THE BRITISH CONTRACT
Size of the “Drawings and Descriptions.” Pseudonyms. Proposals.
Contract with the British government. Was Fulton false to his
principles in supporting Great Britain against France? His
financial position under the contract.
The “Descriptions” that Fulton left in England were in two parts, of
which the first is a recital of his negotiations and work, and the
second a minute description of the boat and bombs. Both parts are wholly
in Fulton’s handwriting and cover twelve double sheets of paper, five
for the first and seven for the second part. The sheets are 14¾ inches
high with a double or folded width of 19⅛ inches. The writing is on both
sides of the sheets, so that exclusive of the outside pages, which are
left blank, except for the descriptive recital on page 1 of the first
part, there are 43 pages of writing. There are from 26 to 28 lines to a
page with a margin of 2 inches on the left-hand side, and about 8 words
to a line. The paper is heavy hand-made linen, slightly off the white in
color with gilt on the edges. One-half of each sheet is water-marked
with a design composed of a crown and fleur-de-lys surmounting the
letters P & B, the other half of the sheet being water-marked Portal &
Co. 1796.
The drawings are water-colored and are on sheets of heavy Bristol paper
measuring 22¼ × 18¾ inches. As will be seen each one is dated and signed
by Fulton.
The “Bond and Contract” to which reference is made was found in 1812
among the papers of Lord Melville and was then deposited by his
executors in the Public Record office. With the exception of the
Admiralty CIRCULAR given on page 52, the contemporaneous archives of the
government contain little concerning Fulton’s work, and are in this
respect quite different from the French records. The explanation is that
the British ministers were fearful lest information regarding the
submarine should transpire to their detriment. They, therefore, treated
all correspondence as confidential and kept letters and other documents
in their personal rather than official files. In fact Fulton adopted the
pseudonym of “Robert Francis,” a designation that was frequently, though
not exclusively, used by both the Government officials and himself in
correspondence during the years 1804–1806.
The “Contract” was Fulton’s own conception in form and substance, the
government accepting the terms that he proposed. This is shown by his
notes and copies of letters that still exist.
Lord Hawkesbury who had induced Fulton to leave France for England was
Robert Banks Jenkinson (1770–1828). His father, created Lord Hawkesbury
in 1786 and Earl of Liverpool in 1796, had served as Secretary for War
from 1778 and therefore during the greater part of the American
Revolution. The son, using his father’s junior title of Lord Hawkesbury,
became Secretary for Foreign Affairs in 1801 in the Addington ministry.
As such Secretary, he would be the one to open negotiations with Fulton
in Paris.
Fulton arrived in London on the 19th of May. Addington had been
displaced by Pitt in the control of the government a few days before.
Lord Hawkesbury, though no longer in charge of Foreign Affairs,
continued in office, holding the portfolio of the Home Office in the new
cabinet. In spite of his change of status, Fulton would naturally call
on him as the only official with whom he was acquainted. In his note
book, in which he copied in neat hand the letter of Lord Hawkesbury that
the agent “Mr. Smith” had handed him in Paris, he writes at the bottom
of the copy of the letter, “I had an interview with Mr. Hammond on the
21 when he desired me to give in proposals they were as follows.”
From this juxtaposition of names it is fair to assume that to Lord
Hawkesbury he gave the name of Hammond. Fulton was fond of doing such
things. His own attempt at personal disguise under the name of Francis
was very thin. The coincidence that his real and temporarily assumed
names began with the same letter will be noted. So do Hawkesbury and
Hammond. The letters to “Mr. Hammond” are letters that would be written
only to one who was high in authority. It was not in accordance with
Fulton’s character to send such communications as are the Hammond
letters to a subordinate. In “Mr. Hammond” can be seen Lord Hawkesbury
who had just been made a peer in his own right and was Pitt’s leader in
the House of Lords. This identification of “Mr. Hammond” will be borne
in mind in connection with several letters given on pages 96 et seq. as
well as those immediately below containing the proposals promised on May
21st.
London May the 22d 1804
Proposals for the examination of a System of Submarine navigation,
Having been invited to London by the late Administration to
demonstrate the practicability of navigating under water and attacking
and destroying ships of war by submarine operations I propose that
government name a commission as they think proper to examine the
following principles and give their decision for or against each
article, which commission Should be composed of at least two able
mechanecians and one Chymest,—
Then follows matter describing the plunging vessel almost verbatim with
that given in the “Descriptions,” beginning with First principle on page
56 down to and including the demand for £100,000 on page 59, after which
the proposals continue as follows:
What plans government may have in View to draw the power of Bounapart
into governable limits Secure perminant peace and forever remove all
Ideas from the Side of France I do not pretend to Conjecture.
I beg leave to propose one which will be prompt in execution and if
Successful will forever Remove from the mind of Man the possibility of
France making a descent on England. I propose a submarine expedition
to destroy the fleets of Boulogne and Brest as they now lie. I am
ready to exhibit the practicability of my plan or at least that the
chances are many to one in favour of Success, and merits immediate
attention as the Season is much advanced much is to be done and no
time should be lost.
If government adopt my plan it must be organized nearly as follows,
One good Mechanecian must receive my drawings, take my orders and see
to the execution of the Machinery. An Active Sea officer must have
power to choose 100 hardy seamen _out of the fleet_ who are good
swimmers about 40 tons of powder and 7 thousand pounds for various
expences will fit out the expedition.
If government give into this plan I demand the following terms.
A pay of 200 pounds a Month while I devote my time to the enterprise
or till government notify that they have no further need of my
exertions,
If Government appoint their own officers to make the Attack; from the
directions I may give, without my going to Sea to direct it I demand
only the monthly pay.
But if government think proper that I go on board a Ship of war off
Boulogne and Brest to direct the time and mode of Attack I demand one
fourth the Value of each Vessel burnt or destroyed, In either case if
I do not succeed I demand nothing for my trouble but the monthly pay
before mentioned, till government notify that my exertions are no
longer necessary,
ROBERT FRANCIS
These proposals were sent under a covering letter to “Mr. Hammond” dated
the following day.
London May the 23d 1804
Mr. Hammond
Sir I herewith send you my proposals for examining the principles of
submarine navigation, also my proposal for a submarine attack on
Boulogne and Brest, in this period of our communications it is
necessary we Should clearly understand each other, First Ministers
will have the goodness to examine the mode I propose for investigating
the properties and combinations of Submarine navigation, if they
approve of it they will Sign it as a contract between them an me, then
appoint a commission to decide which commission approving the reward
follows; this part finished the expedition if thought proper is to
commence on the terms specified
I have the honor to be with
much respect your most obedient
ROBERT FRANCIS
Without waiting for his proposals to be accepted, Fulton’s mind began
working on the commission to be named. On June 12th he suggested to “Mr.
Hammond” that the government and he should name an equal number, the
majority to decide. On his part, he proposed Bishop Watson, Sir John
Sinclair, Lord Stanhope and the Rev. Edmund Cartwright. Apparently
Fulton had great faith in the efficacy of the church in this matter.
The Bond and Contract is on five pages wholly in Fulton’s handwriting
with an outside sheet with two dockets, one reading
Articles of Agreement
with Mr. Fulton
20th July 1804
The other
This attested Counterpart of an
agreement between His Majesty’s
Government in 1804 & Mr. Robert Fulton
was found among the papers of the late
Lord Viscount Melville, 22nd Jan. 1812.
M——
Articles of Agreement between the Right Honorable William Pitt, first
Lord commissioner of his Majesty’s treasury and Chancelor of the
Exchequer; and the Right Honorable Lord Viscount Melville first Lord of
the Admiralty, in behalf of his Majesty’s government on the one part;
and Robert Fulton citizen of the United States of America and inventor
of a plan of attacking fleets by submarine Bombs, on the other part,
The said Robert Fulton agrees to disclose the principles of his scheme
to Sir Home Popham and to superintend the execution of it on the
following conditions
_First_, To be paid Two hundred pounds a month while he is employed on
this Service for his personal trouble and Expences;
_Second_, To have a credit lodged from time to time for the payment of
his Mechanical preperations, not to exceed Seven thousand pounds.
_Third_, That in His Majesty’s dockyards and Arsenals shall be made or
furnished all such articles as may be required, which are applicable to
this purpose.
_Fourth_, If any circumstance should arise to prevent government
carrying this plan into execution then the parties are each to name two
commissioners for the purpose of examining the principles; and trying
such experiments as they may think proper, And if it should appear to
the Majority of the Members that the plan is practicable and offers a
more effectual mode of destroying the enemies fleet at Boulogne, Brest,
or elsewhere, than any now in practice and with less risk, then
government is to pay the said Robert Fulton the sum of Forty Thousand
Pounds as a compensation for demonstrating the principles, and making
over the entire possession of his submarine Mode of Attack.
_Fifth_, When the Said Robert Fulton has destroyed by his submarine
carcasses or Bombs one of the enemies deck’d Vessels, then Government is
to pay him the sum of Forty Thousand pounds, provided commissioners
appointed As in the previous article shall be of opinion that the same
Scheme can be practically applied to the destruction of the enemies
fleets,
_Sixth_, If the Arbitrators differ in opinion then they are to draw lots
for the choice of an Umpire and the Majority of Voices to decide all
points of reference within the construction of this agreement and that
decision to be final
_Seventh_, One half the supposed Value of all Vessels destroyed by Mr.
Fulton’s Submarine Mode of attack to be paid him by government as long
as he superintends the execution of his plan; but when government has no
further occasion for his service; or that he wishes to retire, then he
is only to be paid one quarter of the supposed value of such vessels as
may be destroyed by his scheme, and this remuneration to continue for
the space of fourteen years from the date thereof
_Eighth_, In case the Vessels destroyed by this scheme should exceed in
amount Forty thousand pounds, then the Forty Thousand pounds first
stipulated to be paid, shall be considered as part payment of the whole
sum which may become due to the said Robert Fulton,
_Ninth_, If in the course of practice any improvemt Should be Suggested
that can only be esteemed as a collateral Aid to the general principles
of Mr. Fulton’s mode of attack, then such improvements are not to
deminish or set aside his claims on government,
_Tenth_, All monies which may become due to Mr. Fulton to be paid within
six months from the time when they Shall be so adjudged according to the
tenor of this agreement,
_Eleventh_, This agreement to be considered by both parties as a liberal
covenant with a View to protect the Rights of the individual, and to
prevent any improper advantages being taken of his Majesty’s Government.
Mr. Fulton having deposited the drawings and plans of his submarine
scheme of attack; in the hands of a confidential friend with the View to
their being delivered to the American government in case of his death,
does hereby bind himself to withdraw all such plans and drawings and not
devulge them or any part of his principles to any person whatever for
the space of fourteen years; which is the term during which he is to
derive all the advantages of their operation from the British
Government,
The benefit of the foregoing agreement shall be extended to the heirs
and executors of the said Robert Fulton, Signed this Seventeenth day of
July one thousand eight hundred and four
ROBERT FULTON
exchanged with a counterpart
signed by the Right Honble
William Pitt & the Right
Honble Lord Melville
H.P.
Witness
Home Popham
The reading of these remarkable documents of such great historical
interest, especially at this time when submarine navigation has been
developed to the point of complete success, kindles many lively
reflections.
The question is whether Fulton acted as a man of honor in abandoning the
country for which he had volunteered to fight and where he had received
such signal and loyal service from its citizens. Was he justified in
transferring his support to another nation at war with France and thus
help destroy the growing power of France for which country he had
professed so much affection? This question has been debated by Fulton’s
biographers, although apparently none of them knew exactly what it was
that Fulton had done for the British Government. They were all under the
impression that his work consisted chiefly in the demonstration of the
efficacy of torpedoes, carcasses or bombs as Fulton vicariously called
them, or mines as we would speak of them today. Cadwallader D. Colden
gives several pages of his book to developing, with some labor, an
excuse for Fulton. Dickinson finds some justification in the fact that
Fulton had been only partially reimbursed by the French Government for
his work, but more particularly in that the development of Napoleon’s
ambitions was repugnant to Fulton’s ideas of republicanism. The last is
without question the correct and only view to take.
A radical republican, hating blindly all forms of autocracy, he had
remained in France believing that in France he would see the full
flowering of his principles. He offered his inventions to the French
Government, not for pecuniary gain, because his proposals show that he
was willing to abide by their decision as to the monetary value to be
determined only after he had achieved success, but because he thought
that the French revolution was a real movement toward perfect liberty.
To this end he offered not only his device, but also himself. He was
anxious to be enrolled in the fighting force of France and go forth in
his little boat to do battle against mighty England. When, therefore, he
was refused by Bonaparte and his sincere offers scorned with absolutely
unjustified insult, we can imagine his revulsion of sentiment and
forgive any bitterness of feeling. In a moment his idol was shattered.
He realized that those in control of the French Government were not
actuated by a broad conception of world freedom, but solely by personal
ambition and thirst for power. He makes this position quite clear in a
letter to Lord Melville quoted by Colden as follows, though, before
publishing, the latter must have edited the orthography: “In writing
this letter, I feel no enmity to the people of France, or any other
people; on the contrary, I wish their happiness; for my principle is,
that every nation profits by the prosperity of its neighbours, provided
the governments of its neighbours be humane and just. What is here said,
is directed against the tyrannic principles of Bonaparte, a man who has
set himself above all law; he is, therefore in that state which Lord
Somers compares to that of a wild beast unrestrained by any rule, and he
should be hunted down as the enemy of mankind. This, however, is the
business of Frenchmen. With regard to the nations of Europe, they can
only hold him in governable limits, by fencing him round with bayonets.”
France, his dearly beloved France, was no more liberal under the upstart
clique of the consulate than was England under the régime of her long
established autocracy. This is the only explanation of how and why
Fulton abandoned his allegiance to France, went to England and there
worked to strengthen the British navy that it might the more easily
smash the growing power of the French fleet with which he had once so
ardently desired to serve. He had been cruelly stabbed by the hands of
his friends in the most tender spot in his heart. This cruelty that
served to clear his vision he could not forgive, much less forget.
Fulton had undoubtedly been unfairly and even cruelly treated by the
French authorities. His cherished ideas into which he had thrown his
whole soul had been rejected without fair or reasonable examination. His
pride had been deeply wounded. But Fulton was magnanimous enough to have
overlooked this treatment had France herself remained true to his
conception of her own ideals. It was not that Fulton abandoned France,
but that France deserted Fulton. From his arrival in 1797, he thought
that he saw in France a great exponent of a new world liberty, with
freedom of trade, freedom of men, freedom of the seas, and above all an
enduring world-wide peace. In his enthusiasm he believed that such
ideals, in which he firmly believed, were not only practically
realizable, but that France was about to make them the guiding
principles of every nation. It was for that reason that he so warmly
espoused her cause.
In 1797, soon after his arrival in Paris, he wrote to his friend Lord
Stanhope his views based on what he fancied to be the actuating theory
of the French revolution:
My Lord
Hoping every month to Return to England, together with the difficulty
of transmitting Letters to London, has hitherto prevented my Writing
to you Since my arrival In Paris. But at present I have troubeled you
with a very Long Letter, the object of Which I will here
explain,—Since my arrival In Paris I have been Very active In my Canal
pursuits, And on this Subject I have Created a Revolution In the mind
of all the french engeneers I have met with, who are now descidedly In
favour of the Small System of Canals—Which are now Contemplated on an
emmense Scale of extension which you will See explained in my
Letter—It is Contemplated to Raise the Whole Revenue by a Single toll
on Canals which System will Infinately Simplify the operations of
Government, tend directly to Set trade free and annihilate a Mass of
Political absurdities which have hitherto disturbed the peace of
Nations—all of Which you will find explained in the annexed Letter,
Which Letter will Shew you how much Frenchmen are turning their mind
to the true fountain of Riches—viz home Improvement and Systems of
Industry. With the true philosophic Ideas which the entertain of
Foreign Possessions and Restricted trade—And I Can assure you that I
find In them the most Resolute determination to establish the
principles which you will find explained And Which to me appears of
the Very first Importance to Lasting peace—and the Wellfare of all
Nations—It is therefore of much Importance that English Men Should
know the truth of these principles and Learn their true Interest by
Giving up as the french mean to do, and will Compel _others to do_ the
System of foreign Possessions and Restricted trade they should also
understand that Frenchmen are Realy thinking Like philosophers Which I
hope my Letter will prove.
By 1801, when his offer of his talents and personal service were
spurned, Napoleon was already leading France far afield from the
altruistic but impossible programme of 1797. In 1802, Napoleon had made
himself consul for life. In the spring of 1804, he was proclaimed
Emperor of the French and the beautiful dream that had entranced Fulton
for more than ten years had faded into nothingness, as dreams usually
do. He saw that in the aristocracy of England he could find a truer
democracy than in the demagogic leaders of France. Fulton was but human.
His warm heart, artistic temperament and impetuous nature now asserted
themselves and drove him back to the country whence his forebears had
come, and away from the people whose governing powers had wounded his
pride and had failed him in his ideals.
The “Descriptions” given above were written just prior to August 10th,
1806, and recite the course of events from the autumn of 1803. At the
time they were signed, Fulton was arranging to return to America, and
actually sailed about ten weeks later. His negotiations with the
Government had not been satisfactory in that his devices had not been
accepted and he had not received in money what he felt was due. The
contract shows that Fulton, profiting perhaps by his French experiences
not to put trust in princes, foresaw this contingency and provided
against it in the Fourth article, that should any circumstance arise to
prevent carrying the plan into execution commissioners should be
appointed to determine whether the stipulated compensation had been
earned. The “Descriptions” were prepared for submission to the
arbitrators and were actually read to them, as is shown by a note
attached to a copy of the manuscript reading as follows:
These papers I read to Sir Charles Blagden, Capt. Hamilton, the Rev.
Dr. Cartwright and Alexander Davison, Esq., on the 18th of August 1806
these gentlemen being named Arbitrators to settle my Claims on
Government under a contract which I made with Mr. Pitt and Lord
Melville—the two last named acting for me.
The words “two last” refer, of course, to Dr. Cartwright and Mr.
Davison. The “Descriptions,” therefore, give Fulton’s case as he saw it,
and consequently are of intense interest and historical importance.
His vision for the United States that the population would increase from
5,500,000, as it then was, to 120,000,000 has already been almost
realized, sooner, of course, than he expected, but the absence of
colonies and lack of desire for them have hardly met an equally
successful prophetic fate. Certainly he never foresaw Porto Rico,
Panama, Samoa, Hawaii, Guam, the Philippines and other outlying
possessions.
What a delightful picture Fulton unconsciously presents of the skillful
and diplomatic way in which the British Ministry handled him from the
beginning to the end! When the emissary, known only as “Mr. Smith,”
stated to Fulton that the Government wished to use the submarine against
the French fleet, Fulton pointed out that it was not the part of wisdom
so to do, that the British with their superiority in sea power had more
to lose than to gain by developing such a weapon. In so doing, he but
anticipated Earl St. Vincent who, bluff old sea-dog like so many of his
profession to whom innovations in naval warfare were anathema, exclaimed
that “Pitt was the greatest fool that ever existed to encourage a mode
of war which they who commanded the seas did not want, and which, if
successful, would deprive them of it.”
“Mr. Smith” was very clever and was not put off by any such argument. He
saw clearly that whether England needed the device or not, they must
have control of the man who possessed the secret. He evidently felt sure
of Fulton’s sentiments because he told him quite frankly that they
wished him “out of France and in England.”
On the financial side, Fulton appears to have had a proper estimate of
himself and the value of his devices. The sum of £10,000 as a retainer
would be no mean figure today, but owing to the difference in purchasing
power it was comparatively a vastly greater figure in 1803. This
retainer was in addition to his main fee or price for selling the
explanation of his devices which he put at £100,000. The “Descriptions”
read that he said “require” that sum. He first wrote “demand,” which
word he erased, but not sufficiently to obliterate it, and then wrote
“require.”
The rating of the value of his devices as being equivalent to a
ship-of-the-line, or battle ship as a capital ship is now called, is
certainly ingenious and not unreasonable. If his devices had any value
at all they would increase the effective power of the fleet by much more
than the addition of one first-class vessel.
But Fulton was dealing with men far abler than he in fixing values and
making contracts. The negotiations were not broken off by abruptly
refusing to pay the sums asked. That would have been a blunder that one
selected for such a delicate mission would not be guilty of committing.
The British representative apparently did not even suggest that the
retainer was exorbitant, but only that it was “contrary to established
rules” to pay in advance. Then, before giving an obligation to pay a sum
commensurate with the value of the devices, the reasonable and
unanswerable preliminary condition of an experimental demonstration was
made a prerequisite.
The British diplomats unlike the French had avoided giving any offense
to his amour propre. Though they refused to grant his financial
requests, they succeeded in getting him to go to England, which was
their main purpose. Not until they had him safe in London, did they take
up the question of a contract. The original demand of £100,000 was
reduced to £40,000. The retainer disappeared entirely except as it was
represented by such portion of the £800 with which “Mr. Smith” was
furnished in the first instance to pay his own and Fulton’s expenses. In
lieu of the reductions, there appears in the contract an agreement to
pay a salary of £200 a month. How deliciously clever! To one in the
straightened circumstances in which Fulton always had been and still
was, for even now any surplus of income of which he might have been
possessed, but of which there is no evidence, was swallowed up by his
steamboat experiments, this monthly payment must have been of
inestimable importance. It guaranteed him comfort and at last a
substantial excess for his other work, because his submarine
disbursements were to be met entirely by the government up to a maximum
limit of £7,000. On the other hand, the Government held secure the man,
who as an enemy they feared, and who as such was a constant source of
worry. This result was obtained at a cost that was to them a trifling
figure.
Fulton appears to have concluded that his claim for £100,000 was perhaps
too high because he voluntarily accepted the sum of £40,000 mentioned in
the contract. Of this latter amount, he made to the arbitrators the
ingenious suggestion that they pay him one-half in cash and the other
half in an annuity based on his life, the annuity to be forfeit should
the secret of his inventions in submarine warfare be divulged by him or
his friends. It is regretted that Fulton did not disclose the names of
his friends who were jointly interested with him, as they were probably
the same who had financed his French experiments.
Fulton’s receipts on his own account amounted on balance to £13,391 ..
16 .. 10, leaving due as he claimed £1608 .. 3 .. 2, exclusive of any
payment in part or whole of the £40,000. As it was, he did not do badly
for two years’ work. In addition the Government furnished £11,353 ..
3 .. 2 to repay his expenditures.