president's address — SECTION B. 65 



conceived the idea earlier tlian he did. The priority of the thought, 

 as well as its practical execution in a primitive way, is even attributed 

 to the ancient Chinese, for it is said that Wm. Kelly, of Kentucky, 

 the chronological forerunner of Bessemer, was indebted to members 

 of that race, whom he employed, for the knowledge. However this 

 may be, Kelly made his first unpractical attempts at blowing compressed 

 air through a body of molten pig iron, in a manner related to our present 

 practice, in 1847 (b). The mechanical problems involved were, how- 

 ever, too much for him, and even in 1857 he was scarcely a step further 

 with the translation of his pneumatic concept into the language of 

 practical mechanics. It is here that the genius of Henry Bessemer 

 shone : and who knows but that, were it not for him, a succession of 

 Wm. Kellys might still be tinkering away at the proper solution of 

 the scheme to this day ! Neither Kelly, nor subsequently Parry, had 

 the special subtlety of feeUng for mechanical execution which dis- 

 tinguished Sir Henry, and the latter's priority of real invention remains 

 unaffected by the abortive efforts of a few others to utilise the same 

 principle. As Wedding (c) remarks, apropos of this point—" It can 

 hardly be called an invention for someone to have an idea respecting 

 the application of an otherwise well-known natural law without at the 

 same time being able to indicate adequate ways and me^ns for its 

 execution." Incidentally, it will be recalled that to these early men, 

 including Bessemer himself, the feasibility of the scheme was considered 

 to lie in the sufficiency of the calorific value of a modicum of carbon 

 in pig iron to maintain a mass of the latter at a high temperature, 

 while it was itself being consumed. 



Leaving this digression we may resume the historical thread. 

 Passing over Murtien's proposal to drive out the impurities from pig 

 iron by blowing a blast of air through it while on its way, in a liquid 

 state in a runway or gutter, from the blast furnace to the puddling 

 furnace, but in which proposal no appreciation of the essential fact 

 was expressed that enough heat would thereby be evolved to keep the 

 metal in that state, and, in fact, to overheat it instead of cooling it, 

 we come to Parry's attempt at steam-refining in 1856. This consisted 

 of blowing a current of superheated steam, accompanied by a large 

 quantity of air, through a small number of tuyeres into a small rever- 

 berator}^ furnace erected immediately in front of a blast furnace, and 

 holding a small charge of pig, direct tapped into it (35cwts.). The 

 arrangement saved the fuel for the remelting, and also removed some 

 sulphur, but the method was finally abandoned. The decomposition 

 of the steam undoubtedly caused an absorption of heat, and the claim 

 advanced, that an important saving of fuel was effected, maybe boiled 

 down to the fact first stated, i.e., the abolition of the remelting. 



A much more important and promising idea, constituting, in fact. 

 a quite serious rival claimant for priority, which, but for a managerial 

 veto placed on further experimenting after the failure of the first 

 attempt, might have deprived Bessemer of his laurels as far as they 



(6) Jos. D. Weeks. Trans. Am. Inst. Min. Engrs, 1896, vol. XXVI. 

 (r) Percy- Wedding, " Iron and Steel," 1874. 

 E 



