at the York Meeting, 1848. 
407 
Mr. Howe staled in the desciipiion, but it will be seen by the 
Table that when the steam was up the engine did an extra- 
ordinaiy quantity of work with it ; for with 20 lbs. of coal it 
worked (drivins^ 4 horse-power) 50 minutes ; thus requiring 
more coal to get up the steam, but less when in full work than 
stated in the description. This engine was altogether well fitted, 
and worked admirably well and steady. 
It is very much to be regretted that Mr. Howe had not put a 
governor to it ; by doing so, and making a little alteration in the 
boiler, we have no doubt the engine would be still further improved. 
Mr. Howe's improvements in the transparent water-gauge will 
be found a useful invention. Every practical engineer has known 
the want of a flexible packing in the water-gauge, to prevent it 
from breaking by the e.\pansion and contraction of heat and cold. 
A medal was awarded to Mr. Howe for these improvements. 
No. 6. — Stand 37, art. 1. — Messrs. Ogg and HowAUD, of 
Northampton. 
Like a great many of the others, consumed more coal and time 
to get up the steam to its working pressure than stated in the 
description ; however, this engine worked very well. By refer- 
ence to the Table it will be seen that it took 22 lbs. of wood, 65 
lbs. of coal, and 45 minutes to get up the steam, and to 
work 65 minutes with 4 horse-power it used 75 lbs. of coal, 
which we consider tells against the use of two cylinders for agri- 
cultural purposes. 
This engine had a very useful and ingenious apparatus at- 
tached to the chimney, called a spark-catcher, which acted very 
well, and cannot be too highly recommended. It had also a 
governor to regulate its motion. It was the one Mr. Ogg ex- 
hibited at Northampton in 1847, and appeared to have been at 
work for twelve months. 
No. 7. — Stand 53, art. 1. — Barrett and Ashton, of Hull. 
The engine worked quite to the power represented by the 
exhibitor, with 12 lbs. of coals per hour for each horse-power : 
but the construction of the boiler was considered dangerous, [and 
the general work of the engine not good ; the force-pump ceased 
working and reduced the water \\ inches in the boiler. 
No. 8. — Stand 24, art. 7. — Richard Hornsby, of Grantham. 
The prize was awarded to this engine because it was stronger, 
steadier, better fitted, got up the steam and worked with less 
fuel than any other engine exhibited. (^See Table.) 
It worked in every way as the exhibitor has described it. It 
had a good boiler to generate steam, plenty of cylinder room to 
