372 INTRODUCTION 



Although, however, we have been presented with a view 

 of De Cans as elevated through the medium of Arago s 

 eloquent Eloge, when endeavouring with true national 

 zeal to claim the honour of the invention of the steam- 

 engine (even on this slender proof) for his own country 

 this position seems only to have been assigned to him 

 in the present instance, to make his downfall the more 

 signally complete ; for Mr. Muirhead most dispassion 

 ately observes : u Considering the uselessness of the 

 contrivance of De Caus, and the doubtfulness existing 

 as to that of the Marquis, it is, perhaps, rather sur 

 prising that the invention of the steam-engine should 

 have been attributed to either of them, with such 

 great confidence as both English and French writers 

 have alternately shown. 7 Unfortunately for this anti 

 thesis, the one invention is not &quot; worthless,&quot; and the 

 other is not properly to be charged with &quot; doubtfulness.&quot; 

 It may be justly said, in one sense, that all the engines 

 preceding those made in Watt s time are &quot; worthless,&quot; 

 but we have here a wide range. In 1615 De 

 Cans s invention was not a worthless&quot; although its 

 worth was limited to its demonstrating one simple 

 mode of applying an important elementary principle. 

 And the vast amount of accumulated evidence 

 relating to the Marquis of Worcester s Engine indis 

 putably removes all &quot; doubtfulness&quot; as to its actual 

 accomplishment and general construction, so far as 

 words, irrespective of absolute models and drawings, 

 can supply information ; and the absence of these latter 

 accessories is traceable solely to the lapse of time, 

 combined with the indifference of the public to designs 

 that went beyond general information on such matters, 

 as well as from their exceeding the common manufac 

 turing skill, and not captivating the small commercial 

 enterprize of that age. 



