1839,] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



403 



Worcester, seriously implicated in the latter years of the reigii of the 

 Stuarts, was coniined in the Tower of London ; one day, according to 

 tradition, the lid of the pot in which his diinier was being cooked, sud- 

 denly tlcw off- " What is to be done in such a melancholy den, unless 

 we have the liberty of thought?" The Marquis set himself to work, 

 then, to think of the stranj^e phenomenon which he had just witnessed. 

 Then it o- cured to him, that the same power which raised the pot-lid 

 would, under other circumstances, become a useful and convenient motive 

 power. Oil recoveriug his liberty, he published, in 1661^, ih a b.ook en- 

 titled the Gntun/ i>f Inve.ulions^ the means by which he proposed to carry 

 out his idea.* This method, as to its essential cbaia(*er. seems, as far as 

 it can be understood, to be the bomb half tilled with the liquid and the 

 ascending tube, which we have just described. 



This bomb, this same tube, are described in the " Raison des forces 

 raouvantes," t a work of Solomon de Chus. There the idea is presented 

 cJearly, simply, and without any exaggeration. Its origin has nothing 

 romantic; it tells no story of civil war, nor of celebrated duugeons, not 

 even of the lifting of the pot-lid of a prisoner's kettle. J But, what is 

 worth much more, in a question of imoritv, it is, by its publication, 

 forty-eight years older than the Centunj of InuentionSy and forty-one 

 years antecedent to the imprisonment of Worcester 



Thus brought back to a comparison of dates, the dispute would seem 

 to be closed ; for who could maintain that 1618 did not happen before 

 1663? But those wliose principal object seems to have been to remove 

 eveiy French name from this important chapter in the history of the 

 sciences, § suddenly shifted their ground, when La Raison des forces 



* lMARQUIS of WORCESTER'S ENGINE. 



B is the boiler ; C, one of the vessels with a pipe to deliver the water to 

 an elevated cistern D. 



>iow suppose tlie vessel C to be supplied from a cistern of cold water A by a 

 pipe, so that it would be lilled on opening the cock E, and attei-wards closing 

 h\ if, when the steam in the boiler is of sufficient strength, the cock F be 

 opened, the pressure of the steam on thi; water in C would cause it to ascend 

 from C, through the pipe a into the cistern D. The vessel C being emptied, 

 and the cock F being shut, it woidd refill with water ou again opening the 

 cock E. Another vessel C, and it5 cot k.s and pipes, are necessary to com- 

 plete the species of water en.ine indicated by the description, and these may 

 be on the other side of the boiler. — Tredyold, 



i .The Reason of moviug Forces. 



{ M. Arago, with the* same bnd tasie which influences the stile and malti-r of iliis 

 memoir in too many placfs, heie cudtMVuiirs to i!iio\v unnecessary ridicule ii|Hm a 

 legend, wliich, by its veiy ainiplicity, lie is wcM aware gives a strung Hiiaraniee of its 

 truth. The flimsy story ui Suloi'ii>n dc Cans, wanted all the support of sndi wteichi-d 

 cavils; l>Ht we should have liopud that M . Ar;igo, wliilu endeavoiniug to maintain his cha- 

 racter, as a man of impartidUly and freidfun from prejudice, by the choice of such a 

 subject as Watt, wouhi have found it useful to snpi'juri "in the details, what lie will not 

 otherwise gain credit for a^ a whole. This iaiim old a game of the etif my, however, 

 t.> deceive the world; Ilie French are too fund of realizing: Svvift's sarcasm of knockiDi^ 

 down the other's mound instead of raisins^ their own. It was thus that Voltaire, to 

 acquire a reputation for his Henriade, alteinpted to reduce, in liis Essai siir la Pocsie 

 Epiijm, Shakspeare and Millon to his own level. M. Arasjo, however, with all his 

 talk about roinance, has set afloat a more romantic F-ench sentimental story, abont the 

 interview between the Marquis of Worcester and Sohmion de Cans in a mad house. 

 Why did not M. Arago, a' the same time, lau^h at tlie traditions of Archimedes and 

 ihe bath, Galileo and the lamp, ami Newion and (he apple i why not conjure up for 

 these a similar ribaldry of style, aud an equal lowiie-s^ of tliougbti — J\'ote of the 

 translator. 



§ If M. Arago can tell what good French names have done in the history of the 

 steam-engine, he is welcome to leave tlieie as many as he likes, and to disinter .\% 

 many volumes as lie pleases fmm ihe pondeTOUS libraries. lie cannot deprive our 

 race of a Savcry, a Watt, and a Trevithick, of applying the steanwngine to draining, 

 to mining, to every br;inrh of manufactures, to the pathless ocean, and the iron road, 

 the inventions of the hi^U and low pressure piintiples, and their convtriion in this' 

 continent and the other to many arts of peace and war. To all the real Ihe French 

 are welcome— tlie mane nnmen of crainmioL; into such company the innunurahle men 

 who have talked, and who have done no more. France is too rich in great names 

 has too many realms of science exclusively her own, to humble herself to tlie indul- 

 gence of such petty jealousies, winch do wrong to a noble country, and to a memory 

 which every man of science must honour jnd respect. There are nobler pUces ibr 

 M. Arago than the tribune, either of tlie academy, or of the senate hou^e. This 

 memoir is but one of the many instances of the mischevious system of which it is a 

 part, invented by Louis XIV; this deplorable system has praised every tjaitor and 

 villain down to the present time. — Note of (he translator. 



Mouvantes was brought out of the crowded libiaries in which it had 

 been buried. They broke, without hesitation, their ancient idol- The 

 Marquis of Worcester was sacrificed to the desire of annulling the claims 

 of Solomon de Cans ; the bomb placed on the blazing furnace and 

 its ascending tube ceased, in fact, to be the true germs of the present 

 steam-engine.* 



As to myself, I cannot concede that he has done nothing useful, 

 who, reflecting on the enormous expansion of steam greatly heated, 

 first saw that it could be used to raise great masses of liquid to any 

 imaginable height. I cannot admit that some remembrance is not due 

 to the mechanic, who, the first also, described a machine fit for realising 

 such results. We must not forget that we cannot judge properly of the 

 merit of an invention, except by transporting one's self in thought to 

 the period at which it was conceived, and divesting the mind for the mo- 

 ment of all the information which ages, subsequent to the period of this 

 invention, have contributed. Let us imagine an ancient mechanic, 

 Archimedes for instance, consulted on the means of raising to a great 

 height, the water contained in a vast closed metallic recipient. He 

 would certainly have spoken of great levers, pulleys, simple or combined, 

 perhaps of his ingenious screw; but what would be his surprise if, 

 to resolve the problem, some one proposed merely a bundle of sticks 

 and a match? Will, 1 ask, would any one dare to refuse the title of 

 an invention to a process with which the inunortul author of the first and 

 true principles of statistics and hydrostatics would have been astonished? t 

 The apparatus of ^olomou de Caus, this inetaljie envelope, within which 

 was created an almost indefinite motive power, by means of a faggot and 

 a match, will always figure nobly in the histoiy of the steam-engine. 



It is very dotibtlul whether tioiomon de Caus and Worcester ever had 

 their apparatus constructed : J this honour belongs to an Englishman. 

 Captain Savcry. I assimilate the niaahine of this engineer to that of 



• It has bekO primed that J. B. Porta gave, in 1606, in his SpiritaH, nine or ten 

 years before ihe publication of llie work ol Solomon de Caus, Uie description of « 

 roncliine iniended to raise water by means ol the elastic power of steam. 1 have 

 Bhown elsewhere that ihe leariied Neapolilau bpoke neither directly nor indirectly, of 

 any machine m the passage alluded to ; but that bis purpsse, his only purpose, was 

 10 determine, experinienlally , tlie relative volumes of water and steam ; that in the 

 little experiuieulal appaialus employed for this put pose, ateam could only raise the 

 liquid, according to the very words of the author, a few inches ; that in every descrip- 

 tion of this experiment, there is not a single word implying that Porta was acquainted 

 wiih the pow«r of this agent, and the possibility of applying it in the production of au 

 ellective maclitue. 



Can It be supposed that I am obliged to quote Porta, if it be only on account of his 

 researches on the traiistormalii.n of water iulo sleam ( But I should then reply, that 

 ihis phenomenon had alre.tdy been studied with attention by Professor Besson, ol" 

 Orieaus, toward.", the middle of the sixleeolh cenlmy, and that one of ihe ireatises of 

 Ihis mechaJiic, dated ISCy, especially cunlams au ere^y ou the determination of the 

 relative volumes ol water and steam. — Nute of M. Arago. 



The Candour of M. Arago seems to fail him more and more ; but we leave this 

 portion lu the able casligation of the Athenaeum, hertafter quoted.— i\'o(e of the 

 translator, 



t Piitliug out of the question the illogicaliiy of this pseado argument, we mav sim- 

 ply obseive that it is but a pari of the false system by which M. Arago tiuds it 

 necessary to boUler up iheir shallow cl.iinis. Here we have a reason for secluding 

 the anecdote ol Authemius {p 4U'/) ui the obscurity of a note, and ihe reason for slurring 

 it over aa of suspicious auiheiiticiiy ; for adniiiiing what M. Arago says concerning 

 the propcities ol Ilie apparatus of Solomon de Cans, was it not anticipated by the 

 operation of Anthcmiua ■ He ce- tainly knew that steam was a nmlivc power, or why 

 did he attempt such a po^verful experiment in the house of Zeuo ? Anihemius cei- 

 aliily knew of the bundie of aticks a/id a match.— Note of the translator. 



X i'liere is no doubi as lo the case ot Solomon de Caus— he never constructed a 

 macliine; ami there is none as to the Marquis of Worcester, for he certainty did. 

 We have done suincient to shew tlie groundlessness ol M. Arago's pielensioiis.oo that 

 we cannot do belter than sum up ihe questiuu wilh the following able remai'ks of the 

 Athencetim. . 



*' VV hen the revival of learning, towards the conclusion of the dark ages, exhumed 

 once more the knowledge uf the (JreeliS, Hero's work was one of ihe first productions 

 of the piess. It gave an excitement to the mechanical talent of the age— many ingeni- 

 ous men imitated and extended tlie ci>ntrivances of Hero, and produced ingenious 

 mechanical toys; and Geibert, Cardan, Mathesias, Bapiisla Porta, Solomon de Caus, 

 Giovanni Branca, Cornelius Drebel, Kircher, and others, imitated the machines uf 

 Hero, and made some modifications of their structure, and extcuded their applicaiions. 



" Out of this group, M. Arago selectsioue of the least di^tinguisbtd — bolomon de 

 Caus— and endeavouis to exalt him to the pedestal of fame, as the inventor of the 

 steam-eueine, because, forsooth, he look np the iu\entions of Hero, and slightly modi- 

 fied them The following are the facts of the case :— I, It is not known of what country 

 De Caus was a native; -2, U is well known that he was engineer and architect to 

 Charles the First, and was employed in designing bydiaulic oinam- nts for hi^ Palace 

 of Richmond ■ 3, That he dedicates the second part ot his work to Charles s sister, the 

 Electie^s Palestine; 4. That he resided, fo. a time, at Heidelberg; 5, That a French 

 edition of his work was dedicated to ihe king ot France, in whose service he appears, 

 at one time, to have been engaged ; ti. That, among;^! other things in bis b..ok, he 

 describes a machine for throwing up a jet of water, in a mann. r similar to Hero's 

 steam iet • an invention which he does not even claim as his own, but describes 

 amongst a'mimber of others ; " dont il w ptut faire divtrses machines, j en donnejai 

 ici la demonstration d'une." ., , l ^ n • .i ■. rvi t» « 



On this slender ground, M- Arago builds the following theory :— 1, That De Caus 

 was certainly a Frenchman 1 2, Thai this machine, dvsciibed by De Caus, to make a 

 small iet of water olay ornamentally in theair, was ceitainly his own inveniion,.anil 

 was literally a steam-engine, suitable to the purpose oi diammg mines of water! I 

 3 That Solomon de Caus is thejnventorof the sleam-engme^! ! ! 



" To this we reply —1, That De Caus may liave been a German, a Frenchman, ao 

 n^Iishman or a Jcw; -2. That De Caus is, in all probability, only describing the in- 

 vention of another, and that he puts foith no claim to orii;mality ; and 3, That ihe 

 invention, if his own, is a inert- machine for projecting au oi nameutal jet ol water for 

 a ganlen, infirior to many of Hero's toys. ..... ,. ,, , ... 



'' But we canmd b»t believe that M. Arago himself is aware <d the weakness of his 

 cause ■ for in explaining the machine of De Caus— whicli he cidL-* a veritable machine 

 de vaieur'.propred opirerdeatpuisemem-h^hA&xiOX mserted De Caiis's o«n drawing 

 of the machine, whhh would have at once shown its nature as a Iri.ial and useiea* 

 toy ■ but he givea a figure aud description of his own mvcntion, so altered as to kwd 



