1825.] 
existing why steam-boats, as towing- 
vessels, should not be generally adopted 
in the navigation of the Thames. The 
great waste of time in the ordinary 
navigation between London, Oxford, 
Abingdon, &c., is more than equivalent 
to the expense for which the loan of 
a tow-boat might be procured, provided 
such boats were once established. 
- In canal navigation, also, there ap- 
pears to be no real objection to the 
application of steam-boats. Ithas been 
urged, that the ripple of water pro- 
duced by the momentum of a barge 
travelling six or seven miles an hour; 
would materially injure the banks of a 
canal, If all canal boats were built 
with a sharp head and stern, and a pro- 
jecting cut-water, instead of the present 
clumsy build of the major part of these 
craft, the ripple would not only be in 
a great measure prevented, but the 
friction of the vessel through the water 
greatly diminished. As to the ques- 
tion, whether the power of a steam- 
engine in propelling boats be more ad- 
vantageous when affixed to a given ves- 
sel, or to be used as a detached steam- 
boat, no general rule can be given. For 
passage vessels, or others making a long 
continuous run, an engine erected in the 
vessel appears far preferable on several 
accounts. But for the purposes of ca- 
nal navigation, a series of steam tow- 
boats, placed at convenient intervals, 
would probably be found more advan- 
tageous; as a detached steam-boat, 
which had towed one or more barges a 
given extent, might be kept in almost 
constant requisition. On any canal, 
therefore, where considerable’ traffic 
already exists, there can be little doubt 
that the use of steam-boats would be 
highly advantageous. 
It may be said that many difficulties 
attend the application of this agent to 
the larger class of vessels going long 
voyages: such as the great expense of 
the larger engines—their considerable 
weight, and the tonnage of coals requi- 
site—the liability of the machinery to 
get out of repair during bad weather 
at sea, without the possibility of getting 
it repaired —and the constant possibi- 
lity of accident from the bursting of the 
steam boiler.* 
* I shall avoid all notice of the New 
Gas Engine, which is stated, by the inven-, 
tor, to be a substitute in all cases for the 
steam-engine. It willxbe time enough to 
reason on the operation of that engine 
when it shall have been submitted to the 
test of experience for twelve months, 
Prevention of Liability to Accidents in Steam Vessels. 
27 
* With regard to the two former ob- 
jections—the bulk of the engine and its 
appendages—this is to a certain degree 
obviated by the use of high-pressure 
engines instead of the low-pressure, or 
condensing engines, for working ships. 
As to the third objection, there appears 
to be no possible way of protecting the 
paddle-work of a steam-engine from the 
force of a heavy sea, without so far 
covering it as to prevent the full action 
of the paddles, indispensably necessary 
to the momentum of the vessel. For 
if the paddle acts on dead water, or is 
placed with its centre below the sur- 
face, it immediately ceases to exert its 
greatest power asa propelling agent. In 
a boisterous sea, therefore, the paddle- 
wheel will be often submerged ccn- 
siderably below the surface on one side 
the ship, whilst the other paddle-wheel 
will be elevated out of the water: in 
either case. producing a considerable 
strain on the gear of the engines, and 
rendering the occurrence of accident 
always probable, to an extent beyond 
what would admit of reparation on 
board a vessel at sea. 
The last objection (though not the 
least) is the considerable liability to 
accident from the explosion of the 
steam-boiler. But it is obvious that all 
the accidents which have occurred with 
steam-boilers, have been occasioned 
either by the imperfect workmanship 
or bad materials of the boiler, or by the 
superintendant of the engine urging the 
steam beyond the degree of elasticity, 
the thickness, or strength the boiler is 
able to withstand. Perhaps the latter 
has been the immediate origin in nine 
instances out of ten. By way of pre- 
venting the risk of this, it would at first 
view appear sufficient, if the manage- 
ment of a steam-engine were only en- 
trusted to the care of a tolerable good 
engineer, and a steady man; did we not’ 
know, from constant observation, that 
men who are daily accustomed even to’ 
the most dangerous employment be- 
come habitually negligent and insen- 
sible to danger. In such cases, it is 
not sufficient security to the public that 
accidents have not hitherto happened, 
when working the engine with the 
steam at a given pressure ; for the boiler 
of a steam-engine is subject to very 
considerable and unequal destruction’ 
from. the action of the fire; and that 
corrosion will be in proportion to the 
sulphureous quality of the coals em- 
ployed. 
Notwithstanding the greater experise 
E 2 of 
