light to be resolved into those beautiful
images pointed out by Frauenhofer, and also so much admired in
the celebrated gold buttons produced by the late Mr. Barton, the
Comptroller of the Mint.
Peace, then, to their memory, aptly enshrined in unknown characters
within the penetralia of the temple of oblivion.
〈CONSOLATION FOR THE COMMISSIONERS.〉
These celebrities may there at last console themselves in the enjoyment
of one enviable privilege denied to them during their earthly
career—exemption from the daily consciousness of being “_found out_.”
It is, however, not quite impossible, although deciphering is a
brilliant art, that one or other of them may have heard of the dread
power of the decipherer. Having myself had some slight acquaintance
with that fascinating pursuit, it gives me real pleasure to relieve
them from this very natural fear by assuring them that not even the
most juvenile decipherer could be so stupid as to apply himself to the
interpretation of—characters known to be meaningless.
Yet there is one name amongst, but not of them—a fellow-worshipper
with myself at far other fanes, whose hands, like mine, have wielded
the hammer, and whose pen, like mine, has endeavoured to communicate
faithfully to his fellow-men {165} the measure of those truths he
has himself laboriously extracted from the material world. With such
endowments, it is impossible that _he_ could have had any cognizance of
this part of the proceedings of his colleagues.[33]
[33] I have since learnt, with real satisfaction, that my friend,
Mr. Fairbairn, was _not_ a member of that incompetent Commission.
〈MR. GRAVATT EXPLAINS THE ENGINE.〉
At the commencement of the Exhibition, Mr. Gravatt was constantly
present, and was so kind as to explain to many anxious inquirers the
nature and uses of the Difference Engine. This, however, interfered so
much with his professional engagements as a Civil Engineer, that it
would have been unreasonable to have expected its continuance. In fact,
as not above half a dozen spectators could see the machine at once, it
was a great sacrifice of valuable time for a very small result.
During the early part of my own examination of the Exhibition I had
many opportunities of conversing with experienced workmen, well
qualified to appreciate the workmanship of the Difference Engine; these
I frequently accompanied to its narrow cell, and pointed out to them
its use, as well as the means by which its various parts had received
their destined form.
Occasionally also I explained it to some few of my personal friends.
When Mr. Gravatt or myself were thus engaged, a considerable crowd was
often collected, who were anxious to hear about, although they could
not see, the Engine itself.
Upon one of these occasions I was insulted by impertinent questions
conveyed in a loud voice from a person at a distance in the crowd.
My taste for music, and especially for organs, was questioned. I was
charitable enough to suppose that this was an exceptional case; but
in less than a week another instance {166} occurred. After this
experience, of course, I seldom went near the Difference Engine. Mr.
Gravatt who had generously sacrificed a considerable portion of his
valuable time for the information and instruction of the public was now
imperatively called away by professional engagements, and the public
had no information whatever upon a subject on which it was really very
anxious to be instructed.
〈MR. WILMOT BUXTON EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE ENGINE.〉
Fortunately, however, the Exhibition took place during the long
vacation; and a friend of mine, Mr. Wilmot Buxton, of the Chancery Bar,
very frequently accompanied me in my visits. Possessing a profound
knowledge of the mathematical principles embodied in the mechanism, I
had frequently pointed out to him its nature and relations. These I
soon found he so well apprehended that I felt justified in intrusting
him with one of my keys of the machine, in order that he might have
access to it without the necessity of my presence.
Whenever he opened it for his own satisfaction or for the instruction
of his friends, he was speedily surrounded by a far larger portion of
the public than could possibly see it, but who were still attracted by
his lucid oral explanation.
It was fortunate for many of the visitors to the Exhibition that this
occurred, for the demands on his time, when present, were incessant,
and hundreds thus acquired from his explanations a popular view of the
subject.
After the close of the Exhibition, Mr. Gravatt and myself attended to
prepare the Difference Engine for its return to the Museum of King’s
College. To our great astonishment, we found that it had already been
removed to the Museum at South Kensington. Not only the Difference
Engine itself, but also the illustrations and all the unfinished
portions of exquisite workmanship which I had lent to the Exhibition
for its explanation, were gone. {167}
On Mr. Gravatt applying to the Board of Works, it was stated that the
Difference Engine itself had been placed in the Kensington Museum
because the authorities of King’s College had declined receiving it,
and immediate instructions were of course given for the restoration of
my own property.
{168}