The tendency of shipbuilders during the eighteenth century was to

increase the length of vessels in proportion to the breadth of beam

and diminish the depth of the hull and superstructures, above the

water line, with improved sailing qualities. England's extensive trade

with India and the far East was conducive to this development, as the

"East Indiamen" were necessarily a combination of merchant vessel and

battleship.

In the first half of the nineteenth century America rose to great

commercial importance thanks to her fleets of fine sailing vessels.

Speed rather than strength in their ships was the aim of American

ship-builders, to gain which they built boats proportionately longer

and narrower than ever constructed before for ocean traffic. The

culminating type of wooden sailing ship was represented by the

"Baltimore clippers," in which the length was five, and even six,

times the beam, with light rigging and improved mechanical devices for

handling it, whereby the amount of manual labor was greatly lessened.

One of these ships, the _Great Republic_, built in 1853, was over three

hundred feet long, and 3,400 tons register. She was a four-masted

vessel, fitted with double topsails, with a spread of canvas about

4,500 square yards.

The modern descendant of the wooden clipper ship is the schooner with

from four to six masts. Some of these vessels exceed the older boats

in size and carrying capacity, if not in speed. Perhaps the largest

schooner ever constructed is the _Wyoming_, which was completed at

Bath, Maine, early in the year 1910. This vessel is 329 feet long

and 50 feet broad. It has a carrying capacity of 6,000 tons. The

construction of such a vessel at so recent a period suggests that the

day of the sailing ship is by no means over notwithstanding that a

full century has elapsed since the coming of the steamboat. Here, as

so often elsewhere in the history of progress, it has happened that

the full development of a type has not been reached until the ultimate

doom of that type, except for special purposes, had been irrevocably

sealed. Ever since the full development of the steamboat in the early

decades of the nineteenth century, the sailing ship has seemed almost

an anachronism; and yet, in point of fact, the steamship did not at

once outrival its more primitive forerunner. Even in the matter of

speed, the sailing ship more than held its own for a generation or

so after the steamship had been placed in commission. In 1851 the

American clipper _Flying Cloud_ made 427 knots in twenty-four hours;

and _The Sovereign of the Seas_ bettered this by averaging over

eighteen miles an hour for twenty-four consecutive hours. The Atlantic

record for sailing vessels is usually said to have been made in 1862

by the clipper ship _Dreadnought_ in a passage between Queenstown

and New York, the time of which is stated as nine days and seventeen

hours. It should be remarked, however, that the authenticity of this

extraordinary performance has been challenged.

Be that as it may, it is certain that the speediest sailing ships,

granted favorable conditions of wind and wave, more than surpassed

the best efforts of the steamship until about the closing decades of

the nineteenth century. But of course long before this the steamship

had proved its supremacy under all ordinary conditions. Even though

sailing ships continued to be constructed in large numbers, their

picturesque rigging became less and less a feature in all navigable

waters, and the belching funnel of the steamship had become a

characteristic substitute as typifying the sea-going vessel.

The story of the development of this new queen of the waters must now

demand our attention. It begins with the futile efforts of several more

or less visionary enthusiasts who were contemporaries of James Watt,

and who thought they saw great possibilities in the steam engine as a

motive power to take the place of oars and sails for the propulsion of

ships.

EARLY ATTEMPTS TO INVENT A STEAMBOAT

Among the first of these was an American named John Fitch. Judged by

the practical results of his efforts, he was not a highly successful

inventor; as a prophet, however, and as an experimenter whose efforts

fell just short of attainment, he deserves a conspicuous place in the

history of an epoch-making discovery. Yet his prophecy was based on his

failures. From 1780, for twenty years he strove to perfect a steamboat.

His efforts did not carry him far beyond the experimental stage. But

his courage and enthusiasm never waned. "Whether I bring the steamboat

to perfection or not," he declared, "it will some time in the future be

the mode of crossing the Atlantic for packets and armed vessels."

At that very time Benjamin Franklin said this would never be. But

twenty years later Fulton's _Clermont_ paddled up the Hudson River

from New York to Albany and opened the era that saw Fitch's prophecy

fulfilled. This was in 1807--a year that must stand as the most

momentous in maritime history. In that year the little _Clermont_

steamed slowly from New York to Albany, a distance of one hundred

and fifty miles in thirty-two hours, unaided by sails or oars, and

propelled entirely by steam-power. A sail-boat could cover the distance

in the same number of hours; a modern torpedo boat in one-sixth the

time. Yet no performance of any boat, before or since, had such

far-reaching effects upon the progress of the world.

When Fulton turned his attention from his favorite theme--the invention

of a submarine boat--and took up the question of perfecting a boat

propelled by steam, he did not find himself the first or the only

inventor in the field. For a hundred years, in round numbers, men had

been wrestling with the question of applying steam pressure to boat

propulsion. All manner of more or less ingenious devices had been

conceived, most of them having a germ of success in the principles

involved, but all of them being failures in actual practice.

Among the most promising of these first steamboats were those in which

the propeller, or the paddle-wheel, was tried; but neither of these

methods was looked upon favorably at first. Less promising was one in

which the motive power was a jet of water pumped through a submerged

tube--a principle that still periodically fascinates certain modern

inventors.

[Illustration: MARINE ENGINES AND AN EARLY TYPE OF STEAMBOAT.

The small figure in the centre represents a very remarkable steamboat

constructed in America by John Fitch. The precise date of its

construction is not clearly established, but the inventor had made

efforts at steam navigation as early as 1776. The upper figure shows a

marine engine made in Scotland in 1788 for Patrick Miller by William

Symington. It was used to equip a double-hulled pleasure boat which it

is said to have propelled at the rate of five miles an hour. The motive

power is supplied by two open-top Newcomen cylinders. The lower figure

represents a modern side wheel steamer with oscillating engines.]

But the boats that seemed to have come nearer attaining practical

success for the moment were those in which several sets of oars

worked by steam were placed vertically on each side of the hull, the

machinery so arranged that the oars were dipped into the water and

drawn sternward by one motion of the machinery, raised and carried

toward the bow by the opposite motion. In some of these boats it was

planned to have four sets of oars, two sets on each side, which were to

work alternately, so that while one set was traveling forward through

the air, its mate would be paddling through the water, thus insuring a

continuous forward impulse. But the machinery for these boats proved

to be too cumbersome and complicated for practical results, and this

idea was finally abandoned. The jet of water did not prove any more

successful, and but two other methods were available--the propeller and

the paddle-wheel.

Both of these methods of utilizing the power of moving water had been

familiar in the form of the Archimedian screw and the commonplace

overshot or undershot mill-wheel. In these examples, of course,

the force of the water was used to move machinery, reversing the

action of the paddle-wheel of the boat. And yet the principles were

identical. Obviously if the conditions were reversed, and the undershot

mill-wheel, for example, forced against the water with corresponding

power, the propulsive effect might be great enough--since action and

reaction are equal--to move a boat of considerable size. But curiously

enough, at the time when Fulton began his experiments there was a wave

of general belief that when this principle was applied to boats it

would fail. The reason for this lay in the fact that several such boats

had been built from time to time, and all had failed. The fault, of

course, lay in some other place than in their paddle wheels; but for

the time being the wheel, and not the machinery, was shouldered with

the blame.

Just a hundred years before Fulton finally produced his practical

paddle-wheel steamboat, a prototype was built by the Spaniard, Blasco

de Gary. In 1707, this inventor constructed a model paddle-wheel

steamboat, and tried it upon the river Fulda. But this model boat

failed to work, and the experiment was soon forgotten.

Twenty-five years later Jonathan Hulls of England patented a marine

engine which he proposed to use in a boat which was to be propelled by

a stern wheel. His idea was to use his boats as tug- or tow-boats, and

to equip the larger vessels themselves with steam. But his engines were

defective and his boats did not achieve commercial success.

During the time of the American Revolution, a French inventor, the

Marquis de Jouffroy, made several interesting experiments with

steam-propelled boats, using the principle of the paddle which was

dipped and raised alternately as referred to a few pages back. His

boats made several public trials, one of them ascending the Seine

against the current; but nevertheless, the French government refused

to grant the inventor a patent. Presumably, therefore, the boat was

not considered a practical success in official circles; and this view

is tacitly conceded by the fact that no more boats of its type were

constructed. Had they been really practical steamboats it is a fair

presumption that others would have been constructed and put into

operation, regardless of patents. Nevertheless, in France to-day,

the Marquis de Jouffroy is often referred to as the father of steam

navigation.

The idea of propelling a boat by means of a jet of water pumped out at

the stern by steam pumps was given a practical test in 1784, by James

Rumsey. His boat made a trial trip on the Potomac River in September

of that year, General Washington and other army officers being present

on this occasion. The boat was able to make fairly good progress

through the water, and seemed so promising that a company was formed

by capitalists known as the Rumsey Society, for promoting the idea and

building more boats. Rumsey was sent to England where he undertook the

construction of another boat, meanwhile taking out patents in Great

Britain, France, and Holland. Before his boat was completed, however,

he died suddenly, and the Rumsey Society passed out of existence

shortly afterwards.

An even closer approach to practical success was made in Scotland by

James Symington, who in 1788, in association with two other Scotchmen,

Miller and Taylor, constructed a boat consisting of two hulls, with a

paddle-wheel between them worked by a steam-engine. This boat worked

so well that in 1801, Lord Dundas engaged Symington to build a smaller

boat to be used for towing on the Caledonian Canal. This boat, called

the _Charlotte Dundas_, completed in 1802, is said to have been capable

of towing a vessel of one hundred and forty tons "nearly four miles an

hour." But in doing this the resulting "wash" so threatened the banks

of the canal that the vessel was laid up and finally rotted and fell to

pieces.

By many impartial judges this boat is considered the first practical

steamboat, and its failure to establish its claim due to the force

of circumstances rather than to any inherent defects. Symington was

too poor to pursue his work independently, and was deterred by the

attitude of James Watt, who "predicted the failure of his engine,

and threatened him with legal penalties if it succeeded." And when at

last he received an order for eight smaller vessels from the Duke of

Bridgewater, his patron died before the details of the agreement had

been completed. So that while he failed in accomplishing what was done

by Fulton a few years later, it is certain that, as Woodcraft says, "He

combined for the first time those improvements which constitute the

present system of steam navigation."

Some of Symington's engines have been preserved, and one of them is now

in the Patent Office Museum in London. Since the beginning of practical

steam navigation this engine has been tested several times, the result

showing that Woodcraft's estimate is not overdrawn.

While Symington was thus perfecting a paddle-boat, an American, Col.

John Stevens of Hoboken, New Jersey, was on the verge of accomplishing

the same end with a screw-propeller boat--a form of steamship that did

not come into use until some forty years later.

[Illustration: THE STEAMSHIPS "CHARLOTTE DUNDAS" AND "CLERMONT."

The "Charlotte Dundas" (lower figure) was built in 1801 by A. Hart at

Grangemouth, Scotland, and engined by William Symington, for service on

the Forth and Clyde Canal. Its length was 56 feet; beam 18 feet; depth

8 feet. The boat was a practical success, but its use was discontinued

because of the damage done to the banks of the Canal by the wash of

the paddles. The upper left-hand figure is a picture of Fulton's

"Clermont." The diagram at the right represents the "Clermont's" paddle

wheels and the mechanism by which they were worked.]

Stevens also invented what he called a "rotary engine" which was really

an engine constructed on the same principle as the modern turbine

engine. It was a small affair which he placed in a skiff, and used for

turning the screw-propeller of a boat which was able to travel at a

rate of three or four miles an hour on the North River, during the fall

of 1802. But Stevens found so much difficulty in packing the blades of

this engine without causing too much friction that he finally abandoned

it for the more common type of reciprocating engine. But if this little

steamboat had its defects, it nevertheless contained the germs of two

great features of steam navigation--the screw propeller and the turbine

engine, the advantage of the first of which was not recognized for

nearly half a century, and the other not until almost a full century

later.

In 1804 Stevens produced another propeller steamboat, this one using

the ordinary type of reciprocating engine, and being notable for having

twin screws of a pattern practically identical with the screws now in

use. This boat was able to steam at a rate of four miles an hour on

many occasions, and at times almost double this rate, according to some

observers. The engines of this boat are still in existence, and on

several occasions since 1804 have been placed in hulls corresponding

as nearly as possible to the original, and have demonstrated that

they could force the boat through the water at six or eight miles an

hour. These engines in a modern hull were exhibited at the Columbian

Exposition at Chicago, in 1893. They supply irrefutable evidence that

the practical steamboat had been invented at least three years before

Fulton's historic voyage in 1807. Yet no one questions that it was

Fulton's, not Stevens', invention that inaugurated steam navigation.

Just why this was so is a little difficult to comprehend at this time,

unless it was that Stevens' boat was such a small affair that it did

not attract the attention it deserved, as did Fulton's larger boat.

And yet we should not be guided too much by retrospective judgment.

The significant fact remains that Stevens himself did not have entire

confidence in his boat, or in the principle of his screw propeller, as

is shown by the fact that three years later, while Fulton was building

the _Clermont_, Stevens was also constructing a steamboat, not along

the lines of his previous inventions, but as a paddle-wheel boat. This

leaves little room for doubt that Stevens had not full confidence in

the propeller; and when an inventor himself mistrusts his own device,

there is little likelihood that anyone else will supply the necessary

confidence. This may account for the fact that Stevens found difficulty

in securing financial backing for his enterprise; and when such backing

was found it was for the construction of the paddle-wheel boat, which

was finished a few months after Fulton's boat had solved the problem of

steam navigation.

FULTON AND THE CLERMONT

As we shall see in another place, Fulton was no novice in the

construction of peculiar boats at this time. He had built experimental

boats both at home and abroad, was familiar with the principle of the

screw and the paddle-wheel, and had come to have absolute confidence

in the possibility of propelling boats at a good rate of speed by the

use of steam. When he began his now famous _Clermont_, in the spring of

1807, it was not as an experimental skiff, but as a boat of one hundred

and fifty tons burden--half again the size of the boats in which

Columbus had discovered America--to be placed in commission between

Albany and New York city. By August, this boat was completed, and the

engines in place, and, under her own steam, the new boat was moved

from the Jersey shipyard where she was constructed, and tied up at a

New York dock. On August 7th, she started on her maiden trip up the

Hudson. To the astonishment of practically every one of the persons in

the great throng that had gathered along the shores, she left her dock

in due course, and with wind and tide against her, steamed up the river

at the rate of about five miles an hour. At this speed she covered

the entire distance between New York and Albany, settling forever the

question of the practicability of steam navigation.

The impression this fire-belching monster made upon the sleepy

inhabitants as it passed along the river can be readily imagined. An

eye-witness account of this first passage of the _Clermont_ has been

given by an inhabitant at the half-way point near Poughkeepsie.

"It was the early autumn in 1807," he wrote, "that a knot of villagers

was gathered on the high bluff just opposite Poughkeepsie, on the

west bank of the Hudson, attracted by the appearance of a strange,

dark-looking craft which was slowly making its way up the river. Some

imagined it to be a sea-monster, while others did not hesitate to

express their belief that it was a sign of the approaching Judgment.

What seemed strange in the vessel was the substitution of lofty and

straight black smoke-pipes, rising from the deck, instead of the

gracefully tapered masts that commonly stood on the vessels navigating

the stream; and, in place of spars and rigging, the curious play of the

working-beam and pistons, and the slow turning and splashing of the

huge, naked paddle-wheels, met the astonished gaze. The dense clouds of

smoke as they rose wave upon wave, added still more to the wonderment

of the rustics.

"This strange looking craft was the _Clermont_, on her trial trip to

Albany. On her return-trip, the curiosity she excited was scarcely

less intense--the whole country talked of nothing but the sea-monster,

belching fire and smoke. The fishermen became terrified and rowed

homewards, and they saw nothing but destruction devastating their

fishing grounds; whilst the wreaths of black vapor, and rushing noise

of the paddle-wheels, foaming with the stirred-up water, produced great

excitement among the boatmen."

[Illustration: THE CLERMONT

The replica of Robert Fulton's first steamboat which took part in the

Hudson-Fulton celebration in September, 1909. The small picture shows

one of the paddle-wheels in detail. The original _Clermont_, the first

commercially successful steamboat, was put in commission for the New

York-Albany service in 1807.]

While acknowledging fully Fulton's right to the claim of being "the

father of steam navigation," as he has been called, there is no

evidence to show that he introduced any new principle or discovery

in his application of steam to the _Clermont_. The boiler, engine,

paddle-wheel--every part of the boat had been known for years. Yet

this does not detract from the glory of Fulton, who first combined

this scattered knowledge in a practical way, and demonstrated the

practicality beyond question.

SEA-GOING STEAMSHIPS

The first war steamer and ocean steamer ever attempted was built by

Fulton, in 1813. It was called the _Demolgos_, and was not a practical

success, and made no attempts to take protracted ocean voyages. The

first steamship to cross was the _Savannah_ in 1819. She made the

voyage from Savannah to Liverpool in twenty-five days, using her

paddle-wheels part of the time, but at other times depending entirely

upon her sails. She was a boat of three hundred and fifty tons, and her

paddle-wheels were arranged so that they could be hauled in upon the

deck and stowed away in bad weather.

Following the _Savannah_ several similar combination sailing and

steam-propelled boats were constructed, the navigators coming to have

more and more faith in the possibilities of steam, so that less sail

was carried. These vessels continued to reduce the time of the passage

between Europe and America, until the voyage had been made in about

seventeen days. Then, in 1838, two vessels, the _Sirius_ and the _Great

Western_, for the first time using steam alone as motive power, made

record voyages, the _Great Western_ crossing in twelve days, seven and

a half hours. This was considered remarkable time--an average speed of

over two hundred miles a day. Something like four hundred and fifty

tons of coal were consumed on the voyage, which impressed many as a

great extravagance of fuel. Some of the ocean liners at present consume

more than twice this amount in a single day.

On July 4, 1840, the _Britannia_, the first steamer of the Cunard

Line, started on its maiden voyage from Liverpool to Boston. The

voyage was made in fourteen days, among the passengers being Samuel

Cunard, a Quaker of Halifax, who was the founder of the enterprise.

The population of Boston went mad on the arrival of this boat; streets

and buildings were decorated, and the day was given over to the

regular holiday amusements. Cunard received upward of eighteen hundred

invitations to dinner that evening.

The year 1840, then, may be considered as one of the vital years

in the progress of steam navigation. Since that time no year has

passed without seeing some important addition and improvement made

in the conquest of the ocean, either in size, shape, or speed of the

"greyhounds."

SHIPS BUILT OF IRON AND STEEL

Even before the introduction of steam as a motive power for boats

shipbuilders had been casting about for some satisfactory substitute

for wood in the construction of vessels. One reason for this was that

suitable wood was becoming scarce and very expensive. But also there

was a limit to the size that a wooden vessel might be built with

safety. A wooden boat more than three hundred feet long cannot be

constructed without having dangerous structural weakness.

Naturally the idea that the only suitable material for boat-building

was something lighter than water,--something that would float--which

had been handed down traditionally for thousands of years, could not be

overcome in a moment. And surely such a heavy substance as iron would

not be likely to suggest itself to the average ship-builder. But at the

beginning of the nineteenth century rapid strides were being made in

theoretical, as well as applied science, and the idea of using metal in

place of wood for shipbuilding began to take practical form.

Richard Trevithick, whose remarkable experiments in locomotive building

have been noted in another chapter, had planned an iron ship as early

as 1809. He did not actually construct a vessel, but he made detailed

plans of one--not merely a boat with an iron hull, but with decks,

beams, masts, yards, and spars made of the same material. It was nearly

ten years after Trevithick drew his plans, however, before the first

iron ship was constructed. Then Thomas Wilson of Glasgow built a vessel

on practically the same lines suggested by Trevithick.

This vessel, finished in 1818, and called the _Vulcan_, was the pioneer

of all iron boats. For at least sixty years it remained in active

service. Indeed, for aught that is known to the contrary, this first

iron boat may be still in use in some capacity.

One of the most surprising and interesting things to shipbuilders

about the _Vulcan_, and the boats that were constructed after her,

was the fact that they were actually lighter in proportion to their

carrying capacity than ships of corresponding size built of wood. In

wooden cargo ships the weight of the hull and fittings varies from 35

to 45 per cent. of the total displacement, while iron vessels vary from

25 to 30 per cent. This was a vital point in favor of the iron vessel,

and one that appealed directly to practical builders. But the public

at large looked askance at the new vessels. To "sink like a stone" was

proverbial; and everyone knows that iron sinks quite as readily as

stone.

But very soon a convincing demonstration of the strength of iron

vessels brought them into favor. A great storm, sweeping along the

coast of Great Britain in 1835, drove many vessels on shore, among them

an iron steamboat just making her maiden voyage. The wooden vessels

without exception were wrecked, most of them destroyed, but the iron

vessel, although subjected to the same conditions, escaped without

injury, thanks to the material and method of her construction.

From that time the position of the iron steamship was assured. And

whereas sea voyagers had formerly looked askance at iron passenger

boats they now began to distrust those built of wood. By the middle of

the century, iron shipbuilding was at its height, and in the decade

immediately following, the _Great Eastern_ was finished--possibly the

largest and most remarkable structure ever built of iron, on land or

sea. In recent years larger ships have been constructed, but these

ships are made of steel.

The _Great Eastern_ marked an epoch in shipbuilding. In size she was a

generation ahead of her time, but the innovations in the method of her

construction gave the cue to modern revolutionary shipbuilding methods.

Sir George C. V. Holmes gives the following account of the great ship:

"She was originally intended by the famous engineer, Mr. I. K. Brunel,

to trade between England and the East. She was designed to make the

voyage to Australia without calling anywhere _en route_ to coal, a feat

which, in the then state of steam-engine economy, no other vessel could

accomplish. It was supposed that this advantage, coupled with the high

speed expected from her great length, would secure for her the command

of the enormous cargoes which would be necessary to fill her. Mr.

Brunel communicated his idea that such a vessel should be constructed

for the trade to the East to the famous engineer and shipbuilder, the

late Mr. John Scott Russell, F.R.S., and he further persuaded his

clients, the directors of the Eastern Steam Navigation Company, of the

soundness of his views, for they resolved that the projected vessel

should be built for their company, and entrusted the contract for its

execution to the firm of John Scott Russell & Co., of Millwall.

"Mr. Scott Russell and Mr. Brunel were, between them, entitled to the

credit of the design, which, on account of the exceptional size of the

ship, presented special difficulties, and involved a total departure

from ordinary practice.

"Mr. Scott Russell had systematically, in his own previous practice,

constructed iron ships with cellular bottoms, but the cells had only

five sides, the uppermost side on the inside being uncovered. Over

a large portion, however, of the bottom of the _Great Eastern_ the

cells were completed by the addition of an inner bottom, which added

greatly both to the strength and to the safety of the ship. It was

also Mr. Brunel's idea that the great ship should be propelled by both

paddles and screw. Mr. Scott Russell was responsible for the lines and

dimensions, and also for the longitudinal system of framing, with its

numerous complete and partial transverse and longitudinal bulkheads.

"The following are some of the principal dimensions and other _data_ of

the _Great Eastern_:

Length between perpendiculars 680 feet

Length on upper deck 692 "

Extreme breadth of hull 83 "

Width over paddle-box 120 "

Depth from upper deck to keel 58 "

Draught of water (laden) 30 "

Weight of iron used in construction 10,000 tons

Number of plates used in construction 30,000

Number of rivets used in construction 3,000,000

Tonnage, gross 18,914 tons

Nominal power of paddle engine 1,000 H. P.

Nominal power of screw engines 1,600 "

"The accommodation for passengers was on an unprecedented scale. There

were no less than five saloons on the upper, and as many on the lower

deck, the aggregate length of the principal apartments being 400 feet.

There was accommodation for 800 first-class, 2,000 second-class, and

1,200 third-class passengers, and the crew numbered 400. The upper

deck, which was of a continuous iron-plated and cellular structure,

ran flush from stem to stern, and was twenty feet wide on each side of

the hatchways; thus two spacious promenades were provided, each over a

furlong in length. The capacity for coal and cargo was 18,000 tons.

"The attempts to launch this vessel were most disastrous, and cost no

less than £120,000, an expense which ruined the company. The original

company was wound up, and the great ship sold for £160,000 to a new

company, and was completed in the year 1859. The new company very

unwisely determined to put her on the American station, for which she

was in no way suited. During her preliminary trip the pilot reported

that she made a speed of fully 14 knots at two-thirds of full pressure,

but the highest rate of speed which she attained on this occasion was

15 knots, and on her first journey across the Atlantic the average

speed was nearly 14 knots, the greatest distance run in a day having

been 333 nautical miles. The great value of the system adopted in her

construction was proved by an accident which occurred during one of her

Transatlantic voyages. She ran against a pointed rock, but the voyage

was continued without hindrance. It was afterwards found that holes of

the combined length of over 100 feet had been torn in her outer bottom;

but, thanks to the inner water-tight skin, no water was admitted."

Between the years 1860 and 1870 great improvements were made in marine

engines, and screw-steamers very generally replaced side-wheel boats

for ocean traffic. The improvements in the engines consisted largely

in the use of higher pressures, surface condensation, and compounding

of the cylinders, which resulted in a saving of about half the amount

of fuel over engines of the older type. As a result steamers were able

to compete successfully with the sailing ships, even as freighters for

long voyages, such as those between Europe and Australia.

During the reactive period in France immediately following the

Franco-Prussian war, when there was great activity in shipbuilding,

the use of mild steel plates in place of wrought iron was tried. The

superiority of this material over iron was quickly demonstrated, and

as the cost of steel was constantly lessening, thanks to the newly

discovered methods of production, steel practically replaced iron in

ship construction after this time.

It was during this same period that a new type of passenger steamer was

produced--the "ocean greyhound." The first of these was the _Oceanic_,

built by the White Star Company in 1871. This ship was remarkable in

many ways. Her length, four hundred and twenty feet, was more than

ten times her beam; iron railings were substituted for bulwarks; and

the passenger quarters were shifted from the position near the stern

to the middle of the vessel. All these changes proved to be distinct

improvements, and the _Oceanic_ became at once the most popular, as

well as the fastest ocean liner.

Like all the other boats of the seventies and early eighties, the

_Oceanic_ was a single-screw vessel. The advantage of double propellers

in case of accident had long been recognized, but hitherto twin-screws

had not proved as efficient as a single screw in developing speed. But

in 1888 the _City of Paris_ (now the _Philadelphia_) a twin-screw boat,

began making new speed records, and the following year her sister ship,

the _New York_, and the new _Majestic_ and _Teutonic_, entering into

the ocean-record contests, cut the time of the passage between Europe

and America to less than six days.

The advantages of the double-screw over the single are so many and so

manifest as to leave no question as to their superiority. The disabling

of the shaft or screw of the single-screw steamer, or the derangement

of her rudder renders the vessel helpless. Not so the twin-screw ship;

for on such ships the screws can be used for steering as well as

propelling. And it has happened many times that twin-screw ships have

crossed the ocean with the steering gear disabled, or with one screw

entirely out of commission.

THE TRIUMPH OF THE TURBINE

In recent years the greatest revolutionary step in steamship

construction has been the invention and development of the turbine

engine, the mechanism of which has been described elsewhere. Since

the day of the little _Turbinia_, whose speed astonished the nautical

world, the limit for size and speed of ships has again been materially

advanced, and no thinking person will venture to predict restricting

limits without a modifying question mark.

At the beginning of the twentieth century a keen rivalry had developed

between England and the Continent for supremacy in transatlantic

traffic, America having dropped out of the race. The Germans in

particular had produced fast boats, such as the _Deutschland_ and

_Kaiser Wilhelm II_, which for several years held the ocean record for

speed. But meanwhile the turbine engine was being perfected in England,

the land of its invention, and presently turbine "greyhounds" began

crossing the ocean and menacing the records held by the boats equipped

with the older type of engine.

The reciprocating marine engine, however, had been steadily improved,

until it was a marvel in efficiency. Quadruple expansion engines

driving twin-screws of a size and shape known to develop the greatest

efficiency, for several years offered invincible competition to the new

type of engine. There were new conditions to be met, new difficulties

to be overcome.

A decisive test of the merits of the turbine engine was given in

1905, when the Cunard Company built two vessels, the _Caronia_ and

_Carmania_, of exactly the same size and shape, the _Caronia_ having

the highest type of quadruple expansion reciprocating engines, while

the _Carmania_ was equipped with turbine engines. Here was a fair

test of efficiency between the two types. And the turbine boat proved

herself the better of the two by developing more than a knot greater

speed per hour.

Still the _Carmania_ offered no serious competition in speed to

several of the German flyers. But in 1908 two more turbine ships,

the _Lusitania_ and _Mauretania_ began making regular transatlantic

voyages, and quickly distanced all competitors.

In size as well as in speed these sister ships mark an epoch in

navigation. Turbine engines take the place of the usual reciprocating

type, acting on four propellers for going ahead, and two separate

propellers for going astern. These engines develop 68,000 horse-power.

Stated in this way these figures convey little idea of the power

developed. But when we say that it would take a line of horses one

hundred and twenty miles long hitched tandem to develop the power

generated in the compact space of the _Mauretania's_ engine room, some

idea of the power is gained.

It is not the matter of power, size, or speed alone that makes the

twentieth century passenger steamer so completely outclass her

predecessors. It is really the matter of comfort and safety afforded

the ocean travelers. Safety against sinking from injury to the hull

was provided for by the introduction of watertight compartments half a

century ago, as we have seen; and the size of the _Great Eastern_ has

been surpassed in only a few instances. But it is since the beginning

of the present century that two revolutionary safety devices have been

perfected--wireless telegraphy and the submarine signaling apparatus.

The wireless apparatus has been described in another chapter, and as

it is used almost as much on land as at sea, cannot be considered as

solely a nautical appliance. But the submarine signaling device, which

is dependent upon water for transmission, is essentially a nautical

mechanism.

SUBMARINE SIGNALING

It is difficult for the average landsman to appreciate that the one

thing most dreaded by mariners is fog. Dark and boisterous nights

which frighten the distressed landsman have no terrors for the sailor.

Given an open sea-way he knows that he can ride out any gale that

blows. It is the foggy night that fills him with apprehension.

In perfectly still weather the sound of the fog horn carries far

enough, and indicates location well enough so that two ships

approaching each other, or a ship approaching a bell buoy, can detect

its location and avoid danger. But this is under favorable conditions;

and unfortunately such conditions do not always prevail. And if there

is a wind stirring or the sea running high atmospheric sounds cannot be

depended upon. A fog whistle whose sound ought to carry several miles

under ordinary conditions, may not be heard more than a ship's length

away. And scores of accidents, such as collisions between ships, have

happened in fogs, when both vessels were sounding their fog whistles at

regular intervals.

When wireless telegraphy was perfected sufficiently to be of

practical use, great hopes were entertained that this discovery could

be used to give warning and prevent accidents to fog-bound vessels. But

experience has shown that its usefulness is confined largely to that

of calling for help after the accident, rather than in preventing it.

Thus in 1908 when the wireless operator on board the steamer _Republic_

flashed his message broadcast telling ships and shore-stations for

hundreds of miles around that his vessel had been run down in a fog

and was sinking, he could only give the vessels that hurried to the

_Republic's_ aid an approximate idea of where they could find her. The

use of another electric appliance, of even more recent invention than

the wireless telegraph, was necessary for locating the exact position

of the stricken ship. This was the submarine signaling device, which

utilizes water instead of air as a medium for transmitting sound.

Benjamin Franklin pointed out more than a century ago that water

carries sound farther and faster than air, and carries it with greater

constancy. Density, temperature, and motion of the atmosphere act upon

aerial sound waves to reflect and refract them in varying degrees;

but these waves are not affected when water is the medium through

which they are passing. The knowledge of these facts was turned to

little practical account until the closing years of the last century

when Arthur J. Mundy of Boston, and a little later Prof. Elisha Gray

of Chicago, began experiments together that resulted finally in a

practical submarine signaling apparatus which is now installed as

a system on boats and buoys in dangerous places along the coasts,

particularly near the great highways of ocean travel.

The principle upon which this system is based is simply that of sound

waves transmitted through the water and detected at a distance by a

submerged electrical transmitter. The sound transmitted is usually

that of a submerged bell. It is possible for a person whose head is

submerged to hear the ringing of such a bell distinctly for a long

distance; but of course for practical purposes such submergence is out

of the question. The receiving apparatus of the Mundy-Gray signaling

device offers a substitute in the form of a submerged "artificial

ear"--an electrical transmitter, connected with a telephone receiver.

In the early experiments a small hollow brass ball filled with water

and containing a special form of electrical transmitter was lowered

over the side of a ship and connected by insulated wires to the

receiver of a telephone in the pilot house. The sound of a submerged

bell could be heard in this manner at a distance of ten or twelve

miles. The location of the bell could be determined by having two

such brass balls, one on each side of the hull of the vessel but not

submerged to a depth below that of the hull, so that the ship itself

acts as a screen in obstructing the sound waves coming from the bell.

By listening alternately to the sounds of the bell transmitted through

these two submerged balls it was found that the ball on the side of the

ship toward the bell gave a distinctly louder sound. By turning the

ship so that the sounds were of equal intensity the direction of the

bell could be determined as either directly ahead or astern; and by

using the compass the exact location could be determined.

But such brass-ball transmitters can be used only when the vessel

is moving at a rate not exceeding three miles an hour. They are,

therefore, of little value for ocean liners whose reduced speed far

exceeds this. But the inventors discovered presently that by using the

inside of the outer steel skin of the ship's hull below the water line

as one side of the brass ball, the transmitter would work equally well.

Indeed, with added improvements, this hollow metal device fastened to

the inside of the hull on each side, with connecting wires leading to

the pilot house, in its perfected form will pick up the sound of the

submerged bell equally well at any speed, regardless of calm or storm.

The chief defect of this arrangement was that the sound of the

pulsations of the engines of the ship were also heard, and interfered

seriously with the detection of the sound of the bell. But presently

a receiving device was perfected which ignored all sounds but those

of the bell, thus giving the mariner a means of protection against

accidents that could be depended upon absolutely at all times

regardless of speed or weather conditions.

When this stage of perfection of the signaling device was reached

the various governments began installing the instruments on buoys,

lighthouse sites, and light-ships, using various mechanical devices for

ringing the bells, and timing the strokes so that the mariners could

tell by the intervals just what bell he was in touch with, as he knows

each lighthouse by the intervals between the Hashes of its lights. A

further development in the signaling device was to equip ships with

submerged bells, as well as with the receiving apparatus. In this way

two ships could communicate with each other, or with a shore receiving

station, by using the Morse telegraph code, just as in the case of

telegraphy.

The maximum distance at which such communications may be detected is

about fifteen miles, and the approximate distance from the bell can be

gauged from the clearness of the sound heard in the telephone receiver.

At the distance of a quarter of a mile the sound of the bell is so

loud that it is painful to the listener if the receiver is held against

the ear, while at ten or twelve miles the sound is scarcely audible.

Probably the most dramatic rescue at sea in recent years was that

of the passengers and crew of the steamer _Republic_, referred to a

few pages back. When her wireless messages of distress were received

a score of vessels went groping in the fog to her assistance, while

the entire civilized world waited in breathless expectancy. Most

of the rescuing vessels, although constantly in communication with

the stricken ship, were unable to locate her. But the successful

vessel finally got in touch with the _Republic's_ submarine signaling

apparatus, and aided by this located the vessel and rescued the crew

and passengers.

This is only one instance of the practical application of the submarine

signaling apparatus. But its use is not confined to the larger boats.

The apparatus can be made so small that even boats the size of a

fishing dory may be equipped at least with the sounding device, and

thus protected.

On the Newfoundland fishing banks one of the chief causes of loss of

life is the running down of the fishing boats in the fog by passing

steamers, and also the loss of the dories of the fishermen who are

unable to find their way back to their vessels. Many of these fishing

vessels now supply each of the attending dories with a submarine bell

which weighs about forty pounds and is run by clockwork. When caught

in the fog the fisherman hangs this bell over the side of his dory and

thus warns approaching steamers of his position, at the same time

affording his own vessel a guide for finding him and picking him up. In

this manner the appalling loss of life in the fogs on the fishing banks

has been greatly lessened. Thus the submarine signaling device gives

aid to the smaller craft as well as the larger vessels.

For the moment this is the last important safety device that has been

invented to help lessen the perils of sea voyages. Indeed the perils

and discomforts of ocean voyages are now largely reminiscent, thanks

to the rapid succession of scientific discoveries and their practical

application during the last half century. The size of modern vessels

minimizes rolling and pitching. Turbine engines practically eliminate

engine vibrations. The danger from fires was practically eliminated by

the introduction of iron and steel as building material; the danger of

sinking after collisions is now guarded against by the division of the

ship's hull into water-tight compartments; sensitive instruments as

used at present warn the mariner of the presence of ice-bergs; wireless

telegraphy affords a means of calling aid in case of disabled machinery

and giving the ship's location in a general way; while the submarine

signal makes known the exact location of the stricken vessel in foggy

weather.

In a trifle over half a century the time of crossing the Atlantic has

been reduced by more than one-half. In 1856 the _Persia_ crossed the

ocean between Queenstown and New York in nine days, one hour, and

forty-five minutes, making a new record. In 1909 the _Mauretania_

covered the same distance in four days, ten hours, and fifty-one

minutes. In March, 1910, the same vessel completed a passage over

the longer winter course, a distance of 2,889 knots, in four days,

fifteen hours, and twenty-nine minutes, reducing the previous record by

twenty-nine minutes.

When the _Lusitania_ and _Mauretania_ were completed many short-sighted

persons predicted that these vessels would never be surpassed in size

or speed. As if to refute such predictions, however, the White Star

Company at once began constructing two vessels, the _Olympic_ and

_Titanic_, each with a displacement of one-fourth more than the great

Cunarders, and of overshadowing proportions in everything save the

matter of speed. Against the _Mauretania's_ average twenty-six knot

speed the new boats are designed to make only twenty-one.

These new boats are eight hundred and ninety feet in length, as against

the _Lusitania's_ seven hundred and ninety. They are ninety-two feet in

beam, and sixty-two feet in molded depth. The roof of the pilot house

is seventy feet above the water. The maximum draft is thirty-seven and

a half feet and the displacement sixty thousand tons.

They resemble the _Great Eastern_ in that they have two systems

of engines. Two reciprocating engines drive the two outer of the

three screws, and the exhaust from these engines is utilized in a

low-pressure turbine engine, driving the center propeller.

LIQUID FUEL

Another step that has been taken to increase the efficiency of the

steam engine on ships, is the adoption of liquid fuel in place of coal

for making steam. For years the advantages of this form of fuel have

been recognized, the Russians having brought its use to a high state of

perfection, both in boats and locomotives. Practically all the steamers

on the Black and Caspian seas, as well as on such rivers as the Volga,

burn oil exclusively. And early in 1910 the British Navy decided to

substitute oil for coal on all its vessels.

The advantages claimed for oil over coal as fuel are many. It is

smokeless, produces more heat than coal, occupies less space for

storage, can be loaded more quickly and easily, is cleaner, and reduces

the engine-room force to one-fourth or one-third the number of men

required when coal is used. Incidentally it reduces the difficult

physical task of stoking to one relatively pleasant and easy. It

gives a steadier fire, does not foul the boilers, and does away with

cumbersome ashes and clinkers.

Its disadvantage lies in the danger from fire. An inflammable

liquid carried in a ship's hold is obviously more dangerous than a

corresponding quantity of relatively incombustible coal. Yet the

obvious advantages of this form of fuel have been so compelling that it

is now coming into use on all classes of war vessels, and seems likely

to supplant coal entirely on some types of boats, such as the torpedo

destroyers. Moreover, the experience of the Russian boats on the Black

and Caspian seas seems to indicate that the dangers from the use of

oil as a fuel when properly handled have been greatly exaggerated,

and passenger and freight steamers all over the world are gradually

adopting it.

Some tests were made by the Navy Department of the United States in

1909-1910 using a vessel which was formerly a coal-burning boat.

In these tests it was found that the steaming radius was greatly

increased, the firing force reduced, and fuel taken into the ship in

about one-fourth the time it takes to coal. It was possible to get up

steam in any boiler, or set of boilers, much more quickly than with

coal.

Of course where oil is used for fuel some special form of burner is

necessary. Many types have been tried, but in the most effective the

oil is atomized by the use of steam spray, or air blast, it being

impossible to get proper combustion of the oil except when used in

minutely divided particles. Used in this manner a uniform temperature

can be maintained easily, or may be increased or decreased very quickly.

As used at present liquid fuel simply substitutes coal for heating the

ordinary type of boiler. But there seems every reason to believe that

in the near future some type of internal combustion engine will be

perfected that will use the crude, cheap oil, as the finer and lighter

oils are used in motors to-day. When this occurs the space-consuming

boilers and furnaces used in ships at present will be replaced by

compact machinery, quite as efficient, but occupying only a fraction of

the space. Nor need we expect that the invention of some such type of

engine will be long delayed, if we may judge by the rapid strides made

in perfecting other internal combustion engines during the past few

years.

III

SUBMARINE VESSELS

The development of submarine vessels has been one of the slowest in

the history of modern inventions. Submarine boats, using submarine

torpedoes, were able to destroy ships a hundred years ago; and a little

less than half a century ago naval vessels were destroyed in actual

warfare by these boats. But curiously enough no vessel has ever been

destroyed in actual warfare by a submarine boat since that time. Yet

these boats are essentially war-vessels, and, with the exception of

boats of the Lake type, of no use whatever for commercial purposes.

Perhaps the explanation for this tardy development lies in the fact

that until recent years naval men have not looked with favor upon this

style of fighting craft. In Admiral Porter's book, written in 1878,

he makes the statement that one of the reasons why they did not show

more enthusiasm about the submarine made by Robert Fulton early in

the nineteenth century, was that such boats "menaced the position of

the naval men, whose calling would be gone did the little submarine

boat supplant the battle-ship." We need not, however, depend upon

this statement, made as it was three-quarters of a century after the

demonstrations by Fulton, for there are many similar statements made

at the time to be had at first hand. Thus Admiral Earl St. Vincent,

when opposing the views of William Pitt, who had become enthusiastic

over the possibilities of Fulton's submarines, is on record as having

opposed such craft on the ground that by encouraging such development

"he was laying the foundation which would do away with the navy." In

1802, M. St. Aubin wrote in this connection, "What will become of the

navies, and where will sailors be found to man ships of war, when it is

a physical certainty that they may at any time be blown into the air by

diving boats, against which no human foresight can guard them?"

Such opposition has undoubtedly tended to retard the progress of

submarine navigation; but be the cause what it may, it has made slow

and laborious work of it; and we are only now approaching a solution

of the question that seemed almost within grasp a hundred years

ago--before the days of steam or electricity.

THE FIRST SUBMARINE

As early as the sixteenth century the possibilities of submarine

navigation was the dream of the mariner, and tentative attempts at

submarine boats are said to have been made even at an earlier period

than this; but the first practical submarine boat capable of navigation

entirely submerged for any length of time was made by David Bushnell,

of Westbrook (then Saybrook), Maine, U. S. A., in 1775. Details as to

the construction of the remarkable craft, are recorded in a letter

written by the inventor to Thomas Jefferson in 1789, and recorded

in the _Transactions of the American Philosophical Society_. In this

letter Bushnell says:--

"The external shape of the submarine vessel bore some resemblance to

the upper tortoise shells of equal size, joined together, the place

of entrance into the vessel being represented by the opening made by

the swell of the shells at the head of the animal. The inside was

capable of containing the operator and air sufficient to support him

thirty minutes without receiving fresh air. At the bottom, opposite to

the entrance, was fixed a quantity of lead for ballast. At one edge,

which was directly before the operator, who sat upright, was an oar

for rowing forward and backward. At the other edge was a rudder for

steering. An aperture at the bottom, with its valves, was designed to

admit water for the purpose of descending, and two brass forcing-pumps

served to eject the water within when necessary for ascending. At

the top there was likewise an oar for ascending or descending, or

continuing at any particular depth. A water-gauge or barometer

determined the depth of descent, a compass directed the course, and

a ventilator within supplied the vessel with fresh air when on the

surface.

"The vessel was chiefly ballasted with lead fixed to its bottom; when

this was not sufficient a quantity was placed within, more or less

according to the weight of the operator; its ballast made it so stiff

that there was no danger of oversetting. The vessel, with all its

appendages and the operator, was of sufficient weight to settle it very

low in the water. About two hundred pounds of lead at the bottom for

ballast could be let down forty or fifty feet below the vessel; this

enabled the operator to rise instantly to the surface of the water in

case of accident.

"When the operator would descend, he placed his foot upon the top of a

brass valve, depressing it, by which he opened a large aperture in the

bottom of the vessel, through which the water entered at his pleasure;

when he had admitted a sufficient quantity he descended very gradually;

if he admitted too much he ejected as much as was necessary to obtain

an equilibrium by the two brass forcing-pumps which were placed at each

hand. Whenever the vessel leaked, or he would ascend to the surface, he

also made use of these forcing-pumps. When the skillful operator had

obtained an equilibrium he would row upward or downward, or continue at

any particular depth, with an oar placed near the top of the vessel,

formed upon the principle of the screw, the axis of the oar entering

the vessel; by turning the oar one way he raised the vessel, by turning

it the other he depressed it.

"An oar, formed upon the principle of a screw, was fixed in the fore

part of the vessel; its axis entered the vessel, and being turned one

way, rowed the vessel forward, but being turned the other way rowed it

backward; it was made to be turned by the hand or foot.

"Behind the submarine vessel was a place above the rudder for carrying

a large powder magazine. This was made of two pieces of oak timber,

large enough when hollowed out to contain one hundred and fifty pounds

of powder, with the apparatus used in firing it, and was secured in

its place by a screw turned by the operator. A strong piece of rope

extended from the magazine to the wood screw above mentioned, and was

fastened to both. When the wood screw was fixed to be cast off from

its tube, the magazine was to be cast off likewise by unscrewing it,

leaving it hanging to the wood screw; it was lighter than the water,

that it might rise up against the object to which the wood screw and

itself were fastened.

"Within the magazine was an apparatus constructed to run any proposed

length of time under twelve hours; when it had run its time it

unpinioned a strong lock resembling a gun-lock, which gave fire to the

powder. This apparatus was so pinioned that it could not possibly move

till, by casting off the magazine from the vessel, it was set in motion.

"The skillful operator could swim so low on the surface of the water

as to approach very near a ship in the night without fear of being

discovered, and might, if he chose, approach the stem or stem above the

water with very little danger. He could sink very quickly, keep at any

depth he pleased, and row a great distance in any direction he desired

without coming to the surface, and when he rose to the surface he could

soon obtain a fresh supply of air. If necessary, he might descend again

and pursue his course.

"After various attempts to find an operator to my wish, I sent one

who appeared more expert than the rest from New York to a fifty-gun

ship lying not far from Governor's Island. He went under the ship

and attempted to fix the wooden screw in her bottom, but struck, as

he supposed, a bar of iron which passes from the rudder hinge, and

is spiked under the ship's quarter. Had he moved a few inches, which

he might have done without rowing, I have no doubt but that he would

have found wood where he might have fixed the screw, or if the ship

were sheathed with copper he might easily have pierced it; but not

being well skilled in the management of the vessel, in attempting to

move to another place he lost the ship. After seeking her in vain for

some time he rowed some distance and rose to the surface of the water,

but found daylight had advanced too far that he durst not renew the

attempt. He says that he could easily have fastened the magazine under

the stem of the ship above the water, as he rowed up to the stern and

touched it before he descended. Had he fastened it there the explosion

of one hundred and fifty pounds of powder (the quantity contained in

the magazine) must have been fatal to the ship. In his return from the

ship to New York he passed near Governor's Island, and thought he was

discovered by the enemy on the island. Being in haste to avoid the

danger he feared, he cast off the magazine, as he imagined it retarded

him in the swell, which was very considerable. After the magazine had

been cast off one hour, the time the infernal apparatus was set to run,

it blew up with great violence."

[Illustration: ROBERT FULTON.]

ROBERT FULTON'S EXPERIMENTS

The work begun by Bushnell in 1775 was taken up ten years later by

Robert Fulton whose diving-boats so nearly fulfilled the conditions

necessary for practical submarine navigation. As America was at

peace at this time, and as her financial condition was at the lowest

ebb, Fulton transferred his skill and energy to Europe which was

then involved in the Napoleonic wars. Several attempts were made to

interest the French government in his invention, but although certain

commissions reported favorably on his ideas, nothing came of them for

a time. In 1800, however, Fulton succeeded in interesting Napoleon in

his scheme, and the following year he was given the opportunity of

building his first submarine boat, the _Nautilus_. This boat was cigar

shaped, about twenty-one feet long and seven feet in diameter, and made

of copper supported by iron ribs. When operating at the surface this

boat used a peculiarly shaped sail; but when submerged it was propelled

by a screw actuated by machinery turned by hand. In this boat, Fulton,

with three companions, descended to a depth of twenty-three feet and

remained submerged for twenty minutes; and at a depth of five or six

feet they are said to have remained submerged for six hours, air being

supplied by a copper vessel, probably containing oxygen or compressed

air.

The first experiment made in attempting actually to destroy a vessel

with the _Nautilus_, was successful, a small vessel being sunk.

Encouraged by this success Fulton proposed to build larger boats of

this same type capable of destroying the largest battle-ships. In

return he asked that a reward be paid him for each vessel destroyed,

the price of his diving boat reimbursed, and a patent be given himself

and the members of his crew, so that in case of capture they would

be treated as prisoners of war and not hanged as pirates. Strangely

enough this latter clause was the greatest stumbling-block, as the

proposed methods of destroying battle-ships by torpedoes was held in

such disrepute that the French government would not grant a patent

rating the crew of torpedo boats or submarine boats as legitimate

belligerents. In effect, their attitude was, that while a person was at

liberty to destroy an empire from the surface of the water, he would be

hanged as a criminal if he dived beneath the surface and destroyed a

boat.

Discouraged by this stand of the French government, Fulton removed to

England, where he succeeded in interesting the prime-minister, William

Pitt, in his novel boat. A commission was appointed consisting of a

number of prominent men, including Mr. Pitt, and Fulton was requested

to demonstrate what could be done in actual practice by his submarine.

On October 15, 1805, an old brig detailed for the purpose was destroyed

by Fulton by the explosion of a torpedo containing one hundred

and seventy pounds of powder. Yet in the face of this remarkable

demonstration the commission remained unfavorable to Fulton's scheme,

although Mr. Pitt to the last retained his faith in the possibilities

of such boats.

Recognizing that further attempts in England would be fruitless,

Fulton returned to the United States. Here, in 1810, Congress became

sufficiently interested to appropriate five thousand dollars to assist

him in his work, and as a final test of the boat he had built, the

naval authorities prepared the brig _Argus_ to resist an attack by

the submarine. This preparation consisted in surrounding her with

protecting booms of logs, supporting strong netting, and held a

distance from the hull by spars. In fact all possible means short of

actually building a wall about the _Argus_ were taken to defeat the

attack. It is probable that the brig, when her preparations for defense

were completed, would have been invulnerable even to a modern torpedo,

and it is not surprising, therefore, that Fulton's attack upon her

utterly failed.

Commenting upon this failure and the means taken by the authorities to

protect the _Argus_, Fulton significantly remarked that the very fact

that a war vessel was obliged to make use of such means to protect

herself against a system of attack then in its infancy, spoke volumes

for the possibilities of this method of attacking when it should be

more fully developed.

But although this failure to destroy the _Argus_ caused Congress to

withdraw its aid for future experiments in submarine warfare, Fulton

himself never lost faith in the importance of his work. Even after

his successful invention of the steamboat, for surface navigation, he

is said to have remarked that, while this invention was important, it

could in no wise compare with the revolutionary effects upon navigation

that would eventually be produced by submarine boats. And despite his

failure to convince the government of the possibilities of his diving

boats, he continued his experiments with them. How nearly he succeeded

in making a practical submarine was shown in the second war with

England that followed soon after.

In this war a "diving boat," supposed to have been one of Fulton's

submarines, made several attacks upon the British man-of-war

_Ramillies_ off New London, in the summer of 1813. In the first two

attempts the approach of the submarine was detected by the crew of

the man-of-war, who cut their cables, and stood out of the harbor as

quickly as possible. In the third attempt, the diving boat succeeded in

coming up in a position directly under the _Ramillies_, fastened itself

to the keel and made a hole in the planking large enough to receive the

screw which was to fasten the torpedo in place. In the act of fastening

it, however, this screw was broken off, and the attempt had to be

abandoned for the moment.

This attack created such a panic aboard the British boat, that she

did not return to the inner harbor but kept constantly in motion

outside. Not satisfied with this protection against such "dishonorable

attempts," the British commander took on board his vessel a hundred

prisoners, apprising the Americans of the fact, and assuring them that

a similar action would be taken by all the ships of the British fleet,

so that in case a vessel was torpedoed the American prisoners would be

blown up with her crew. This effectually frustrated Fulton's plans; for

when the fact became known in the United States, the Americans were

naturally as vigorous as the British in protesting against Fulton and

his boats.

Obviously the rule that "everything is fair in war" was not accepted

in practice a hundred years ago. Fulton's attempts were regarded as

the acts of a pirate, those of the British commander as perfectly

legitimate and honorable methods.

A SUCCESSFUL DIVING BOAT

From the time of Fulton to the outbreak of the American Civil War there

were few attempts at submarine navigation. On the opening of this war,

however, efforts were made to perfect diving boats; and these efforts

were so well directed that eventually one of these boats succeeded in

destroying the Federal boat _Housatonic_ in Charleston Harbor on the

night of February 17, 1864.

The submarine that accomplished this was one of the most remarkable

boats ever constructed. It was cigar shaped, about sixty feet long,

and carried a crew of nine men. It was submerged partly by means of

ballast tanks and partly by lateral fins. As a weapon it carried a spar

torpedo fastened to its blunt nose. It was propelled by hand-power,

eight of the nine members of the crew working on a crank which actuated

the propeller. The ninth man, crouching in the bow, steered the boat.

No reserve air was carried, and consequently the length of time the

boat could remain submerged was limited to a very few minutes. On

account of this, and because of its unfortunate career, it was aptly

called the "peripatetic coffin"; and it justified this name by sinking

five different times, drowning thirty-five out of forty of the members

of its different crews. Nevertheless it succeeded in destroying an

American war vessel, thus demonstrating that this feat is possible

under condition of actual warfare.

The submarines of the Civil War came to be known by the general name of

"Davids," and several of them of different types were built. The only

successful attack of any of these Davids, however, was the one which

destroyed the _Housatonic_. In his book, _The Naval History of the

Civil War_, Admiral Porter described this attack upon the _Housatonic_

as follows:--

"At about 8.45 P.M. the officer of the deck on board the unfortunate

vessel discovered something about one hundred yards away, moving along

the water. It came directly toward the ship, and within two minutes of

the time it was first sighted was alongside. The cable was slipped,

the engines backed, and all hands called to quarters. But it was too

late--the torpedo struck the _Housatonic_ just forward of the mainmast,

on the starboard side, in a line with the magazine. The man who steered

her knew where the vulnerable spots of the steamer were, and he did his

work well. When the explosion took place the ship trembled all over as

if by the shock of an earthquake, and seemed to be lifted out of the

water, and then sunk foremost, heeling to port as she went down.

"Her captain, Pickering, was stunned and somewhat bruised by the

concussion, and the order of the day was 'Sauve qui peut.' A boat

was despatched to the _Canandaigua_, not far off, and that vessel at

once responded to the request for help, and succeeded in rescuing the

greater part of the crew.

"Strange to say the David was not seen after the explosion, and

was supposed to have slipped away in the confusion; but when the

_Housatonic_ was inspected by divers, the torpedo-boat was found

sticking in the hole she had made, and all her crew were dead in her.

It was a reckless adventure these men had engaged in, and one in

which they could scarcely have hoped to succeed. They had tried it

once before inside the harbor, and some of the crew had been blown

overboard. How could they hope to succeed on the outside, where the sea

might be rough, when the speed of the David was not over five knots,

and when they might be driven out to sea! Reckless as it might be, it

was the most sublime patriotism, and showed the length to which men

could be urged on behalf of a cause for which they were willing to give

up their lives and all they held most dear."

RECENT SUBMARINES AND SUBMERSIBLES

After the Civil War several nations interested themselves in the

subject of submarines, and during the Franco-Prussian war in 1870-71,

France attempted the construction of such vessels, but without success.

Yet the possibility of producing these boats was becoming more apparent

every year by the improvements in electrical motors, gasoline engines,

compressed-air motors, and the automobile- or fish-torpedo--itself a

miniature submarine boat.

In America the progress made in submarine-boat construction has been

fully as great, if not greater, than in any other country. Undoubtedly

the foremost figure in this progress has been Mr. P. Holland; and his

efforts and successes are largely responsible for the present fleet of

submarine boats built already, or in the process of construction, as

well as for those of several foreign countries. Indeed, in the matter

of submarine inventions, only one country can be considered as rivaling

America, that nation being France, whose enthusiasm for submarine

navigation has been much greater than that of any other nation,

although in the matter of results she has not outstripped the United

States.

Mr. Holland's first submarine boat was built in 1875. It was called

a "diving canoe," being only sixteen feet in length and wide enough

to hold one man clothed in a diving-suit. Four years later, however,

Holland built a larger boat called the _Holland No. 3_ constructed

along similar lines to the most recent submarines. This was the first

buoyant submarine to be steered up and down by horizontal rudders

alone, and may be said to mark an epoch in submarine navigation. But

the No. 3 had many defects, and Mr. Holland continued to build and

improve new boats, until finally his ninth boat, which is the one

familiarly known as the _Holland_, represented a practical form of

submarine vessel. This boat was 53 feet 10 inches long, 10 feet 3

inches in diameter, had a displacement of 75 tons, and carried 10 tons

of water ballast. The gasoline engine which it used when running at the

surface propelled the boat at the rate of seven knots an hour, and it

could travel a distance of fifteen hundred miles at this rate of speed

with the amount of fuel carried. When submerged it could run a distance

of about fifty knots without coming to the surface.

In diving, the Holland type of boat takes in sufficient water ballast

to lower it to the surface of the water. The horizontal rudders are

then brought into use causing it to descend to the desired depth, and

keeping it at an approximately uniform distance from the surface while

running submerged. By this arrangement the boat can dive very quickly,

requiring only a matter of eight or ten seconds for reaching a depth of

thirty feet. Record plunges have been made in less time than this.

The armament of the Holland boat was originally designed to consist

of three tubes, two of which were for throwing aërial torpedoes and

shells, and the third for discharging Whitehead torpedoes. One of

these aërial guns was placed in the bow, and one in the stem; but

later the stern tube was abandoned. The bow gun was designed to

discharge projectiles a distance of about one mile, such projectiles

weighing something over two hundred pounds and carrying one hundred

pounds of gun-cotton. The tube for discharging the Whitehead torpedo

was practically the same as the submerged tubes in use at present on

battle-ships.

Although this _Holland_ is now the type of diving boat most familiar to

the majority of people, and the one in use in several navies, it should

not be understood that the Holland boats were the only successful

submarines constructed up to this time. France and Russia had produced

successful diving boats; and in America those invented by Simon Lake,

some of which are used for wrecking and salvage work as well as for

war purposes, have proved quite as practical as the Hollands. In recent

tests of these two types by the United States Government the Holland

boats showed themselves to be slightly superior to the Lake boats in

certain particulars, but the margin of superiority was a very narrow

one.

The boats of the "Octopus" type are strictly speaking "diving boats,"

while the Lake boats are of the "even-keel" type. These terms refer to

the method of submergence, the diving boats changing their horizontal

trim when submerging, while the even-keel boats retain their horizontal

trim, or nearly so.

The Lake boats have some features not usually embodied in other

submarines, since some of the boats are designed for purposes other

than warfare. Thus, they are equipped with wheels, or buffers, on which

they can roll along the bottom of the ocean or bay. In the bow is an

air-tight compartment with an opening in the bottom through which a

diver can emerge and work on wreckage, or laying and disconnecting

mines. These boats have also a safety device in the form of a

detachable keel weighing several tons. In case of accident, when it

might otherwise be impossible to rise to the surface, this keel can be

detached simply by pulling a lever, thus giving the boat sufficient

buoyancy to rise to the surface. This particular feature of the

detachable keel is not peculiar to the Lake boats alone, some of the

foreign submarines using a similar arrangement as a safeguard.

[Illustration: THE AMERICAN SUB-MARINE BOAT "CUTTLEFISH" IN DRY DOCK AT

THE BROOKLYN NAVY YARD.]

Technically speaking the name "submarine" is now used only as applying

to those boats that are operated solely by electric power, have

little buoyancy, and do very little running at the surface. The term

"submersible" is applied to a submarine boat, actuated by electricity

while submerged, but using gasoline motors for motive power while

running at the surface. These gasoline engines are used at the same

time for charging the storage batteries; so that the submersible is

a much more practical boat than the submarine, and at the same time

is quite as good a diver. Indeed, although many naval writers are

very careful to make a distinction in the use of these terms, there

seems little need of doing so, since only one type of boat--the

submersible--is now considered practical. But as the word submarine

is the older and more popular, it is used here to cover both classes

except in specific cases.

For several years there were two classes of submarines under

observation--those possessing no floatability when submerged, and

those having some reserve buoyancy. The advantage claimed for the

no-floatability class of boats is that, having no buoyancy, they are

kept more easily at a certain depth below the surface of the water

instead of tending to come to the surface constantly as in the case of

boats of the other type.

But in actual practice the theoretical possibilities of such boats have

not come up to the expectations of their advocates. For keeping the

boat at a uniform depth, the most universally accepted method is by

the use of horizontal rudders. The fact that the vertical direction of

a boat may be controlled by horizontal rudders, when her buoyancy is

small, has long since been established in submarine navigation; and

the simplicity of this method naturally helps its popularity. If there

were no shifting of weight in a submarine, or no wave disturbance,

it would not be difficult to set the rudders at such an angle that

the boat would travel for long distances at an approximately uniform

submergence, the depth of submergence being indicated by gauges acted

upon by the water pressure on the surface of the boat. And in actual

practice it is possible to do this at the present time, part of the

problem having been solved by automatic and other devices.

It should be remembered that many things enter into the disturbance of

the submarine's equilibrium. The movement of a member of the crew from

one point to another shifts the ballast; a certain amount of leakage of

water cannot be avoided, and the sudden discharge of a torpedo weighing

several hundred pounds from her bow tends to bring the boat quickly

to the surface if this lost weight is not compensated for quickly. By

various ingenious devices all these difficulties have been practically

overcome, most of them automatically.

But the great unsolved problem of submarine navigation--practically

the only one that now opposes a question mark to its great utility

in warfare--is that of steering with certainty of direction when

submerged. Once the submarine is under water it is in utter darkness as

far as seeing to steer is concerned; and what adds to the difficulty

is the fact that the compass cannot be relied upon, because of the

surrounding electrical apparatus. It would be possible, perhaps, to

construct a powerful electric lamp to throw a light some distance

ahead of the boat, but this would defeat the primary object of

submarine attack, as such a light would be seen by an enemy.

In still water, when the boat is running within a distance of ten

or fifteen feet of the surface, it is possible to steer with great

precision by the use of an optical tube or "periscope." This periscope

is a straight, hollow tube, connected with the steering compartment

in the submarine, and protruding above the water. In the upper end

are a mirror and lenses so arranged that the surrounding objects are

reflected downward through the tube, and show on a screen, or some

other device, so that the helmsman sees things of exactly the same size

that they would appear to the naked eye. The periscope is also fitted

with a telescope attachment which magnifies objects like the binoculars

used in surface navigation. On some recent submarines there are two

periscopes, a movable one for use of the commanding officer, and one

that looks straight ahead for the helmsman's use.

In still water the periscope works admirably, but it is seriously

interfered with even by small waves. It is so small and inconspicuous,

however, that it might enable a submarine to creep within torpedo range

even in daylight, and launch the torpedo with accuracy, as was proved

in 1908 when a fleet of submarines actually accomplished this feat in

an experimental test.

PRESENT STATUS OF SUBMARINE BOATS

To most people, one of the most surprising things in the Russo-Japanese

war was the fact that submarine boats played no part in it whatever.

There is only one possible conclusion to be drawn from this: the day of

the submarine as a determining factor in naval battles on the high seas

had not arrived.

The reason for the surprise of the generality of people in finding the

submarine was not as yet an entirely practical war engine, is due to

the enthusiastic misrepresentations of the daily press and magazines,

whose readers have been led to infer that the modern submarine boat

is so far perfected that it can do things under water almost as well

as boats on the surface. Nothing is farther from the truth. Under

ideal (and consequently unusual) conditions, the submarines, and

submersibles, have done, and can do, some remarkable things, such as

staying submerged for hours, diving to a depth of two hundred feet, and

running long distances. But these are only the first requisites of the

under-water fighting boat--simply the "creeping stage" of development.

The common impression that the submarine boat, such as the ones of the

Holland and Lake types, can go cruising about, fish-like, for hours,

watching for its prey in some mysterious manner without coming near the

surface, is a dream not yet realized.

If one will pause to consider that light is necessary to sight and that

one hundred feet of sea water makes almost as efficient an obstacle to

vision as a stone wall, it will be easy to understand why the submarine

is still struggling with difficulties that oppose its perfection. The

fanciful illustration seen so often of a submarine diving hundreds of

feet deep in the water, swimming about and finally coming up under the

keel of a battle ship and destroying it, are as yet the creations of

vivid imaginations. For submarine marksmen, like all others, require

a fairly clear view of the target--even such a huge target as a

battle-ship--to direct their shots with any degree of certainty.

The greatest problem now confronting the submarine navigator,

therefore, is that of seeing without being seen. At night, and at long

ranges, this is not difficult, as the little conning-tower, or tiny

periscope tube protruding above the waves, is not easily detected

even by strong searchlights, sharp eyes, and marine glasses. But long

ranges are of little use to the submarine; and there is always another

difficulty--the leviathan battle-ship does not lie still waiting to be

stabbed by its sword-fish enemy, but keeps moving about, twisting and

turning, at a rate of from fourteen to eighteen knots an hour, while

the submarine can only make about eleven knots when submerged. In a

stern chase, therefore, the submarine is one of the most harmless of

sea-monsters, in the open ocean. For harbor work, however, the case is

different. In some recent tests the submarine boats made eighty per

cent. in hits while attacking moving vessels in a harbor at night--a

far higher percentage than is usually made by surface torpedo boats

under the same circumstances.

At present the best solution of the problem of steering the partly

submerged submarine is offered by the use of a conning-tower elevated

five or six feet above the body of the submarine, which can be kept

just above the waves, and present an inconspicuous target. The early

Holland boats did not have this, although the American Lake boats have

had it from the first; but at the present time all boats are being so

made. At first these towers were made circular in form; but it was

found that towers of this shape made sufficient splash in passing

through the water to attract attention at a considerable distance on a

still night. This shape was abandoned, therefore, and a boat-shaped one

adopted.

With such a noiseless conning-tower the submersible can cruise about

on foggy nights, or when the waves are just high enough to make a

disturbance on the surface, running with the top of the conning-tower

open so as to secure good ventilation as long as possible, until the

enemy is nearly within striking distance. As the target is approached

the conning-tower must be closed, the protruding top sunk lower and

lower in the water, and finally completely submerged, nothing appearing

at the surface but the periscope tube just above the waves. With the

aid of this instrument the target may still be seen distinctly, but the

arc of vision is limited, and guessing the distance or rate of speed of

the target is very difficult. Nevertheless, by estimating the distance

before submerging, and knowing the rate of speed of his little craft,

the submarine gunner may still get his range and find his target.

If the waves are at all high, this is very difficult, as the water,

slopping over the periscope, obscures the vision for several seconds at

a time and is very distracting. But some experiments carried on during

the summer of 1908 show that, even in broad daylight, it is no easy

matter for a battle-ship to detect the approach of submarines until

well within torpedo range, even when an attack is expected.

In these experiments the United States cruiser "Yankee" in Buzzard's

Bay was attacked by five submarines of the most recent type. The

"Yankee" remained stationary expecting the attack, but to offset this

disadvantage the crew was fully aware of the exact time that the attack

was to be made. Indeed the officers of the cruiser had watched the

submarines steam away until they disappeared. When twenty miles from

the "Yankee" the five submarines submerged and headed for the cruiser,

making observations at intervals by means of the periscope.

The day was perfectly clear, and all on board the "Yankee" were keenly

watching for the expected submarines. Yet the first intimation they had

of the proximity of the diving boats was the striking of five torpedoes

against the cruiser's hull. Each submarine had scored a bull's-eye.

Not content with this success, the submarines repeated the attack from

a nearer point, again scoring five hits before their presence was

detected.

One great obstacle to successful submarine navigation on an extended

scale is the difficulty of keeping a supply of air not only for the use

of the crew, but for the engines. Any really powerful engine, either

steam or gas, consumes an enormous amount of air. This is not true, of

course, of the storage batteries which furnish the power for running

while submerged, but these, at best, are but feeble generators of

energy, although Edison's recent improvements may materially improve

their power. If gasoline engines could be used during submergence a

far greater speed would be acquired; but this is out of the question,

as such engines would consume the air supply of the little boat far too

rapidly. The compromise, now adopted universally, is to use gasoline

motors while running at the surface or partly submerged, when the

conning-tower is open, utilizing part of their energy meanwhile to

charge the storage batteries.

It is evident, therefore, that no great speed can be expected of the

submarine in its present state; and in point of fact the largest type

is able to develop only about ten or eleven knots when submerged, and

fifteen while at the surface--far below the speed of any other type

of war vessel. But the experimental attacks upon the "Yankee" prove

that they are dangerous fighting craft, and a recent voyage by a

flotilla of Italian submersibles shows that such boats are no longer

harbor-locked vessels. In 1908 the Italian flotilla in question made

a voyage from Venice to Spezia, a distance of thirteen hundred miles,

without assistance from auxiliary boats. About the same time a British

submarine flotilla, on a three-hundred mile trip, remained submerged

for forty consecutive hours. The depth of the submergence in this case

was only a few feet, but great depths may be reached with relative

safety. In one test a Lake boat carrying her crew sank to a depth of

one hundred and thirty-eight feet, returning to the surface in a few

minutes. At another time the "Octopus," without her crew, was lowered

to a depth of two hundred and five feet, sustaining a pressure of

fifteen thousand tons, without injury.

[Illustration: A FLEET OF BRITISH SUB-MARINES MANŒUVERING AT THE

SURFACE.]

Such performances as these are thought-provocative, to say the least.

Submarine boats that can hit the target without being detected, go on

cruises unattended for more than a thousand miles, and remain submerged

for more than a day and a half, must be classed as efficient engines of

warfare.

Since the submersible is designed to spend most of its time on the

surface of the water like an ordinary boat, it must have considerable

buoyancy, but it must also have some means of getting rid of this

buoyancy quickly when submergence is necessary. The submarine proper

has only from five to eight per cent. buoyancy, while some of the

submersibles have twenty-five per cent. or more. With such boats of

the ordinary size some fifty tons of water must be admitted before

bringing them to a condition in which they can be submerged; but this

can be done very quickly. One of the submarines of the U. S. fleet in

an actual test filled her ballast tanks and dived to a depth of twenty

feet in four minutes and twenty seconds.

It is not impossible that the recent triumphs in aërial navigation may

have an important bearing on the use of submarines in future wars. It

is well known that large objects when submerged even to a considerable

depth are discernible from a height in the air directly above them.

It is quite possible, therefore, that swift aeroplanes circling about

a fleet of war vessels might be able to detect submarine boats when

these boats were near enough the surface to use their periscopes. If

so it might be possible for the aeroplanes to drop torpedoes upon the

submerged boats without danger to themselves. Or if the aeroplanes

carried no effective weapons, they could at least act in the capacity

of scouts and warn their battleship consorts of the presence of the

submarine. Of course, this would be possible only in daylight, the

airships giving no protection against night attacks.

IV

THE STEAM LOCOMOTIVE

Modern railroads are the outcome of the invention of the locomotive;

yet the invention of the practical locomotive was the outcome of iron

railroads which had been in existence for half a century. These iron

railroads were a development from wooden predecessors, which were the

direct descendants of the smooth roadways of the Greeks and Romans.

Indeed it is quite reasonable to suppose that the ancients may have

been familiar with the use of parallel rails with grooved or flanged

wheels to fit them; but if so there seems to be no definite record of

the fact, and our knowledge of true railroads goes back only to the

seventeenth century.

As early as 1630, it is recorded that a road built of parallel rails of

wood upon which cars were run was used in a coal-mine near Newcastle,

England; and there is no reason to suppose that this road was a novelty

at the time. Half a century later there was a railroad in operation

near the river Tyne which has been described by Roger North as being

made of "rails of timber placed end to end and exactly straight, and in

two parallel lines to each other. On these rails bulky cars were made

to run on four rollers fitting the rails, whereby the carriage was

made so easy that one horse would draw four or five chaldrons of coal

to a load."

At this time the use of iron rails had not been thought of, or at least

had not been tried, probably from the fact that iron was then very

expensive. Even the wooden rails in use, and the wheels that ran upon

them, were of no fixed pattern. Some of these rails were in the form

of depressed grooves into which an ordinary wheel fitted. But these

were very unsatisfactory because they became filled so easily with dirt

and other obstructions, and a more common type was a rail raised a few

inches above the ground like a molding, a grooved wheel running on the

surface.

Such rails were short lived, splitting and wearing away quickly, and

being easily injured by other vehicles. But they were, on the whole,

more satisfactory than the depressed rails, and were the type adopted

when iron rails first came into use, about 1767. Ten years later the

idea of the single flange was conceived, not placed on the wheels of

the cars as at present, but cast on the rails themselves. These flanges

were first made on the outside of the rails, and later placed on the

inside, the wheels of the cars used on such rails being of the ordinary

pattern with flat tires.

But, in 1789, William Jessop, of Leicestershire, began building cars

with wheels having single flanges on the inside like modern car wheels,

to run upon an elevated molding-shaped iron rail; and the many points

of superiority of this type of wheel soon led to its general adoption.

So that aside from some minor changes, the type of rails and wheels in

use at the close of the eighteenth century was practically the same as

at present.

It is probable that if the first inventors had attempted to make

locomotives to run upon the railroads then in existence they would have

been successful many years before they were, but the advantages of

railroads was not as evident then as now, and the inventors' efforts

were confined to attempts to produce locomotive wagons--automobiles--to

operate upon any road where horses and carts could be used.

Some of their creations were of the most fanciful and impractical

design, although quite a number of them were "locomotives" in the sense

that they could be propelled over the ground by their own energy, but

only at a snail's pace, and by the expenditure of a great amount of

power. Several inventors tried combining the principle of the steamboat

and the locomotive in the same vehicle, and in 1803 a Philadelphian by

the name of Evans made a steam dredge and land-wagon combined which

was fairly successful in both capacities of boat and wagon. He called

his machine the "Oruktor Amphibious," and upon one occasion made a

trip through the streets of Philadelphia, and then plunged into the

Schuylkill River and continued his journey on the water. But as he was

unable to arouse anything but curiosity, the financiers refusing to

take his machine seriously, he finally gave up his attempts to solve

the problem of steam locomotion.

The year before this, in 1802, Richard Trevithick, in England, had

been more successful in his attempts at producing a locomotive. He

produced a steam locomotive that operated on the streets of London

and the public highways, hauling a wagonload of people. But the

unevenness of the roads proved disastrous to his engine, and as it

could make no better time than a slow horse, it was soon abandoned. But

Trevithick had learned from this failure that a good roadbed was quite

as essential to the success of a locomotive as the machine itself,

and two years later he produced what is usually regarded as the first

railway locomotive. This was built for the Merthyr-Tydvil Railway in

South Wales, and on several occasions hauled loads of ten tons of iron

at a fair rate of speed. It was not considered a success financially,

however, and was finally abandoned.