INVENTION OF THE "GEORDY" SAFETY-LAMP.
Explosions of fire-damp were unusually frequent in the coal-mines of
Northumberland and Durham about the time when George Stephenson was
engaged in the construction of his first locomotives. These explosions
were often attended with fearful loss of life and dreadful suffering
to the work-people. Killingworth Colliery was not free from such
deplorable calamities; and during the time that Stephenson was employed
as brakesman at the West Moor, several "blasts" took place in the
pit, by which many workmen were scorched and killed, and the owners
of the colliery sustained heavy losses. One of the most serious of
these accidents occurred in 1806, not long after he had been appointed
brakesman, by which ten persons were killed. Stephenson was near
the pit mouth at the time, and the circumstances connected with the
explosion made a deep impression on his mind, as appears from the
graphic account which he gave of it to the Committee of the House of
Commons on accidents in mines, some thirty years after the event.
"The pit," said he, "had just ceased drawing coals, and nearly all
the men had got out. It was some time in the afternoon, a little
after midday. There were five men that went down the pit; four
of them for the purpose of preparing a place for the furnace.
The fifth was a person who went down to set them to work. I sent
this man down myself, and he had just got to the bottom of the
shaft about two or three minutes when the explosion took place. I
had left the mouth of the pit, and had gone about fifty or sixty
yards away, when I heard a tremendous noise, looked round, and
saw the discharge come out of the pit like the discharge of a
cannon. It continued to blow, I think, for a quarter of an hour,
discharging every thing that had come into the current. Wood came
up, stones came up, and trusses of hay that went up into the air
like balloons. Those trusses had been sent down during the day, and
I think they had in some measure injured the ventilation of the
mine. The ground all round the top of the pit was in a trembling
state. I went as near as I durst go; every thing appeared cracking
and rending about me. Part of the brattice, which was very strong,
was blown away at the bottom of the pits. Very large pumps were
lifted from their places, so that the engine could not work. The
pit was divided into four by partitions; it was a large pit,
fourteen feet in diameter, and partitions were put down at right
angles, which made four compartments. The explosion took place
in one of those four quarters, but it broke through into all the
others at the bottom, and the brattice or partitions were set on
fire at the first explosion.
"Nobody durst go near the shafts for some time, for fear of another
explosion taking place. At last we considered it necessary to run
the rope backward and forward, and give the miners, if there were
any at the bottom of the shaft, an opportunity of catching the
rope as it came to the bottom. Several men were safely got up in
this way; one man, who had got hold of the rope, was being drawn
up, when a farther explosion took place while he was still in the
shaft, and the increased current which came about him projected
him as it were up the shaft; yet he was landed without injury:
it was a singular case.... The pit continued to blast every two
or three hours for about two days. It appears that the coal had
taken fire, and as soon as the carbureted hydrogen gas collected
in sufficient quantity to reach the part where it was burning, it
ignited again; but none of the explosions were equal to the first,
on account of many parts of the mine having become filled with
azotic gas, or the _after-damp_ of the mine. All the ditches in the
countryside were stopped to get water to pour into the pit. We had
fire-engines brought from Newcastle, and the water was poured in
till it came above the fire, and then it was extinguished. The loss
to the owners of the colliery by this accident must have been about
£20,000."[43]
Another explosion took place in the same pit in 1809, by which twelve
persons lost their lives. The blast did not reach the shaft as in the
former case, the unfortunate persons in the pit having been suffocated
by the after-damp. More calamitous still were the explosions which
took place in the neighboring collieries, one of the worst being that
of 1812, in the Felling Pit near Gateshead, a mine belonging to Mr.
Brandling, by which no fewer than ninety men and boys were suffocated
or burnt to death; and a similar accident occurred in the same pit in
the year following, by which twenty-two men and boys perished.
[Illustration: The Pit Head, West Moor. [By R. P. Leitch.]]
It was natural that Stephenson should devote his attention to the
causes of these deplorable accidents, and to the means by which they
might, if possible, be prevented. His daily occupation led him to
think much and deeply on the subject. As engine-wright of a colliery
so extensive as that of Killingworth, where there were nearly 160
miles of gallery excavation, in which he personally superintended the
working of inclined planes, along which the coals were sent to the
pit entrance, he was necessarily very often under ground, and brought
face to face with the dangers of fire-damp. From fissures in the roofs
of the galleries carbureted hydrogen gas was constantly flowing; and
in some of the more dangerous places it might be heard escaping from
the crevices of the coal with a hissing noise. Ventilation, firing,
and all conceivable modes of drawing out the foul air had been tried,
while the more dangerous parts of the galleries were built up. Still
the danger could not be wholly prevented. The miners must necessarily
guide their steps through the extensive underground ways with lighted
lamps or candles, the naked flame of which, coming in contact with the
inflammable air, daily exposed them and their fellow-workers in the pit
to the risk of death in one of its most dreadful forms.
One day in the year 1814, a workman hurried into Stephenson's cottage
with the startling information that the deepest main of the colliery
was on fire! He immediately hastened to the pit-head, about a hundred
yards off, whither the women and children of the colliery were running,
with wildness and terror depicted in every face. In a commanding voice,
Stephenson ordered the engine-man to lower him down the shaft in the
corve. There was danger, it might be death, before him, but he must go.
He was soon at the bottom and in the midst of the men, who were
paralyzed at the danger which threatened the lives of all in the pit.
Leaping from the corve on its touching the ground, he called out, "Are
there six men among you who have the courage to follow me? If so, come,
and we will put the fire out." The Killingworth pitmen had the most
perfect confidence in their engine-wright, and they readily volunteered
to follow him. Silence succeeded the frantic tumult of the previous
minute, and the men set to work with a will. In every mine, bricks,
mortar, and tools enough are at hand, and by Stephenson's direction the
materials were forthwith carried to the required spot, where, in a very
short time, a wall was raised at the entrance to the main, he himself
taking the most active part in the work. The atmospheric air was by
this means excluded, the fire was extinguished, most of the people in
the pit were saved from death, and the mine was preserved.
This anecdote of George Stephenson was related to the writer, near the
pit-mouth, by one of the men, Kit Heppel, who had been present, and
helped to build up the brick wall by which the fire was stayed, though
several of the workmen were suffocated. Heppel relates that, when down
the pit some days after, seeking out the dead bodies, the cause of
the accident was the subject of some conversation between himself and
Stephenson, and Heppel then asked him, "Can nothing be done to prevent
such awful occurrences?" Stephenson replied that he thought something
might be done. "Then," said Heppel, "the sooner you begin the better,
for the price of coal-mining now is _pitmen's lives_."
Fifty years since, many of the best pits were so full of the
inflammable gas given forth by the coal that they could not be worked
without the greatest danger, and for this reason some were altogether
abandoned. The rudest possible means were adopted of producing light
sufficient to enable the pitmen to work by. The phosphorescence
of decayed fish-skins was tried; but this, though safe, was very
inefficient. The most common method employed was what was called a
steel mill, the notched wheel of which, being made to revolve against a
flint, struck a succession of sparks, which scarcely served to do more
than make the darkness visible. A boy carried the apparatus, working
the wheel; and by the imperfect light thus given forth the miner plied
his dangerous trade. Candles were only used in those parts of the pit
where gas was not abundant. Under this rude system not more than one
third of the coal could be worked, while two thirds were left.
What the workmen, not less than the coal-owners, eagerly desired was
a lamp that should give forth sufficient light, without communicating
flame to the inflammable gas which accumulated in certain parts of the
pit. Something had already been done toward the invention of such a
lamp by Dr. Clanny, of Sunderland, who, in 1813, contrived an apparatus
to which he gave air from the mine through water, by means of bellows.
This lamp went out of itself in inflammable gas. It was found, however,
too unwieldy to be used by the miners for the purposes of their work,
and did not come into general use. A committee of gentlemen interested
in coal-mining was formed to investigate the causes of the explosions,
and to devise, if possible, some means of preventing them. At the
invitation of that committee, Sir Humphry Davy, then in the full zenith
of his reputation, was requested to turn his attention to the subject.
He accordingly visited the collieries near Newcastle on the 24th of
August, 1815, and at the close of that year, on the 9th of November,
1815, he read before the Royal Society of London his celebrated paper
"On the Fire-damp of Coal Mines, and on Methods of Lighting the Mine so
as to prevent its Explosion."
But a humbler though not less diligent and original thinker had been at
work before him, and had already practically solved the problem of the
Safety-lamp. Stephenson was, of course, well aware of the desire which
prevailed in the colliery districts for the invention of a lamp which
should give light enough for the miners to work by without exploding
the fire-damp, and the painful incidents above described only served to
quicken his eagerness to master the difficulty.
For several years he had been engaged, in his own rude way, in making
experiments with the fire-damp in the Killingworth mine. The pitmen
used to expostulate with him on these occasions, believing the
experiments to be fraught with danger. One of the sinkers, called
M'Crie, observing him holding up lighted candles to the windward of the
"blower" or fissure from which the inflammable gas escaped, entreated
him to desist; but Stephenson's answer was, that "he was busy with a
plan by which he hoped to make his experiments useful for preserving
men's lives." On these occasions the miners usually got out of the way
before he lit the gas.
In 1815, although he was very much occupied with the business of the
collieries and the improvement of his locomotive engine, he was also
busily engaged in making experiments upon the inflammable gas in the
Killingworth Pit. As he himself afterward related to the Committee of
the House of Commons which sat on the subject of Accidents in Mines in
1835, he imagined that if he could construct a lamp with a chimney so
arranged as to cause a strong current, it would not fire at the top
of the chimney, as the burnt air would ascend with such a velocity as
to prevent the inflammable air of the pit from descending toward the
flame; and such a lamp, he thought, might be taken into a dangerous
atmosphere without risk of exploding.
Such was Stephenson's theory, when he proceeded to embody his idea of
a miner's safety-lamp in a practical form. In the month of August,
1815, he requested his friend Nicholas Wood, the head viewer, to
prepare a drawing of a lamp according to the description which he gave
him. After several evenings' careful deliberations, the drawing was
prepared, and it was shown to several of the head men about the works.
"My first lamp," said Stephenson, describing it to the committee above
referred to, "had a chimney at the top of the lamp, and a tube at the
bottom to admit the atmospheric air, or fire-damp and air, to feed
the burner or combustion of the lamp. I was not aware of the precise
quantity required to feed the combustion; but to know what quantity was
necessary, I had a slide at the bottom of the tube in my first lamp, to
admit such a quantity of air as might eventually be found necessary to
keep up the combustion."
Accompanied by his friend Wood, Stephenson went into Newcastle, and
ordered a lamp to be made according to his plan by the Messrs. Hogg,
tinmen, at the head of the Side--a well-known street in Newcastle.
At the same time, he ordered a glass to be made for the lamp at the
Northumberland Glass-house in the same town. This lamp was received
from the makers on the 21st of October, and was taken to Killingworth
for the purpose of immediate experiment.
"I remember that evening as distinctly as if it had been but
yesterday," said Robert Stephenson, describing the circumstances to
the author in 1857. "Moodie came to our cottage about dusk, and asked
'if father had got back with the lamp.' 'No.' 'Then I'll wait till he
comes,' said Moodie; 'he can't be long now.' In about half an hour,
in came my father, his face all radiant. He had the lamp with him! It
was at once uncovered and shown to Moodie. Then it was filled with
oil, trimmed, and lighted. All was ready, only the head viewer hadn't
arrived. 'Run over to Benton for Nichol, Robert,' said my father to
me, 'and ask him to come directly; say we're going down the pit to
try the lamp.' By this time it was quite dark, and off I ran to bring
Nicholas Wood. His house was at Benton, about a mile off. There was
a short cut through Benton Church-yard, but just as I was about to
pass the wicket I saw what I thought was a white figure moving about
among the grave-stones. I took it for a ghost! My heart fluttered,
and I was in a great fright, but to Nichol's house I must get, so
I made the circuit of the church-yard; and when I got round to the
other side I looked, and, lo! the figure was still there. But what do
you think it was? Only the grave-digger, plying his work at that late
hour by the light of his lantern set upon one of the grave-stones! I
found Wood at home, and in a few minutes he was mounted and off to my
father's. When I got home I was told they had just left--it was then
about eleven--and gone down the shaft to try the lamp in one of the
most dangerous parts of the mine."
Arrived at the bottom of the shaft with the lamp, the party directed
their steps toward one of the foulest galleries in the pit, where the
explosive gas was issuing through a blower in the roof of the mine with
a loud hissing noise. By erecting some deal boarding round that part of
the gallery into which the gas was escaping, the air was thus made more
foul for the purpose of the experiment. After waiting about an hour,
Moodie, whose practical experience of fire-damp in pits was greater
than that of either Stephenson or Wood, was requested to go into the
place which had thus been made foul; and, having done so, he returned,
and told them that the smell of the air was such that if a lighted
candle were now introduced an explosion must inevitably take place. He
cautioned Stephenson as to the danger both to themselves and to the pit
if the gas took fire; but Stephenson declared his confidence in the
safety of his lamp, and, having lit the wick, he boldly proceeded with
it toward the explosive air. The others, more timid and doubtful, hung
back when they came within hearing of the blower; and, apprehensive
of the danger, they retired into a safe place, out of sight of the
lamp, which gradually disappeared with its bearer in the recesses of
the mine. It was a critical moment, and the danger was such as would
have tried the stoutest heart. Stephenson, advancing alone, with his
yet untried lamp, in the depths of those underground workings, calmly
venturing his life in the determination to discover a mode by which
the lives of many might be saved, and death disarmed in these fatal
caverns, presented an example of intrepid nerve and manly courage
more noble even than that which, in the excitement of battle and the
collective impetuosity of a charge, carries a man up to the cannon's
mouth.
Advancing to the place of danger, and entering within the fouled air,
his lighted lamp in hand, Stephenson held it firmly out, in the full
current of the blower, and within a few inches of its mouth. Thus
exposed, the flame of the lamp at first increased, then flickered, and
then went out; but there was no explosion of the gas. Returning to
his companions, who were still at a distance, he told them what had
occurred. Having now acquired somewhat more confidence, they advanced
with him to a point from which they could observe the experiment
repeated, but still at a safe distance. They saw that when the lighted
lamp was held within the explosive mixture, there was a great flame;
the lamp was almost full of fire; and then it seemed to be smothered
out. Again returning to his companions, he relighted the lamp, and
repeated the experiment. This was done several times, with the same
result. At length Wood and Moodie ventured to advance close to the
fouled part of the pit; and, in making some of the later trials, Mr.
Wood himself held up the lighted lamp to the blower.[44] Such was the
result of the first experiments with the _first practical Miner's
Safety-lamp_, and such was the daring resolution of its inventor in
testing its qualities.
Before leaving the pit, Stephenson expressed his opinion that, by
an alteration of the lamp which he contemplated, he could make it
burn better. This was by a change in the slide through which the
air was admitted into the lower part of the lamp, under the flame.
After making some experiments on the air collected at the blower, by
means of bladders which were mounted with tubes of various diameters,
he satisfied himself that, when the tube was reduced to a certain
diameter, the explosion would not pass through; and he fashioned his
slide accordingly, reducing the diameter of the tube until he conceived
it was quite safe. In about a fortnight the experiments were repeated
in the pit, in a place purposely made foul as before. On this occasion
a larger number of persons ventured to witness the experiments, which
again proved successful. The lamp was not yet, however, so efficient as
the inventor desired. It required, he observed, to be kept very steady
when burning in the inflammable gas, otherwise it was liable to go out,
in consequence, as he imagined, of the contact of the burnt air (as he
then called it), or azotic gas, which lodged round the exterior of the
flame. If the lamp was moved backward and forward, the azote came in
contact with the flame and extinguished it. "It struck me," said he,
"that if I put more tubes in, I should discharge the poisonous matter
that hung round the flame by admitting the air to its exterior part."
Although he had then no access to scientific works, nor intercourse
with scientific men, nor any thing that could assist him in his
inquiries on the subject besides his own indefatigable spirit of
inquiry, Stephenson contrived a rude apparatus, by means of which he
proceeded to test the explosive properties of the gas and the velocity
of current (for this was the direction of his inquiries) required to
permit the explosion to pass through tubes of different diameters. In
making these experiments in his cottage at the West Moor, Nicholas Wood
and George's son Robert usually acted as his assistants, and sometimes
the gentlemen of the neighborhood--among others, William Brandling
and Matthew Bell, who were interested in coal-mining--attended as
spectators. One who was present on such an occasion remembers that,
when an experiment was about to be performed, and all was ready, George
called to Mr. Wood, who worked the stop-cocks of the gasometer, "Wise
on [turn on] the hydrogen, Nichol!"
These experiments were not performed without risk, for on one occasion
the experimenting party had nearly blown off the roof of the cottage.
One of these "blows up" was described by Stephenson himself before the
Committee on Accidents in Coal Mines in 1835:
"I made several experiments," said he, "as to the velocity
required in tubes of different diameters, to prevent explosion
from fire-damp. We made the mixture in all proportions of light
carbureted hydrogen with atmospheric air in the receiver, and we
found by the experiments that when a current of the most explosive
mixture that we could make was forced up a tube four tenths of
an inch in diameter, the necessary current was nine inches in a
second to prevent its coming down that tube. These experiments were
repeated several times. We had two or three blows up in making the
experiments, by the flame getting down into the receiver, though we
had a piece of very fine wire-gauze put at the bottom of the pipe,
between the receiver and the pipe through which we were forcing the
current. In one of these experiments I was watching the flame in
the tube, my son was taking the vibrations of the pendulum of the
clock, and Mr. Wood was attending to give me the column of water
as I called for it, to keep the current up to a certain point. As
I saw the flame descending in the tube I called for more water,
and Wood unfortunately turned the cock the wrong way; the current
ceased, the flame went down the tube, and all our implements were
blown to pieces, which at the time we were not very well able to
replace."
The explosion of this glass receiver, which had been borrowed from the
stores of the Philosophical Society at Newcastle for the purpose of
making the experiments, caused the greatest possible dismay among the
party, and they dreaded to inform Mr. Turner, the secretary,[45] of the
calamity which had occurred. Fortunately, none of the experimenters
were injured by the accident.
Stephenson followed up these experiments by others of a similar kind,
with the view of ascertaining whether ordinary flame would pass through
tubes of a small diameter, and with this object he filed off the
barrels of several small keys. Placing these together, he held them
perpendicularly over a strong flame, and ascertained that it did not
pass upward. This was a farther proof to him of the soundness of the
principle on which he had been proceeding.
In order to correct the defect of his first lamp, he accordingly
proceeded to alter it so as to admit the air to the flame by several
tubes of reduced diameter instead of by a single tube. He inferred
that a sufficient quantity of air would thus be introduced into the
lamp for the purposes of combustion, while the smallness of the
apertures would still prevent the explosion passing downward, at the
same time that the "burnt air" (the cause, in his opinion, of the
lamp going out) would be more effectually dislodged. The requisite
alterations were made in the lamp by Mr. Matthews, a tinman in
Newcastle, and it was so altered that the air was admitted by three
small tubes inserted in the bottom, the openings of which were placed
on the outside of the burner, instead of having (as in the original
lamp) the one tube opening directly under the flame.
This second or altered lamp was tried in the Killingworth Pit on the
4th of November, and was found to burn better than the first lamp, and
to be perfectly safe. But, as it did not yet come up entirely to the
inventor's expectations, he proceeded to contrive a third lamp, in
which he proposed to surround the oil vessel with a number of capillary
tubes. Then it struck him that if he cut off the middle of the tubes,
or made holes in metal plates, placed at a distance from each other
equal to the length of the tubes, the air would get in better, and the
effect in preventing the communication of explosion would be the same.
He was encouraged to persevere in the completion of his safety-lamp
by the occurrence of several fatal accidents about this time in
the Killingworth Pit. On the 9th of November a boy was killed by a
blast in the _A_ pit, at the very place where Stephenson had made
the experiments with his first lamp; and, when told of the accident,
he observed that if the boy had been provided with his lamp, his
life would have been saved. On the 20th of November he went over
to Newcastle to order his third lamp from Mr. Watson, a plumber in
that town. Mr. Watson referred him to his clerk, Henry Smith, whom
Stephenson invited to join him at a neighboring public house, where
they might quietly talk over the matter, and finally settle the plan
of the new lamp. They adjourned to the "Newcastle Arms," near the
present High-Level Bridge, where they had some ale, and a design of
the lamp was drawn in pencil upon a half-sheet of foolscap, with a
rough specification subjoined. The sketch, when shown to us by Robert
Stephenson some years since, still bore the marks of the ale. It was
a very rude design, but sufficient to work from. It was immediately
placed in the hands of the workmen, finished in the course of a
few days, and experimentally tested in the Killingworth Pit like
the previous lamps on the 30th of November, by which date neither
Stephenson nor Wood had heard of Sir Humphry Davy's experiments, nor of
the lamp which that gentleman proposed to construct.
[Illustration: DAVY'S SAFETY-LAMP.]
[Illustration: STEPHENSON'S SAFETY-LAMP.]
An angry controversy afterward took place as to the respective merits
of George Stephenson and Sir Humphry Davy in respect of the invention
of the Safety-lamp. A committee was formed on both sides, and the facts
were stated in various ways. It is perfectly clear, however, that
Stephenson had ascertained _the fact_ that flame will not pass through
tubes of a certain diameter--the principle on which the safety-lamp
is constructed--before Sir Humphry Davy had formed any definite idea
on the subject, or invented the model lamp afterward exhibited by him
before the Royal Society. Stephenson had actually constructed a lamp
on such a principle, and proved its safety, before Sir Humphry had
communicated his views on the subject to any person; and by the time
that the first public intimation had been given of his discovery,
Stephenson's second lamp had been constructed and tested in like
manner in the Killingworth Pit. The _first_ was tried on the 21st of
October, 1815; the _second_ was tried on the 4th of November; but it
was not until the 9th of November that Sir Humphry Davy presented his
first lamp to the public. And by the 30th of the same month, as we have
seen, Stephenson had constructed and tested his _third_ safety-lamp.
Stephenson's theory of the "burnt air" and the "draught" was no doubt
wrong, but his lamp was right, and that was the great fact which mainly
concerned him. Torricelli did not know the rationale of his tube, nor
Otto von Guericke that of his air-pump; yet no one thinks of denying
them the merit of their inventions on that account. The discoveries
of Volta and Galvani were in like manner independent of theory; the
greatest discoveries consisting in bringing to light certain grand
facts, on which theories are afterward framed. Our inventor had been
pursuing the Baconian method, though he did not think of that; his
sole object being to invent a safe lamp, which he knew could only be
done through the process of repeated experiment. Hence his numerous
experiments on the fire-damp at the blowers in the mine, as well as on
carbureted hydrogen gas in his cottage by means of the apparatus above
described. By experiment he distinctly ascertained that the explosion
of fire-damp could not pass through small tubes; and he also did what
had not before been done by any inventor--he constructed a lamp on this
principle, and repeatedly proved its safety at the risk of his life. At
the same time, there is no doubt that it was to Sir Humphry Davy that
the merit belonged of elucidating the true law on which the safety-lamp
is constructed.
The subject of this important invention excited so much interest in the
northern mining districts, and Stephenson's numerous friends considered
his lamp so completely successful--having stood the test of repeated
experiments--that they urged him to bring his invention before the
Philosophical and Literary Society of Newcastle, of whose apparatus
he had availed himself in the course of his experiments on fire-damp.
After much persuasion he consented to do so, and a meeting was
appointed for the purpose of receiving his explanations on the evening
of the 5th of December, 1815. Stephenson was at that time so diffident
in manner and unpracticed in speech, that he took with him his friend
Nicholas Wood to act as his interpreter and expositor on the occasion.
From eighty to a hundred of the most intelligent members of the society
were present at the meeting, when Mr. Wood stood forward to expound
the principles on which the lamp had been formed, and to describe the
details of its construction. Several questions were put, to which
Mr. Wood proceeded to give replies to the best of his knowledge. But
Stephenson, who up to that time had stood behind Wood, screened from
notice, observing that the explanations given were not quite correct,
could no longer control himself, and, standing forward, he proceeded
in his strong Northumbrian dialect to describe the lamp down to its
minutest details. He then produced several bladders full of carbureted
hydrogen, which he had collected from the blowers in the Killingworth
mine, and proved the safety of his lamp by numerous experiments with
the gas, repeated in various ways, his earnest and impressive manner
exciting in the minds of his auditors the liveliest interest both in
the inventor and his invention.
[Illustration: LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL INSTITUTE, NEWCASTLE.]
Shortly after, Sir H. Davy's model lamp was received and exhibited to
the coal-miners at Newcastle, on which occasion the observation was
made by several gentlemen, "Why, it is the same as Stephenson's!"
Notwithstanding Stephenson's claim to be regarded as the first inventor
of the Tube Safety-lamp, his merits do not seem to have been generally
recognized. Sir Humphry Davy carried off the larger share of the
_éclat_ which attached to the discovery. What chance had the unknown
workman of Killingworth with so distinguished a competitor? The one
was as yet but a colliery engine-wright, scarce raised above the
manual-labor class, without chemical knowledge or literary culture,
pursuing his experiments in obscurity, with a view only to usefulness;
the other was the scientific prodigy of his day, the pet of the Royal
Society, the favorite of princes, the most brilliant of lecturers, and
the most popular of philosophers.
No small indignation was expressed by the friends of Sir Humphry Davy
at Stephenson's "presumption" in laying claim to the invention of the
Safety-lamp. The scientific class united to ignore him entirely in the
matter. In 1831, Dr. Paris, in his "Life of Sir Humphry Davy," thus
wrote: "It will hereafter be scarcely believed that an invention so
eminently scientific, and which could never have been derived but from
the sterling treasury of science, should have been claimed on behalf of
an engine-wright of Killingworth, of the name of Stephenson--a person
not even possessing a knowledge of the elements of chemistry."
But Stephenson was really far above claiming for himself an invention
not his own. He had already accomplished a far greater thing even
than the making of a safety-lamp: he had constructed a successful
locomotive, which was to be seen in daily work on the Killingworth
Railway. By the improvements he had made in the engine, he might
almost be said to have _invented_ it; yet no one--not even the
philosophers--detected as yet the significance of that wonderful
machine. It excited no scientific interest, called forth no leading
articles in the newspapers or the reviews, and formed the subject of
no eloquent lectures at the Royal Society; for railways were as yet
comparatively unknown, and the might which slumbered in the locomotive
was scarcely, as yet, even dreamed of. What railways were to become
rested in a great measure with that "engine-wright of Killingworth, of
the name of Stephenson," though he was scarcely known as yet beyond the
bounds of his own district.
As to the value of the invention of the safety-lamp there could be no
doubt, and the colliery owners of Durham and Northumberland, to testify
their sense of its importance, determined to present a testimonial to
its inventor. The friends of Sir H. Davy met in August, 1816, to take
steps to raise a subscription for the purpose. The advertised object
of the meeting was to present him with a reward for the invention
of _his_ safety-lamp. To this no objection could be taken; for,
though the principle on which the safety-lamps of Stephenson and Davy
were constructed was the same, and although Stephenson's lamp was
unquestionably the first successful lamp that had been constructed on
such principle, and proved to be efficient, yet Sir H. Davy did invent
a safety-lamp, no doubt quite independently of all that Stephenson
had done; and having directed his careful attention to the subject,
and elucidated the true theory of explosion of carbureted hydrogen,
he was entitled to all praise and reward for his labor. But when
the meeting of coal-owners proposed to raise a subscription for the
purpose of presenting Sir H. Davy with a reward for "his invention of
_the_ safety-lamp," the case was entirely altered, and Stephenson's
friends then proceeded to assert his claims to be regarded as its first
inventor.
Many meetings took place on the subject, and much discussion ensued,
the result of which was that a sum of £2000 was presented to Sir
Humphry Davy as "the inventor of the safety-lamp;" but, at the same
time, a purse of 100 guineas was voted to George Stephenson, in
consideration of what he had done in the same direction. This result
was, however, very unsatisfactory to Stephenson, as well as to his
friends; and Mr. Brandling, of Gosforth, suggested to him that, the
subject being now fairly before the public, he should publish a
statement of the facts on which his claim was founded.
But this was not at all in George Stephenson's line. He had never
appeared in print before, and it seemed to him a far more formidable
thing to write a letter for publication in "the papers" than even to
invent a safety-lamp or design a locomotive. Having called his son
Robert to his assistance, he set him down before a sheet of foolscap,
and when all was ready, he said, "Now, put down there just what I tell
you." The composition of this letter, as we were informed by the writer
of it, occupied more evenings than one; and when it was at length
finished after many corrections, and fairly copied out, the father and
son set out--the latter dressed in his Sunday's round jacket--to lay
the joint production before Mr. Brandling, at Gosforth House. Glancing
over the letter, Mr. Brandling said, "George, this will never do."
"It is all true, sir," was the reply. "That may be; but it is badly
written." Robert blushed, for he thought it was the penmanship that was
called in question, and he had written his very best. Mr. Brandling
then requested his visitors to sit down while he put the letter in a
more polished form, which he did, and it was shortly after published in
the local papers.
As the controversy continued for some time longer to be carried on
in the Newcastle papers, Mr. Stephenson, in the year 1817, consented
to publish the detailed plans, with descriptions, of the several
safety-lamps which he had contrived for use in the Killingworth
Colliery. The whole forms a pamphlet of only sixteen pages of
letter-press.[46]
His friends, being fully satisfied of his claims to priority as
the inventor of the safety-lamp used in the Killingworth and other
collieries, proceeded to hold a public meeting for the purpose of
presenting him with a reward "for the valuable service he had thus
rendered to mankind." Charles J. Brandling, Esq., occupied the chair;
and several resolutions were passed, of which the first and most
important was as follows: "That it is the opinion of this meeting that
Mr. George Stephenson, having _discovered the fact_ that explosion
of hydrogen gas will not pass through tubes and apertures of small
dimensions, and having been _the first to apply that principle in the
construction of a safety-lamp_, is entitled to a public reward."
A subscription was immediately commenced with this object, and a
committee was formed, consisting of the Earl of Strathmore, C. J.
Brandling, and others. The subscription list was headed by Lord
Ravensworth, one of the partners in the Killingworth Colliery,
who showed his appreciation of the merits of Stephenson by giving
100 guineas. C. J. Brandling and partners gave a like sum, and
Matthew Bell and partners, and John Brandling and partners, gave 50
guineas each. When the resolutions appeared in the newspapers, the
scientific friends of Sir Humphry Davy in London met, and passed a
series of counter-resolutions, which they published, declaring their
opinion that Mr. Stephenson was _not_ the author of the discovery
of the fact that explosion of hydrogen will not pass through tubes
and apertures of small dimensions, and that he was _not_ the first
to apply that principle to the construction of a safety-lamp. To
these counter-resolutions were attached the well-known names of Sir
Joseph Banks, P.R.S., William Thomas Brande, Charles Hatchett, W. H.
Wollaston, and Thomas Young.
Mr. Stephenson's friends then, to make assurance doubly sure, and with
a view to set the question at rest, determined to take evidence in
detail as to the date of discovery by George Stephenson of the fact
in question, and its practical application by him in the formation
and actual trial of his safety-lamp. The witnesses examined were
George Stephenson himself, Mr. Nicholas Wood, and John Moodie, who
had been present at the first trial of the lamp; the several tinmen
who made the lamps; the secretary and other members of the Literary
and Philosophical Society of Newcastle, who were present at the
exhibition of the third lamp; and some of the workmen who were present
at the Killingworth Colliery, who had been witnesses of Stephenson's
experiments on fire-damp made with the lamps at different times before
Sir Humphry Davy's investigations had been heard of. This evidence was
quite conclusive to the minds of the gentlemen who investigated the
subject, and they published it in 1817, together with their Report,
in which they declared that, "after a careful inquiry into the merits
of the case, conducted, as they trust, in a spirit of fairness and
moderation, they can perceive no satisfactory reason for changing their
opinion."[47] The Stephenson subscription, when collected, amounted
to £1000. Part of the money was devoted to the purchase of a silver
tankard, which was presented to the inventor, together with the balance
of the subscription, at a public dinner given in the Assembly Rooms
at Newcastle.[48] But what gave Stephenson even greater pleasure than
the silver tankard and purse of sovereigns was the gift of a silver
watch, purchased by small subscriptions collected among the colliers
themselves, and presented to him by them as a token of their esteem
and regard for him as a man, as well as of their gratitude for the
perseverance and skill with which he had prosecuted his valuable and
life-saving invention to a successful issue. To the last day of his
life he spoke with pride of this watch as the most highly-prized gift
he had ever received.
However great may be the merits of Stephenson in connection with
the invention of the tube safety-lamp, they can not be regarded as
detracting in any degree from the reputation of Sir Humphry Davy. His
inquiries into the explosive properties of carbureted hydrogen gas
were quite original, and his discovery of the fact that explosion will
not pass through tubes of a certain diameter was made independently
of all that Stephenson had done in verification of the same fact. It
would even appear that Mr. Smithson Tennant and Dr. Wollaston had
observed the same fact several years before, though neither Stephenson
nor Davy knew of it while they were prosecuting their experiments. Sir
Humphry Davy's subsequent modification of the tube-lamp, by which,
while diminishing the diameter, he in the same ratio shortened the
tubes without danger, and in the form of wire-gauze enveloped the
safety-lamp by a multiplicity of tubes, was a beautiful application of
the true theory which he had formed upon the subject.
The increased number of accidents which have occurred from explosions
in coal-mines since the general introduction of the Davy lamp led to
considerable doubts being entertained as to its safety, and inquiries
were consequently made as to the means by which it might be farther
improved; for experience has shown that, under certain circumstances,
the Davy lamp is _not_ safe. Stephenson was himself of opinion that
the modification of his own and Sir Humphry Davy's lamp, by combining
the glass cylinder with the wire-gauze, would give the best lamp. At
the same time, it must be admitted that the Davy and the Geordy lamps
alike failed to stand the severe tests to which they were submitted
by Dr. Pereira, before the Committee on Accidents in Mines. Indeed,
Dr. Pereira did not hesitate to say that, when exposed to a current
of explosive gas, the Davy lamp is "decidedly unsafe," and that
the experiments by which its safety had been "demonstrated" in the
lecture-room had proved entirely "fallacious."
It is worthy of remark that, under circumstances in which the
wire-gauze of the Davy lamp becomes red-hot from the high explosiveness
of the gas, the Geordy lamp is extinguished; and we can not but think
that this fact testifies to the decidedly superior safety of the
Geordy. An accident occurred in the Oaks Colliery Pit at Barnsley on
the 20th of August, 1857, which strikingly exemplified the respective
qualities of the lamps. A sudden outburst of gas took place from the
floor of the mine along a distance of fifty yards. Fortunately, the men
working in the pit at the time were all supplied with safety-lamps--the
hewers with Stephenson's, and the hurriers with Davy's. On this
occasion, the whole of the Stephenson lamps, over a space of five
hundred yards, were extinguished almost instantaneously; whereas the
Davy lamps were filled with fire and became red-hot, so that several
of the men using them had their hands burnt by the gauze. Had a strong
current of air been blowing through the gallery at the time, an
explosion would most probably have taken place--an accident which, it
will be observed, could not, under such circumstances, occur from the
use of the Geordy, which is immediately extinguished as soon as the
air becomes explosive.[49]
Nicholas Wood, a good judge, has said of the two inventions, "Priority
has been claimed for each of them--I believe the inventions to be
parallel. By different roads they both arrived at the same result.
Stephenson's is the superior lamp. Davy's is safe--Stephenson's is
safer."
When the question of priority was under discussion at Mr. Lough's
studio in 1857, Sir Matthew White Ridley asked Robert Stephenson, who
was present, for his opinion on the subject. His answer was, "I am not
exactly the person to give an unbiased opinion; but, as you ask me
frankly, I will as frankly say, that if George Stephenson had never
lived, Sir Humphry Davy could and most probably would have invented the
safety-lamp; but again, if Sir Humphry Davy had never lived, George
Stephenson certainly would have invented the safety-lamp, as I believe
he did, independently of all that Sir Humphry Davy had done in the
matter."
To this day the Geordy lamp continues in regular use in the
Killingworth Collieries, and the Killingworth pitmen have expressed to
the writer their decided preference for it compared with the Davy. It
is certainly a strong testimony in its favor that no accident is known
to have arisen from its use since it was generally introduced into the
Killingworth pits.
[Illustration: THE STEPHENSON TANKARD.]
FOOTNOTES:
[43] Evidence given by George Stephenson before the Select Committee on
Accidents in Mines, 26th June, 1835.
[44] The accuracy of the above statement having been called in
question, it is proper to state that the facts as set forth were
verbally communicated to the author in the first place by Robert
Stephenson, to whom the chapter was afterward read in MS. in the
presence of Mr. Sopwith, F.R.S., and received his entire approval.
But at the time at which Mr. Stephenson communicated the verbal
information, he also handed a little book with his name written in it,
still in the author's possession, saying, "Read that; you will find it
all there." This little book contains, among other things, a pamphlet,
entitled "Report on the Claims of Mr. George Stephenson relative to the
Invention of his Safety-lamp. By the Committee appointed at a Meeting
holden in Newcastle, on the 1st of November, 1817. With an Appendix
containing the Evidence." Among the witnesses examined were George
Stephenson, Nicholas Wood, and John Moodie, and their evidence is given
in the pamphlet. Stephenson said that he tried the first lamp "in a
part of the mine where the air was highly explosive. Nicholas Wood and
John Moodie were his companions when the trial was made. They became
frightened when they came within hearing of the blower, and would not
go any farther. Mr. Stephenson went alone with the lamp to the mouth
of the blower," etc. This evidence was confirmed by John Moodie, who
said the air of the place where the experiment was about to be tried
was such, that, if a lighted candle had been introduced, an explosion
would have taken place that would have been "extremely dangerous."
"Told Stephenson it was foul, and hinted at the danger; nevertheless,
Stephenson _would_ try the lamp, confiding in its safety. Stephenson
took the lamp and went with it into the place in which Moodie had been,
and Moodie and Wood, apprehensive of the danger, retired to a greater
distance," etc. The accuracy of the other statements made in the text
relative to the invention of the safety-lamp is confirmed by the same
publication.
[45] The early connection of Robert with the Philosophical and Literary
Society of Newcastle had brought him into communication with the
Rev. William Turner, one of the secretaries of the institution. That
gentleman was always ready to assist the inquirer after knowledge,
and took an early interest in the studious youth from Killingworth,
with whose father he also became acquainted. Mr. Turner cheerfully
helped them in their joint inquiries, and excited while he endeavored
to satisfy their thirst for scientific information. Toward the close
of his life Mr. Stephenson often spoke of the gratitude and esteem he
felt toward his revered instructor. "Mr. Turner," he said, "was always
ready to assist me with books, with instruments, and with counsel,
gratuitously and cheerfully. He gave me the most valuable assistance
and instruction, and to my dying day I can never forget the obligations
which I owe to my venerable friend."
[46] "A Description of the Safety-lamp, invented by George Stephenson,
and now in use in the Killingworth Colliery." London, 1817.
[47] The committee, in their report, after setting forth in a tabular
form the dates at which Stephenson and Davy verified their theories by
experiments, and brought out their respective safety-lamps, proceeded
to say: "The friends of Mr. Stephenson, with this table before them,
conceive their resolution to be fully borne out by the testimony of
dates and facts, so far as they are known; and without the slightest
idea or wish of detracting from the scientific fame, honor, or veracity
of Sir Humphry Davy, they would repeat, and confine themselves to
the simple assertion of their belief, that Mr. Stephenson was the
first to construct a lamp upon the principle in question. And when
the friends of Mr. Stephenson remember the humble and laborious
station of life which he has occupied; when they consider the scanty
means and opportunities which he has had for pursuing researches in
practical science, and look to the improvements and discoveries which,
notwithstanding so many disadvantages, he has been enabled to make by
the judicious and unremitting exercise of the energy and acuteness of
his natural understanding, they can not persuade themselves that they
have said any thing more than any liberal and feeling mind would most
readily admit."
[48] The tankard bore the following inscription: "This piece of plate,
purchased with a part of the sum of £1000, a subscription raised
for the remuneration of Mr. George Stephenson for having discovered
the fact that inflamed fire-damp will not pass through tubes and
apertures of small dimensions, and having been _the first_ to apply
that principle in the construction of a safety-lamp calculated for
the preservation of human life in situations formerly of the greatest
danger, was presented to him at a meeting of the subscribers, Charles
John Brandling, Esq., in the chair, January 12th, 1818."
[49] The accident above referred to was described in the "Barnsley
Times," a copy of which, containing the account, Robert Stephenson
forwarded to the author, with the observation that "it is evidently
written by a practical miner, and is, I think, worthy of record in my
father's Life." Mr. John Browne, C.E., Barnsley, in a communication
which appeared in the "Times" of December 24th, 1860, observed:
"At the period of this occurrence we had two kinds of safety-lamps in
use in this pit, viz., 'Davy' and 'Stephenson,' and the gas, in going
off to the upcast shaft, had to pass great numbers of men, who were at
work with both kinds of lamps. The whole of the 'Davy's' became red-hot
almost instantaneously from the rapid ignition of the gas within the
gauze; the 'Stephenson's' were as instantly self-extinguished from the
same cause, it being the prominent qualification of these lamps that,
in addition to affording a somewhat better light than the 'Davy' lamp,
they are suddenly extinguished when placed within a highly explosive
atmosphere, so that no person can remain working and run the risk of
his lamp becoming red-hot, which, under such circumstances, would be
the result with the 'Davy' lamp.
"The red-hot lamps were, most fortunately, all safely put out, although
the men in many cases had their hands severely burnt by the gauze;
but from that time I fully resolved to adopt the exclusive use of the
'Stephenson' lamps, and not expose men to the fearful risk they must
run from working with 'Davy' lamps during the probable recurrence of a
similar event.
"I may remark that the 'Stephenson' lamp, originally invented by the
great George Stephenson, in its present shape combines the merits of
his discovery with that of Sir Humphry Davy, constituting, to my mind,
the safest lamp at present known, and I speak from the long use of many
hundreds daily in various collieries."
In an account given in the "Times" of the 10th of August, 1867, of a
number of experiments made upon different safety-lamps at the Barnsley
Gas-works, occasioned by the terrible explosion at the Lund Hill
Colliery, it is stated that the different lamps were tested with the
following results: "The 'Davy' lamp with no shield on the outside
exploded the gas in six seconds, and with the shield inside the gauze
in nine seconds. The 'Belgian' lamp exploded in ten seconds; the
'Mozard' in ten seconds; the small 'Clanny' in seven seconds, the large
one in ten seconds; and the 'Stephenson' in seventy-five seconds.
Although the 'Stephenson' is undoubtedly the best, it will be seen that
none of the so-called safety-lamps can be depended upon when coming in
contact with a _strong explosive current_ of fire-damp and air."