1849.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



137 



which leads to cprtmntij. it is siire/y to he preferred in a work of this 

 kind: the foundation-courses of stone must be more tedious, yet in 

 this there is nothing impractiaible; and when tlie difficulties of the 

 first courses are surmounted" (which, be it observed, wei-e over- 

 come by Mr. Stevenson himself) "the superiority of a fabric of 

 stone over one of iron will be readily admitted." This is an opin- 

 ion given four years before Mr. Rennie made his first Report, and 

 clearly proves that Mr. Stevenson (and not Mr. Rennie, as Sir 

 John's extracts imply) was the first to recommend and pronounce 

 practicable the erection of the present Bell Rock Lighthouse 

 Tower. 



Again, I refer to that part of Sir John's letter, wherein, in his 

 anxiety to show that the work was entirely under Mr. Rennie's 

 direction, he says, that on 29th October 1807, Mr. Rennie made a 

 Report, describing the progress of the works; and, among other 

 things, reported that "the cofferdam (recommended by Mr. Steven- 

 son) was not necessary." Now, on referring to the Report of 

 26th December 1806, which is n joint report, signed by Mr. Rennie 

 and Mr. Stevenson, the following paragraph will be found : 



"Sixthly^ A cott'erdam will be wanted, to the height of 4 or 5 feet, so as 

 to enable the workmen to continue so much longer than they could do were 

 the tide allowed to flow over the foundation, when it rises above the level of 

 the rock." 



But Sir John has rashly made it appear, from the way in which he 

 has stated the matter, that the said cofferdam was a notion of Mr. 

 Stevenson's, condemned by Mr. Rennie; whereas the Reports in his 

 hands not only show that it -was jointly recommended, but also that 

 it wasjfiintlt/ dispensed with, as appears from Mr. Rennie's Report of 

 29th October 1807, from vvliich Sir John quotes, which, after stating 

 "that the remainder of the articles mentioned in our Report of 

 26th December, should be provided as soon as possible," goes on to 

 say, that it is "proposed to do tlie work without a cofferdam at all. 

 There has been sufficient trial already made, to satisfy us respecting 

 its practicability w ithout a cofferdam." 



Sir John is further anxious to claim for Mr. Rennie the seleetion 

 of the material of wliich the tower was to be built, and says, that, in 

 his Report of 30th December 1805, he recommended, for the e.xte- 

 rior of the tower, Dundee granite, a stone which certainly does not 

 exist, and could not, therefore, have been proposed by Mr. Rennie; 

 but be this as it may, the selection of the stone was made after tlie 

 joint Report by Mr. Rennie and Mr. Stevenson in 1806, in which 

 they recommend .'liwf/epH granite in the following words: — "Ife 

 have no hesitation in recommending that the under part of tlie 

 building, at least as far as the first apartment, sliould be of Aber- 

 deen granite" and this material was accordingly emplnyed. Tlie 

 Dundee stone to which I suppose Sir John Rennie alludes, is the 

 well-known old red sandstone of Kingoodie, which was used in the 

 upper part of tlie Lighthouse. 



Again, in attempting to show that the work as executed is not 

 in accordance with Mr. Stevenson's original design. Sir John says, 

 "the building as erected, it will be observed, differs materially from 

 that proposed by Mr. Stevenson ; the base is much wider." Now, 

 in fact, tlie very opposite of this rash assertion is the ti ue state of 

 the case. The base of the building in Mr. Rennie's sketch is wider, 

 but the tower, as executed, has a base of 42 feet, being the same 

 diameter as that adopted by Mi. Stevenson in his original design. 



Sir John Rennie also states, that his father repeatedly visited" the 

 works, and had the "entire responsibility, superintendence, ma- 

 nagement, and direction of the whole works." WhaX Sir John's 

 idea of repcatedlg ^•isiting a work of such importance may be, I do 

 not know; but I cannot discover that Mr. Rennie was on the Bell 

 Rock more than twice (it may be thrice) during the whole four years 

 occupied in its erection. His first visit was in 1807, "when the 

 workmen were preparing the rock to receive the foundation of the 

 Lighthouse" (see his Report, October 29, 1807), and the second in 

 1808, after the work had been brought to a close for the season, at 

 which time only three courses of masonry had been built; and if 

 ever he was a third time on the Rock, it was not during the build- 

 ing operations. It thus appears, that Mr. Rennie never saw a 

 single stone of the building laid; and Sir John's statement, that he 

 had the "entire responsibility, superintendence, management, and 

 direction of the whole works," and "repeatedly visited" it, stands, 

 therefore, in striking contrast with the real facts of the case. 



Again, Sir Jolin Rennie says, that, "it does not appear from Mr. 

 Stevenson's book that he made separate Reports to the Commision- 

 ers during the construction of the works." Now, to this I oppose 

 tlie statement, made in my letter of the 9th February last, that 

 Mr. Stevenson continued to rejjort directly to the Lighthouse Com- 

 missioners as to the progress of the works; and the jiroof of this 

 assertion is simple. Thus, among the Minutes of the General 

 Meeting of Commissioners, of 8tli January 1808, is the following: 



— "Read Report by Mr. Stevenson on the different operations con- 

 nected with the Bell Ruck Lighthouse, which the Commissioners 

 approved of, and earnestly recommend the most persevering exer- 

 tions in the prosecution of this undertaking." The minutes also 

 notice the reading and approval of Mr. Stevenson's Reports on the 

 progress of the Bell Rock works at the following dates, viz. 14th 

 January 1809, 5th January 1810, and 14th July 1810, when the 

 ivorks were nearly completed, beside several reports, in the form of 

 letters, in the course of the operations. 



After the instances I have given, I think I am warranted in say- 

 ing, that Sir John Rennie was bound, before publicly calling in 

 question the merit so long and generally acknowledged as due to a 

 member of the same profession, to have seen that liis averments 

 were more in accordance with facts; and as it must be as irksome 

 to the reader as it is to me to follow him through the maze of error 

 which his letter contains, I willingly proceed to another part of the 

 subject, and leave him to account for such discrepancies and mis- 

 statements if he can. 



Although I am desirous that all who take an interest in this 

 matter should peruse the accompanying Letters, which passed 

 between Sir John Rennie and myself, 1 am well aware tliat many 

 professional men will not willingly take that trouble. For their 

 satisfaction I have prepared the accompanying Plate, which shows, 

 on one scale, Mr. Stevenson's original design of the Bell Rock 

 Lighthouse of 1800, Mr. Rennie's sketch of 1807, and the work as 

 actually completed in 1811, and also Smeaton's Eddystone. Refer- 

 ring to that Plate, I beg leave to make the following statement of 

 facts, most of which are embodied in my appended Letters. 



1.?/, In 1800, Mr. Stevenson, as Engineer to tlie Lighthouse 

 Board, made the design of the Bell Rock Lighthouse, shown in 

 Plate VIII. fig. 1, with detailed sections, and plans of floors, and 

 courses (figs. 5, 6, 7, and 8); and I assert, without fear of contra- 

 diction, that it embraces all the peculiarities which distinguish the 

 Bell Rock from the Eddystone. 



2f/, That, in 1800, Mr. Stevenson accompanied that design by an 

 elaborate Report, in which, after detailing his inquiries and re- 

 searches as to other works, and the various devices that had occur- 

 red to him for establishing a light, he concludes by '■'■giinu.g the pre- 

 ference to" a stone tower, and states that the practicability of its 

 construction is certain. 



3d, The Board, in 1803, consulted Mr. Telford; and in 1804 they 

 applied to Mr. Rennie (I believe on Mr. Stevenson's suggestion) as 

 the oldest and most eminent engineer of the day, for his advice as 

 to the practicability of the proposed work. In this there was 

 nothing extraordinary. It was very natural and proper that the 

 Commissioners, before embarking in a work of such magnitude and 

 difficulty, should wish to have the view of their own engineer con- 

 firmed by so high an authority as Mr. Rennie; but can this destroy 

 the effect of the evidence, to which I have referred, that Mr. Ste- 

 venson originally projected the stone tower, or detract from the 

 ci-edit due to him for having done so ? 



4rt, j\lr. Rennie corroborated Mr. Stevenson's views as to the 

 practicability of building a stone lighthouse, and recommended 

 that it be adopted, and specially referred to the model prepared by 

 Mr. Stevenson. 



5th, The work was resolved on, and in 1806 a Bill was obtained 

 to enable the Commissioners of Northern Lights to borrow money 

 for its erection. In the memorial presented to Parliament on that 

 occasion, the Commissioners state, that "The Memorialists have 

 received several estimates of the expense of erecting a Lighthouse 

 upon the Bell Rock. They have more particularly had recourse to 

 the professional abilities of Mr. Rennie and Mr. Stevenson, civil 

 engineers, frjm wliose reports they have reason to believe that the 

 sum will not exceed 43,000/." Tlie following is an extract from 

 the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons, to whom 

 the Bill was referred : — 



Extract from Report of the Committee of the House of Commo^is. 



" The Committee to whom was referred the Petition of the Commissioners 

 of the Northern Lighthouses, and to report the matter to the House, as it 

 shall appear to them, — 



" Proceeded to examine Mr. Robert Stevenson, civil engineer, who, in his 

 capacity of Engineer for the Northern Lighthouses, has erected six Light- 

 hcuises in the northern parts of the kingdom; and has made the erection of 

 a Lighthouse on the Cape or Bell Rock more particularly his study, — espe- 

 cially since the loss of about 70 sail of vessels in a storm wliich happened 

 upon the coast in the month of December 1799, by which numerous ships 

 were driven from their course along the shore, and from their moorings in 

 Yarmouth Roads, and other places of anchorage, southward of the Frith of 

 Forth, and wrecked upon the eastern coast of Scotland, as referred to in the 

 Report niaiie to this House in the month of July 1803; the particulars of 

 which he also confirms: That the Bell Rock is most dangerously situated, 



19 



