f-i i 



Figure 74. — Baldwin's conical steam joint. 

 Compression pipe joint as shown in U.S. 

 patent, September 10, 1834. National Archives 

 photograph. 



When satisfied that all was ready for a public 

 exhibition, a round-trip to Lancaster was made, 

 accompanied by the canal commissioners, the civil 

 engineers of the road, and a number of invited guests, 

 Mr. Brandt being on the foot-board with my brother. 

 During the trip to Lancaster the commissioners and 

 engineers took turns in riding on the engine. Among 

 the invited guests were Dr. R. M. Patterson, director 

 of the U.S. Mint, Adam Eckfeldt, chief coiner, our 

 uncle, Franklin Peale, then assayer, melter and 

 refiner, afterwards chief coiner and inventor of the 

 steam-coining press on which the first steam coinage 

 was struck, March 23, 1836, Mr. Thomas Chauncey 

 and a number of others. M. W. Baldwin was the 

 only invited guest that did not accompany us. 



William Norris, though a rival builder, was sincere 

 in his congratulations, and made himself the life of 

 the party. At our dinner at Lancaster he spoke with 

 enthusiasm of the success and unexpected steadiness 

 with outside connections, saying that from it he dated 

 a new era in locomotive building; he could clearly 

 see the time would come for increasing the number of 

 driving-wheels, heavier engines, with a better distri- 

 bution of weight on the road, making available and 

 using more effectively the steam-power of the engine 

 with less injury to the roadway; he called on the 

 commissioners for their opinion of our engine. 



Mr. Jas. Cameron replied that they had been very 

 reluctant in consenting that an outside-connected 

 engine should be built; that they had given way to 

 Messrs. Sellers backed as they were lay John Brandt 



in whom he had great confidence; that he must con- 

 fess to being very agreeably disappointed, as all who 

 had seen the performance could bear witness to the 

 great steadiness of the engine on the road; he had 

 ridden on all their engines, and this was certainly the 

 steadiest; then turning to me he said: "You now see 

 the wisdom of our insisting on the outside supports 

 from the truck frame. Where would we have been 

 left if the engine had been allowed to rock on its 

 center-pin with every stroke of the pistons?" 



When about taking the cars for the return trip, I 

 crawled all around the engine; then standing on a 

 level track, directing Mr. Cameron's attention to the 

 side supports, I took hold of one and raised it clear 

 of its bed groove. 



"What," asked Mr. Cameron, "is the axle broken? 

 We must have a new one put in before we start; I 

 feared they were too light to bear the thrust." 



Going to the other side, and taking hold of the other 

 one I found it jambed, and was obliged to jar it with 

 a hammer before I could raise it. "What," asked Mr. 

 Cameron, "is this one also broken?" 



I directed the pins to be taken out to show the slots. 

 As this was being done Brandt came to my assistance, 

 with the duplicates he had made in hand; showing 

 them to Mr. Cameron with the ones that had been 

 slotted, he said, "With your positive order I could 

 not let the engine go on trial without having these in 

 case they were required." 



"Ah! Johnnie, Johnnie," said Mr. C, "you are a 

 sad man, I see you believe in the old Scotch adage 

 that the proof of the pudding is in chewing the string. 

 I think this time you have chewed it pretty fine. I 

 was going to say take off the things, but on second 

 thought they had better be left on as a safeguard in 

 case of rocking too far on a sudden lurch." The 

 other engine went out without any side supports. 



On our way back to Philadelphia my brother came 

 from the engine into the car, and asked the commis- 

 sioners how they liked the performance of the engine; 

 the answer was, that it was perfectly satisfactory, and 

 if we would call at their office, an order on the treas- 

 urer would be ready for us. We had no written con- 

 tract; the understanding was if the engine performed 

 satisfactorily we were to be paid 85,000. When I 

 called I was handed a draft for $5,500, Mr. Cameron 

 explaining that the $500 had been added for the lever 

 attachment to throw part of the weight of the forward 

 end of the engine on the drivers instead of applying 

 the Miller attachment. [62] 



178 



