984 REroRT— 1898. 



allusion to the steps by ■which it was brought about. Suffice it to say that, iu spite 

 of much discouragement, the ' Great Western ' — of the then unexampled size of 

 two thousand three hundred gross tons, and with engines of unparalleled power — 

 was launched at Bristol in 1837, and ran successful and regular voyages till 1857, 

 when she was broken up. 



In Section G there are many who can appreciate the difficulties of such a new 

 departure as the ' Great Western ' steamship, even if they had been contined to the 

 design and study of a vessel and engines of unprecedented size; but it is not 

 easy to realise the anxiety and trouble caused by the dictum of a scientist so 

 universally admired as Dr. Lardner, at the meeting of the British Association ii» 

 this city in 1836, that the whole idea of ocean navigation on voyages as long a* 

 from Bristol to New York was at that epoch an abstract impossibility. 



In these days of criticism of the past, often involving the rehabilitation of 

 individuals, it is interesting to note that Dr. Lardner "s part in condemning before- 

 hand the construction of the ' Great Western ' steamship and the ideas on which 

 she was designed has been of late years unduly minimised. It has been said 

 that all Dr. Lardner meant was to express a pious doubt as to the commercial 

 prospects of ocean navigation. I have carefully read the ' Proceedings ' of the 

 time, and I am brought to the conclusion that bis words and writings will 

 admit of no such interpretation. Dr. Lardner's view.s, arrived at after calculation 

 and reasoning, were precisely expressed and boldly and honestly enunciated by 

 him. The words of the discussion here appear not to have been preserved ; but in 

 the elaborate article in a Quarterly Review in 1837, which is, I believe, admitted 

 as having been written by Dr. Lardner, and as expressing his matured views, 

 he said ' that in proportion as the capacity of a vessel is increased, in the 

 same ratio, or nearly so, must the mechanical power of the engines be enlarged 

 and the consumption of coal augmented.' He based his views that success was 

 impossible on principles which he supposed to be sound, but which were, in fact, 

 assumptions — viz. that the resistance to the progress of a ship varied directly with 

 her capacity, that a certain number of tons of coal were required in ISoG per 

 horse-power for the voyage across the Atlantic, and that, this being so, enough 

 fuel could not be carried in a ship, however large she might be made. 



Brunei, on the other hand, contended that Dr. Lardner's views were funda- 

 mentally erroneous ; for that, v/hereas the capacity of a ship increased in the ratio of 

 the cube of her dimensions, the resistance to her progress varied more nearlj' as 

 the square. Thus, by adopting a proper length, beam, and draught, a ship would 

 not only carry coal for the journey to New York, but be commercially successful 

 in respect of cargo and passengers. 



It is interesting to note that 9 lbs. of coal per indicated horse-power per hour 

 (as compared with our present ] i to 2 lbs.) was the approximate coal consumj>- 

 tion which was more or less accepted by both sides in the controversies of 1836 

 and 1837. 



We know now that the resistances encountered by a ship are not merely 

 dependent on her dimensions, but comprise wave-making at various speeds, 

 bringing form and proportion of dimensions largely into the necessary calcu- 

 lations ; but I want to point out that the line of divergence of the different 

 views of Lardner and Brunei was sufficiently precise and quite crucial. It is true 

 that Dr. Lardner, in later criticisms of 1837, retreated somewhat from his position 

 of 1836, introducing more of the commercial aspect of the case and stating that no 

 steam vessel could make profitable voyages across the Atlantic, at least until 

 marine engines were immensely improved ; but, even so, it seems clear that 

 the fundamental matter at issue in 1836 and 1837, the period of Dr. Lardner's 

 active criticism, was the question of the resistances increasing in the same 

 ratio as the capacity. The results of these e.v cathedra statements by Dr. 

 Lardner about the ' Great Western,' then in process of being built, must have 

 caused great anxiety to the promoters and much preliminary distrust of the ship 

 on the part of the public. They were, unquestionably, honestly arrived at, how- 

 ever much they were due to reasoning on unascertained premises, and this latter is 

 the reason for my venturing now to refer once more to them. Asa matter of fact, 



