40 
NATURE 
[May 11, 1899 
nature of the product, and not at all from the point of view 
of chemical union. When, therefore, in 1803, Claude Louis 
Berthollet published his ‘* Essai de Statique Chimique,” it 
appeared that the action, of what for the moment I may be 
permitted to classify as the action of ¢rvaces upon masses, was in 
a fair way to be elucidated for the following reason. Berthollet 
pointed out that ‘‘in comparing the action of bodies on each 
other which depends on their affinities and mutual proportions, 
the influence of mass has to be considered.” Unfortunately in 
succeeding years the views of Prout, the courteous opponent 
of Berthollet, prevailed, mainly through the powerful aid of 
Dalton, who published also in 1803 his first table of atomic 
weights. Hence the phenomena which could not be attributed 
to fixed atomic proportions were set aside and usually neglected. 
Evidently the action of one-tenth per cent. of carbon on iron 
could not be explained by the aid of combining weights. The 
century was more than half over before a school of eminent 
chemists arose, who did not insist that matter is minutely 
granular, but in all cases of change of state made calculations 
on the basis of work done, viewing internal energy as a 
quantity which should reappear when the system returns to its 
initial state. 
The production of cast iron and bar iron was rapidly increas- 
ing, and the suitability of cast iron and bar iron for the construc- 
tion of bridges became evident to engineers, among whom 
Telford was pre-eminent. A distinguished professor, a worker 
in pure science, came, in the person of Dr. Thomas Young, to 
the aid of the technical worker. The need of studying the 
mechanical properties of iron and steel was evident, and Young 
showed that the work done in permanently extending or in 
compressing iron or steel could be represented by a coefficient, 
to which he gave the name of the ‘‘ Modulus of Elasticity.” 
This coefficient has probably rendered more service in the 
development of the study of the strength of iron and steel than 
any other which has been determined. It is of great importance, 
because upon it depends the deflection which a structure will 
take under strain. Young, evidently with a view to bring home 
evidence as to the great rigidity of steel, gives in his original 
paper a quaint illustration, He therein shows that if ‘‘ Hook’s 
law holds” a hanging rod of steel would have to be 1500 miles 
long in order that the upper portions of it might be stretched to 
twice their original length. I would incidentally point out that 
on the basis of Young’s calculation, such a column 1500 miles 
high, if it were 1 foot 2,4; inches in diameter, would represent 
the output for the past year of Bessemer steel in this country 
alone. Statements of this kind had such a singular fascination 
for Sir Henry, that I have permitted myself a brief departure 
from chronological order in offering this one. 
[The President then referred to the patent granted in 1817 to 
the Rev. Robert Sterling for the ‘‘ regenerative furnace,” and 
to the work of S. B. Rogers, who introduced ‘‘ iron bottoms” 
in the puddling furnace. An interesting fact was mentioned 
which justified the claim made in the address, that Rogers was 
the pioneer of the great process afterwards known as the 
“‘basic”” process of dephosphorisation. Faraday’s work on 
alloys in 1820, and his discovery of ‘‘a carburet of iron” in 
1822 was then described, and the merits of Neilson’s discovery 
of the ‘‘hot blast” in 1828 were fully dealt with. After a 
brief reference to the work of Thomas Andrews, of Belfast, on 
the “‘heat of combination,” the President proceeded to review 
the theories of the action of the blast-furnace, and especially 
referred to the work done in the year 1846. | 
It was pointed out in 1846 that in the blast-furnace there was 
evidently a kind of tidal ebb and flow in the relations of carbon 
and of oxygen, resulting sometimes in reduction, and at others in 
oxidation or carburisation ; but the changes were all capable of 
more or less simple expression if viewed either from the atomic 
or the dynamic standpoint. As the furnaces grew in dimensions, 
their flaming tops threw a lurid glare over the country, and, 
“like the dying sunset kindled through a cleft,” revealed the 
magnitude of the problems involved in blast-furnace practice, 
which were seen to be disproportionate to their apparent sim- 
plicity. 
In the first half of the century efforts were directed mainly 
to obtaining a material—cast iron containing some 3} per cent. 
of carbon, and fusible at a temperature readily attained in the 
blast-furnace. In the second half of the century, while efforts 
to obtain this fusible material were increased, attention was 
also directed to removing the carbon, and obtaining a product 
which had a melting point of 400° C, (720° F.) higher than 
NO. 1541, VOL. 60] 
cast iron. This product was either cast directly into ingot 
moulds or recarburised to the extent necessary to constitute the 
various gradations of steel. Sheffield hardly knew stee) 
except as a material to be used for the manufacture of cutlery, 
for which she had been famous since the time of Chaucer. 
It is characteristic of our British methods that special cireum- 
stances and needs, mainly arising in connection with the deve- 
lopment of the steam engine and railways, revealed the broad 
principles by which the production of iron must be governed, 
It was natural, therefore, as time went on, that in the work of 
successive inventors the guidance of scientific principles became 
progressively evident as ill-directed efforts were gradually 
replaced by the results of systematic experiments. 
The second half of the century began with events of strange 
importance. The Great Exhibition revealed our industriab 
strength to all nations. The official reporter of the metallurg- 
ical group states that 2,250,000 tons of pig iron were annually 
produced in this country, and that its estimated value was. 
5,400,0007. The annual production had risen in fifty years 
from two hundred thousand tons to over two and a quarter 
millions. Sheffield produced at the opening of the century 
35,000 tons of steel, of which 18,000 tons were cast steel. 
Messrs. Turton exhibited a single ingot of steel weighing 2688 
Ibs., but Krupp showed an ingot of double the weight, for our 
country was only preparing for the great change which was so 
soon to enable it to lead the steel manufacture of the world. 
A noteworthy feature of the Exhibition was the collection of 
iron ores of this country exhibited by Mr. Blackwell, who subse- 
quently, and most generously, provided funds for their analysis. 
With reference to this collection, the reporter points out that 
in this country ‘‘the ores are not carried far, except where 
there is great facility for transport.” This is noteworthy, as 
before the century was much older an important supply of ore 
was brought from Spain, and in the near future we may even 
seek a supply for British furnaces from distant parts of our own 
empire. 
The year 1851 was, moreover, an important one for metal- 
lurgy in this country, as it saw, by the wisdom of H.R.H. the 
Prince Consort, the establishment of the institution which 
developed into the Royal School of Mines. If the projected 
scheme of instruction had been fully carried out, the establish- 
ment of a general system of technical instruction, which the 
pressure of necessity is slowly forcing upon us, would have been 
anticipated by forty years. : 
The year 1856 will be ever memorable in the metallurgical 
annals of our nation as that in which Bessemer gave the descrip- 
tion of his process to the world at the Cheltenham meeting of 
the British Association. As regards the process itself, we have 
too lately lost our great countryman, and many of us are too 
familiar with the details of his labours to be able either to fully 
estimate its value or to realise the wonder of its results, Let 
us try to think of the Bessemer process as I believe those 
at the end of the twentieth century will, whose views range 
over a wider perspective than we can command. The 
economic aspect of the question will naturally strike the 
metallurgists of the twentieth century. They will see that in 
1855 the make of steel in Great Britain did not exceed 50,000 
tons, and the cost of the steel produced sometimes reached 752. 
aton, They will see that thirty years after the publication of 
Bessemer’s paper the production of Bessemer steel rose to 
1,570,000 tons, and that ship plates were sold at 6/. Ios. a ton, 
It will be noted that before the century closed, the maximum 
production of Bessemer steel in this country in one year reached 
2,140,000 tons. The scientific aspect of the process will, how- 
ever, excite their widespread interest, for before the end of the 
twentieth century, metallurgy will be taught in our older univer- 
sities. It will be seen that, notwithstanding the title of 
Bessemer’s Cheltenham paper, he recognised and insisted on 
the fact that the intense heat was engendered by the combustion 
of the elements within the fluid bath. It will be noted in what 
close relation the purely scientific work of Thomas Andrews of 
Belfast, on the heat of combination, stands to that of Bessemer, 
and that another instance is presented of the dependence of 
industrial work on pure investigation. Bessemer’s proposal! 
to employ a mixture of steam and air will not be ridiculed 
as it has been, for speculation will be rife as to whether he 
did not hope that the liberated hydrogen might remove 
sulphur and phosphorus, notwithstanding the feebly exother- 
mic result of the ensuing combination, and in spite of the 
cooling effect of water vapour. In view of the fact that 
