discovery that pig-iron can, whilst in the (luid slate, be 

 purified ... by forcing currents of air under 

 it . . . ," though Marticn had failed to observe the 

 use of temperature by the "dellation of the ironitself; 

 and for discovering that — 



when the carbon has been all. or nearly all. dissipated, 

 the temperature increases to an almost inconceivable extent, 

 so that the mass, when containing only as much carbon as is 

 requisite to constitute with it cast steel . . . still retains a 

 perfect degree of fluidity. 



This, says "Sidcros," was no new observation; "it had 

 been before the metallurgical world, both practical 

 and scientific, for centuries," but Bessemer was the 

 first to show^ that this generation of heat could be 

 attained by blowing cold air through the melted iron. 

 Mushet goes on to show, however, thai the steel thus 

 produced by Bessemer w-as not commercially valuable 

 because the sulphur and phosphorous remained, and 

 the dispersion of oxide of iron through the mass 

 "imported to it the inveterate hot-short quality which 

 no subsequent operation could e.\pel." '"Sideros" 

 concludes that Bessemer's discovery was "at least for 

 a time" now shelved and arrested in its progress; and 

 it had been left "to an individual of the name of 

 Mushet" to show^ that if "fluid metallic manganese" 

 were combined with the fluid Bessemer iron, the por- 

 tion of manganese thus alloyed would unite with the 

 oxygen of the oxide and pass off as slag, removing the 

 hot-short quality of the iron. Robert Mushet had 

 demonstrated his product to "Sideros" and had 

 patented his discovery, though "not one print, literary 

 or scientific, had condescended to notice it." 



"Sideros" viewed Mushet's discovery as a "spark 

 amongst dry faggots that will one day light up a blaze 

 which will astonish the world when the unfortunate 

 in\^entor can no longer reap the fruits of his life-long 

 toil and unflinching perseverance." In an ensuing 

 letter he ''^ summed up the situation as he saw it: 



Nothing that Mr. Mushet can hereafter invent can entitle 

 him to the merit of Mr. Bessemer's great discovery . . . 

 and . . . nothing that Mr. Bessemer may hereafter patent 

 can deprive Mr. Robert Mushet of having been the first to 

 remove the obstacles to the success of Mr. Bessemer's 

 process. 



Bessemer still did not intervene in the newspaper 



discussion; nor had he had any serious supporters, at 

 least in the early stasje."" 



Publication in the Mining Journal o( n list of Mushet's 

 patents,"* evidently in response to .Sideros" complaint, 

 now presented Bes.senier with notice of Robert 

 Mushet's acti\it\. e\en if he had not already observed 

 his claims as they were presented to the Patent Ollice. 

 Mushet, said the .Mirii>ig Journal — 



appears to inlciid to cany on his researches from the 

 point where Mr. J. G. Marticn left otf and is proceeding 

 on the Bessemer plan of patenting each idea as it occurs to 

 his imaginative brain. 1 Ic proposes to make both iron and 

 steel but does not appear to have quite decided as to the 

 course of action ... to accomplish his object, and therefore 

 claims various processes, some of which are never likely to 

 realize the inventor's expectations, although decidedly 

 novel, whilst others are but slight modification of inventions 

 which have already been tried and failed. 



The contemporary attitude is reflected in another 

 comment by the Mining Journal:''^ 



Although the application of chemical knowledge to 

 the manufacture of malleable iron cannot fail to produce 

 beneficial results, the quality of the metal depends more 

 upon the mechanical than the chemical processes . . . 

 Without wishing in any way to discourage the iron chemists, 

 we have no hesitation in giving this as our opinion which we 

 shall maintain until the contrary be actually proved. With 

 regard to steel, there may be a large field for chemical 

 research . . . however, we believe that unless the iron be 

 of a nature adapted for the manufacture of steel by ordinary 

 processes, the purely chemical inventions will only give a 

 metal of a very uniform quality. 



.\nother correspondent. William Green, was of the 

 opinion that Mushet's "new compoimds and alloys," 

 promised well as an auxiliary to the Bessemer process 

 but that "the evil which it was intended to remove was 

 more visionar\' than real." Bessemer's chief dilliculty 

 was the phosphorus, not the oxide of iron "as Mr. 

 Mushet assumes." This, Bessemer no doubt wotdd 

 deal with in due course, but meanwhile he did well 

 "to concentrate his energies upon the steel opcra- 



*' Ibid., p. 823. Mushet's distinction between an inventor 

 and a patentee is indicative of the disdain of a son of David 

 Mushet for an amateur (see also p. 886). 



-" One William Green had commented extensively on Dasid 

 Mushet's early praise of the Bessemer process and on his 

 sudden reversal in favor of Martien soon after Bessemer's British 

 Association address {Mechanics' Magazinf, 1856, vol. 65, p. 373 

 ff.l. Green wrote from Caledonian Road, and the proximity 

 to Baxter House, Bessemer's London headquarters, su£;gests the 

 possibility that Green was writing for Bessemer. 



2' Mtmns; Journal, 1857, vol. 27, p. 764. 



=» Ibid , p. 764. 



34 



BULLETIN 218: CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE MUSEUM OI- HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 



