87 
President, he promised to make a selection of the most 
interesting of these geometrical speculations, and offer them 
to the notice of the Society at no distant period. 
A Paper by Mr. Morris was read, entitled, “ On the 
Practicability of Counteracting a Portion of the Resistance at 
the Head of a Ship, by employing a Revolving Conical-Bow 
to work a Stern Propeller.” Communicated by David 
Chadwick, F.S.S., Assoc. Inst. C.E. 
“The proposed improvement consists in substituting for the 
lower or submerged part of the bow of a vessel, a cone fixed 
upon a moveable shaft. The cone is surrounded by spiral 
flanges, so disposed that the water (when the ship is set in 
motion by sails or steam-power) may impinge upon the flanges, 
and cause the cone to revolve. The force thus obtained is 
transmitted through proper shafting and gear to assist the 
engine, if a steamer, or to work a stern screw, if a sailing ship. 
“ No\v, as this may, at first sight, look very much like an 
attempt to obtain something out of nothing, or to produce an 
effect without a cause, I must solicit your candid attention to 
the few arguments I shall advance. I would first remark, 
that in the examination of this plan, it is necessary to bear in 
mind that it does not profess to be a motive power, — the 
motion must first come from engine or sails ; and secondly, 
that no more power can be derived from it as assistance at the 
stern, than is first encountered as retardation at the head of 
the vessel. Whence, then, it may be asked, arises the 
advantage ? In this way — the resistance in front has to be 
encountered, whatever the form of the ship’s head, and whether 
any use be made of it or not, consequently, if a revolving bow 
be adopted, which gives no material increase of resistance, 
then the power derived from its revolution, when set either to 
assist the engine, or to work an independent screw at the stern, 
must be so much gain. The question, it will be observed, 
is not one of displacement, but the mode of displacement. 
I 
