THE EXPOSITION
OF
1851.
---------------
LONDON:
R. CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD STREET HILL.
---------------
THE EXPOSITION
OF
1851;
OR,
VIEWS OF THE INDUSTRY,
THE SCIENCE, AND THE GOVERNMENT,
OF ENGLAND.
BY
CHARLES BABBAGE, ESQ.
CORRESPONDING MEMBER OF THE ACADEMY OF MORAL SCIENCES OF THE INSTITUTE
OF FRANCE.
SECOND EDITION, WITH ADDITIONS.
LONDON:
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.
1851.
PREFACE
TO THE FIRST EDITION.
---------------
England has invited the civilized world to meet in its great commercial
centre; asking it, in friendly rivalry, to display for the common
advantage of all, those objects which each country derives from the
gifts of nature, and on which it confers additional utility by processes
of industrial art.
This invitation, universally accepted, will bring from every quarter a
multitude of people greater than has yet assembled in any western city:
these welcome visitors will enjoy more time and opportunity for
observation than has ever been afforded on any previous occasion. The
statesman and the philosopher, the manufacturer and the merchant, and
all enlightened observers of human nature, may avail themselves of the
opportunity afforded by their visit to this Diorama of the Peaceful
Arts, for taking a more correct view of the industry, the science, the
institutions, and the government of this country. One object of these
pages is, to suggest to such inquirers the agency of those deeper-seated
and less obvious causes which can be detected only by lengthened
observation, and to supply them with a key to explain many of the
otherwise incomprehensible characteristics of England.
Who, for instance, could have conceived that England, after making
unexampled efforts for the adoption of “_Free Trade_,” should be the
first nation to prohibit[1] its very basis, “_competition_,” at the
world’s great bazaar?
This country is fortunate in having on the Western Continent, a great
nation derived from the same common stock, speaking the same language,
sharing the same feelings, but fortunately not partaking the same
_prejudices_. Proud of the only ancestry which is not contemptible, it
glories in the genius and the virtues of our common forefathers, and in
its young ambition now strives in science and in literature, to prove
itself _their_ worthy descendants—_our own_ generous rivals.
Separated from us by an intervening ocean, the judgment of America is
not obscured by the repulsion or the fascination of personal manners,—by
the tales of jealous rivals or enthusiastic friends. It can thus, as it
were, anticipate for us the decision of posterity upon the reputation of
those English writers who have never visited her shores. Many foreigners
speaking other tongues, whose researches in industrial, economical, and
physical science, have conferred honour on their own country, now visit
ours. These and their congenial spirits throughout the world, sit in
judgment on the _prejudices_ of England, and will, if I mistake not,
find ample reason to agree with the Danish statesman in the
opinion,—that great nations are often governed by very small people.
England has invited the judgment of the world upon its _Arts_ and its
_Industry_;—science appeals to the same tribunal against its
_ingratitude_ and its _injustice_.
Several friends whose esteem I prize, have urged me to avoid everything
personal,—some even to suppress this volume. I value their friendship,
whilst I reject their counsel. In illustrating the position of science
in this country, it would have been affectation not to have mentioned
the Calculating Engines. Who else _could_ have fully known,—who else
_would_ have fully told their history?
It has been suggested to me that, to select _individual_ examples for
illustration, is personality. To have made general charges without them,
would have been termed _vague_, and would certainly have been _useless_.
It still however appears to me that a _single_ illustration in each
case, would cause the least pain, and might yet be sufficient for the
purpose. If it is thought otherwise the remedy is easy.
The facts stated in the following pages are not drawn from any violation
of the confidences of private society: those whose names are mentioned,
are paid by the nation, and therefore responsible to their employers.
Against them I have no personal feeling; their official acts are
necessarily mentioned as parts of the system to which they belong.
The remark most frequently made has been, “that the publication of this
volume will do me injury.” This opinion is indeed a severer censure on
the conduct of the government than any I have myself pronounced. I do
not agree in it, for I know of no injury within the power of those who
have never given me a single occasion for gratitude.
Bad men always hate those they have injured;—Good or great men, when
they have discovered that they have been unjust, always more than repair
the injury they have committed.
Those who, from an acquaintance with the case, can truly interpret this
volume, will _know_ that I have abstained; they will _see_ that I
possess the power, though not the disposition, to avenge injury. But the
same spirit which has carried me through difficulties few have
encountered, at the expense of sacrifices which I hope fewer may ever be
called upon to make, forbids me tamely to submit to injustice.
The reader of these pages will observe that I have exposed with an
unsparing pen the dishonesty of party. The modes employed by it to
“discredit” and intimidate an honest man are various.
If he agree with them in a principle, but differ in its application, he
is called “_crotchety_.” If he cannot be induced by sophistry to vote
with them against his sense of right, he is called “_impracticable_.”
If, when passed over in the appointment to some office for which he is
qualified by knowledge and entitled by position, he complain of the
neglect; notwithstanding he continues to vote with his party, he is
called a “_disappointed man_.” If, however, he has energy, and is backed
by great political or professional interest, he may then secure a
_present_ peerage for himself, his wife, or his relative, with a promise
of better treatment when anything desirable becomes vacant.
At last, having discovered that his party are sincere and united only in
their desire to retain office; if his arguments admit of no
refutation,—if his perception of right can be obscured by no
sophistry,—if he can himself be cajoled by no flattery, seduced by no
advantage, deterred by no intimidation, from expressing his real opinion
upon the merits of his party: then, although he may support them
whenever they are true to their principles, yet he is pronounced a
“_cantankerous fellow_.” Thus bad names are coined by worse[2] men to
destroy honest people; as the madness of innocent dogs arises from the
cry of insanity raised by their villanous pursuers.
The merit of the original conception of the present Exposition is
insignificant in comparison with that of the efforts by which it was
carried out, and with the importance of its practical results.
To have seen from afar its effects on the improvement, the wealth, and
the happiness of the people—to have seized the fit moment, when, by the
right use of the influence of an exalted station, it was _possible_ to
overcome the deeply-rooted prejudices of the upper classes—to remove the
still more formidable, because latent, impediments of party—generously
to have undertaken great responsibility, and with indefatigable labour
to have endeavoured to make the best out of the only materials at
hand,—these are endowments of no ordinary kind.
To move in any rank of society an exception to its general rules, is a
very difficult, and if accompanied by the consciousness of the
situation, a very painful position to a reflecting mind.
Whatever may be the cause, whether exalted rank, unbounded wealth,
surpassing beauty, or unrivalled wit,—the renown of daring deeds, the
magic of a world-wide fame; to all within those narrow limits the
dangers and the penalties are great. Each exists an isolated spirit;
each, unconsciously imprisoned within its crystal globe, perceives the
colours of all external objects modified by those tints imparted to them
by its own surrounding sphere. No change of view can teach it to rectify
this partial judgment; throughout its earthward course the same undying
rainbow attends to the last its parent drop.
Rarely indeed can some deep-searching mind, after long comparison,
perceive the real colours of those translucent shells which encompass
kindred spirits; and thus at length enable him to achromatise the medium
which surrounds his own. To one who has thus rectified the
“colour-blindness” of his intellectual vision, how deep the sympathy he
feels for those still involved in that hopeless obscurity from which he
has himself escaped. None can so justly appreciate that sense of
loneliness, that solitude of mind, which surrounds unquestioned eminence
on its lofty throne;—none, therefore, can make so large an allowance for
its errors;—none so skilfully assist in guiding its hazardous career.
The triumph of the industrial arts will advance the cause of
civilization more rapidly than its warmest advocates could have hoped,
and contribute to the permanent prosperity and strength of the country,
far more than the most splendid victories of successful war. The
influences thus engendered, the arts thus developed, will long continue
to shed their beneficent effects over countries more extensive than
those which the sceptre of England rules.
---------------
P.S.—The greater part of this Work was in type some time previous to the
opening of the Exposition:—it would be of no interest to the public to
explain the cause of this delay.
---------------
NOTE ADDED TO THE SECOND EDITION.
It has been suggested to me that, without some explanation, the Author
of this Volume might appear to have reserved his opinions on the subject
of the Exposition, until it was too late for the Commission to make use
of them. This was not the case.
Being fully aware of the importance of such exhibitions, and having
myself, many years before, endeavoured to connect them with the British
Association, I hailed the announcement of the plan as one calculated to
produce the most extensive good. At that period I was in Paris, and both
abroad and at home I have uniformly spoken of the Exposition with the
highest approbation.
On one or two points I differed entirely from the opinion of those to
whom its management was confided. The questions of the _site of the
building_, and of _affixing prices to articles exhibited_, were the most
important of them. I took the earliest opportunity of expressing
strongly my views on those subjects to several personal friends who were
members of that Commission, nor did I ever fail to communicate through
the fittest channel any circumstance I became acquainted with which
might advance its interests.
[1] See Chapter on Prices.
[2] “A bad old woman making a worse will.”—BYRON.
CONTENTS.
---------------
PAGE
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER II.
ERROR RESPECTING THE INTERCHANGE OF COMMODITIES 7
CHAPTER III.
OF SOCIETIES 12
CHAPTER IV.
ORIGIN OF THE EXPOSITION OF 1851 26
CHAPTER V.
OBJECT AND USE OF THE EXPOSITION 42
CHAPTER VI.
LIMITS 48
CHAPTER VII.
SITE AND CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING 55
CHAPTER VIII.
PRICES 64
CHAPTER IX.
PRIZES 99
CHAPTER X.
JURIES, ETC. 112
CHAPTER XI.
ULTERIOR OBJECTS 125
CHAPTER XII.
INTRIGUES OF SCIENCE 149
CHAPTER XIII.
CALCULATING ENGINES 173
CHAPTER XIV.
POSITION OF SCIENCE 189
CHAPTER XV.
THE PRESS 202
CHAPTER XVI.
PARTY 209
CHAPTER XVII.
REWARDS OF MERIT 220
APPENDIX.
THE ELEVENTH CHAPTER OF MR. WELD’S HISTORY OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY 251
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTION.
One of the most frequent sources of mistaken views in economical
science, arises from confounding the nature of _universal_ with that of
_general principles_.
§ _Universal principles_, such as the fact that every number ending with
the figure five is itself divisible by five, rarely occur except in the
exact sciences. Universal principles are those which do not admit of a
single exception.
_General principles_ are those which are much more frequently obeyed
than violated. Thus it is generally true that _men will be governed by
what they believe to be their interest_. Yet it is certainly true that
many individuals will at times be governed by their passions, others by
their caprice, others by entirely benevolent motives: but all these
classes together, form so small a portion of mankind, that it would be
unsafe in any inquiry to neglect the great principle of self-interest.
Notwithstanding, however, all the exceptions we may meet with, it is
impossible to take any just views of society without the admission of
general principles, and on such grounds they will be used in these
pages.
Self-interest, combined in various degrees with knowledge, assumes the
most diversified forms. It excites our contempt or raises our
admiration, according to the littleness or the greatness of the object
it pursues—according to the temporary or the more distant advantages it
seeks. On the one hand, it governs the minister of a party on his
doubtful eminence, whilst on the other it guides the enlightened
statesman to the object of his distant ambition.
§ Again, it is admitted as a general principle that _each man is the
best judge of his own wants and of his own interest_. Now although many
individuals, and even whole classes of society, have at times been
thought by more enlightened men to have formed erroneous opinions as to
their true interest, yet, when it is remembered, that every man must see
many views of his own case, and must know many facts connected with it,
which he has not communicated even to his most confidential adviser,
those who have had most experience are most inclined to believe that the
exceptions are much less frequent than at first sight would appear.
Another source of erroneous opinions arises from neglecting causes
apparently insignificant.
In taking a comprehensive view of any subject, it is very desirable to
throw into the shade all its minor points; but in estimating the
consequences of any set of facts, there is another condition which must
be fulfilled, before we can arrive at accurate conclusions. If we are
about to neglect a cause on account of its apparent insignificance, it
is _essential_ that it should not be one of _frequent_ recurrence. Thus,
if a labourer inconsiderately lift his shovel but an inch or two more
than is necessary to throw its load into his barrow, although the
exertion of force is trivial in each instance, its repeated occurrence
during the whole day, will produce at its conclusion a very sensible
difference either in fatigue or in the amount of the work done. Napoleon
is said to have remarked of Laplace, when he was Minister of the
Interior, that he was too much occupied with considering _les infiniment
petites_. To dwell upon small affairs which are isolated, is not the
province of a statesman; but to integrate the effect of their constant
recurrence is worthy of the greatest.
One of the most important processes in all inquiry, is to divide the
subject to be considered into as many different questions as it will
admit of, and then to examine each separately, or in other words to
suppose that each single cause successively varies whilst all the others
remain constant.
But this most obvious doctrine of common sense has frequently been
contested in questions of economical science, and has been often
characterized as theoretical, and as entirely inapplicable to the
affairs of life. It is certain that very little progress can be made in
any subject without this aid, and it is hopeless for those whose minds
are incapable of mastering the simpler questions, ever to institute
successfully an investigation into their united action.
A familiar illustration will explain this better. Two men are making an
excavation, removing the earth in the usual way with spades and
wheelbarrows.
One of these men, Q., does more work than his companion P., and if an
inquiry is made, Why is this so? the usual reply would be that Q. is
either stronger, more active, or more skilful than P.
Now it is the third of these qualifications which is the most important,
because if Q. were inferior even both in strength and in activity, he
might yet by means of his skill perform a greater quantity of work
without fatigue.
He might have ascertained that a _given_ weight of earth raised at each
shovelfull, together with a certain number of shovelfulls per hour,
would be more advantageous for his strength than any other such
combination.
That a shovel of a certain weight, size, and form would fatigue him less
than those of a different construction.
That if its handle were two or three inches longer than he required, its
additional weight would at the end of the day have been uselessly lifted
many hundred times.
That if each spadefull of earth were lifted but an inch or two above the
barrow beyond what was necessary, a still greater waste of force would
arise.
That if the barrow itself had its wheel at a distance beyond the centre
of its load, it would be more fatiguing to draw.
That if the barrow had upright sides, it would require more exertion to
turn out its load than if its sides were much inclined.
Thus although Q. might have less strength and less activity than P., he
might yet by skill and practice, have arrived at some combination of
these tools which should enable him with less fatigue to do more daily
work than P.
But in order to have arrived at this degree of skill, Q. must when a boy
have been taught to examine _separately_ the consequences of any defect
or inconvenience in the parts of the tools he was to use in after life,
or in the modes of using them. If not so taught, he must have arrived at
the same knowledge by the slower and more painful effort of his own
reflections.
In either case he would be able to communicate his knowledge to his
friends or his children; and if circumstances induced or obliged him to
enter upon a new trade, he would naturally apply those principles to his
new tools. Indeed, whatever subject might be presented to a mind thus
trained, such habits of inquiry would most probably be applied to its
examination. Thus, by the early education of his reasoning faculties on
the trade by which he is to subsist, he would not only render his own
labour more productive, but would have his mind better prepared for the
reception of other truths.
CHAPTER II.
ERROR RESPECTING THE INTERCHANGE OF COMMODITIES.
There exists in society a widely-spread error relating to the very
principle of that interchange of property between individuals which is
usually called a bargain. It is almost always supposed that one party is
a gainer whilst the other is a loser. Indeed, by those whose reasoning
on the subject has been limited to this single view of the question, it
is with some plausibility maintained, that since the quantity of the
commodities interchanged is in no case augmented by the bargain, the
gain of one party can be accomplished only by an equal loss on the part
of the other.
The insufficiency of this reasoning depends upon the truth of the
principle that each party, being the best judge of the pleasure or
advantage he can derive from the possession of a thing, _himself_
decides that in his own case it will be increased by the exchange.
It may, however, be asked, How does it happen that the sum of two
commodities so exchanged has a greater value after the exchange than
before? or in other words, Whence has the profit arisen?—is there any
third party at whose expense it has been acquired? The answer is—that
there is another source which almost always either directly or
indirectly contributes towards this profit. The advantage is most
frequently won by industry and knowledge from nature herself.
§ The following illustration, which happens also to be a tolerable
approach to truth, will explain this principle more clearly:—
It is found by experience that the upper-leather of Boots made in
France, is better and more durable than the upper-leather manufactured
in England. On the other hand, it is found that the leather prepared in
England for the soles of boots is less permeable by water, and more
durable than that made in France.
Let us suppose that in each country a pair of boots will endure twelve
months’ continual wear; after which time they are thrown aside.
In England the destruction of the boots will arise from that of the
upper-leather, whilst in France it will be caused by that of the sole.
Let us also suppose that the upper-leather of France will wear three
months longer than the French soles, and reciprocally that the soles of
England will wear three months longer than the English upper-leather.
Under these circumstances, it is clear that if the inhabitants of each
country insist on making their boots _entirely_ with the produce of
_their own_ tanneries, the average duration of a pair of boots both in
France and in England will be twelve months.
Let us assume, for the sake of simplicity, that in each country the
upper-leather and the soles have the same value. Then it is equally
clear, if England were to give to France a million pair of soles in
exchange for a million pair of French upper-leathers, that one million
of the inhabitants of each nation would find their boots last during
fifteen instead of twelve months.
This prolonged duration of their boots would not have been acquired by
any sacrifice on either side: the exchange is here for the common and
great advantage of both.
This probably arises from the joint action of many causes. The animals
which in each country supply the hides, may either from breed, from
food, or from climate be best adapted to produce that kind of leather in
which each country excels. The water, the bark, or the climate peculiar
to each country, may then contribute its share to the same effect.
Again, the industry, the skill, and the knowledge of the people
employed, as well as the character of the population and the
distribution of its capital, may also have its influence on these
results.
If we pursue this illustration one stage further, it will appear that it
is our interest not only that we should make these exchanges with
France, but that she should also make exchanges with other countries
than our own.
Let us suppose that France, having a larger population than England,
required for its annual consumption two million pair of boots, and also
that she possessed no other commodities which we required. Under these
circumstances there could be no further direct interchange of leather,
and France would possess a million pair of upper-leathers beyond our
demand. But it is clear that if France could exchange these
upper-leathers for the wools or any other produce of Germany which we
might require, she would not only gain the additional duration of three
months for her own extra million pair of boots, but would also enrich us
by the advantage which we should derive from the exchange of the strong
hides of England for the produce transmitted to us from Germany.
§ The general result of all those inquiries of which only the slightest
sketch has now been attempted, is that—_the free and unlimited exchange
of commodities between nations, contributes to the advantage and the
wealth of all_;—that this benefit arises from no sacrifice on the part
of one nation for the profit of another; but that the sum of the
productive powers of man is by these means, without any increased
labour, largely augmented throughout the world;—that this increment is
won partly by the suppression of ignorance and fraud, and partly by the
united effects of industry, of skill, and of science, in compelling
nature to minister to the wants of man.
All who admit the truth of these principles, must feel an earnest desire
to support every effort which may assist in their dissemination amongst
the masses of mankind. Education is the earliest, and the most effective
aid; but it must be secular education. It must be the education of the
faculties of each child, with reference to the wants of his future
course of life. The religion of the uneducated and unenlightened man,
even when true, partakes of the nature of superstition, and instruction
in religious truth _alone_ will not be enough: his mind must be opened
and informed on other subjects also. He who by observation and inquiry
has arrived at the conviction that any line of conduct which is
dishonest towards his neighbour, will most probably prove unprofitable
to himself in this world, will surely have a strong additional motive to
guard him in the hour of temptation from those courses which his
religion teaches him will incur punishment in a future state.
CHAPTER III.
OF SOCIETIES.
Associations for occasional discussion, of men pursuing the same or
similar studies, have long been found advantageous for the
inter-communication of the difficulties, the doubts, and the discoveries
of students. In more recent times, when each art has gradually connected
itself with the sciences on which its success depends, the importance of
these meetings has become obvious to the manufacturer, although in this
country it may not yet have become apparent to the statesman.
The Academia del Cimento, the Royal Society of London and the Academy of
Sciences at Paris, have had a long series of imitators in the principal
cities of the civilized world. The increasing extension of science and
the wants of its cultivators, have led them to subdivide their pursuits
and to form Societies specially devoted to each separate subject.
§ These learned bodies, however, are of a stationary character, located
for convenience in some capital or large city. With the advance of
civilization new wants arose, and Professor Oken of Munich, feeling the
great advantage of periodical meetings of the cultivators of the natural
sciences, organized an annual assemblage of German naturalists to be
held successively in each of the great cities of Germany, thus rendering
the field of friendly intercourse and of scientific observation much
more easily accessible to all who felt an interest in their common
object.
Although the earliest meetings were small,[3] their value was soon
perceived, and the cultivators of other sciences more or less connected
with natural history, were gradually admitted, to the manifest advantage
of all parties, until at the great meeting in 1828 at Berlin, the
physical sciences themselves possessed their fair share of eminent
representatives. But another important improvement had already
commenced: foreigners were admitted to this German union, and amongst
upwards of four hundred members, although nearly thirty were aliens in
language and in country, they were welcomed with the warmest kindness by
their enlightened friends.
Baron Alexander Humboldt, the President of the Association, in his
inaugural address proclaimed its principle in the following words:—
“May those excellent persons, who, deterred neither by the perils of the
sea nor of the land, have hastened to our meeting from Sweden, from
Norway, from Denmark, from Holland, from England, and from Poland, point
out the way to other strangers in succeeding years, so that by turns
every part of Germany may enjoy the effects of scientific communication
with the different nations of Europe.”
At that meeting a map of Europe was published on which were
conspicuously indicated those towns and countries only, which had sent
representatives to this congress of intellect. On that map Austria
figured an intellectual desert, not because her philosophers were less
industrious in the researches of science, less acute in combining into
laws the facts they had ascertained, nor in any way unworthy of sitting
amongst the congregated talent of their own or of other races: but
because the government of the country, more ignorant of its interest
than the philosophers were of theirs, refused them passports.
§ A few years afterwards, the light of truth having penetrated official
heads, the learned of Europe, to the credit of the Austrian government,
were invited and hospitably entertained at Vienna. The stability of the
great empire which welcomed them, was not shaken by their patient and
acute discussions: and it was at last perceived that unless when
depressed by neglect or persecution, philosophers possess in their own
departments subjects of far more animating and delightful interest than
the unstable and inconclusive discussions of politics.
Sweden sent thirteen representatives to the meeting at Berlin in 1828,
Denmark seven, Poland three, Holland two. Russia, France, England and
Naples each sent one.
§ An account of this scientific congress at Berlin was published in 1829
in the _Edinburgh Journal of Science_. It was communicated by the author
of these pages to Sir David Brewster. In the number of the same Journal
for April, 1831, is an account by J. F. W. Johnstone, Esq., of the
meeting of this scientific Congress, at Hamburgh, in September, 1830.
Sir David Brewster, in conjunction with the late secretary of the Royal
Society of Edinburgh, Sir J. Robison, and the Rev. William Vernon
Harcourt, and several other cultivators of science, resolved on
attempting to organize a similar institution in Great Britain. The
difficulties as well as the advantages of this undertaking were then
discussed. In Prussia the social position of men of science is quite
different from that which they occupy in England. In Prussia the
sovereign was aware of the value of science to his country, and was
therefore induced to support it by an enlightened patriotism as well as
by a generous ambition. In England science is pursued by no powerful
profession which can aid or thwart the measures of the minister of the
day. He is, therefore, indifferent to its progress, and is usually
incapable of distinguishing the charlatan from the philosopher.
§ In 1831 the first meeting of the British Association for the
Advancement of Science was held at York. It was proposed by those who
undertook its management, that each succeeding meeting should be held in
some large city or town at a considerable distance from that which
received it in the previous year, and that after its objects had become
well understood by the public, it should complete its cycle by holding a
meeting in the metropolis. But it was soon felt that in order to
influence public opinion, it was necessary that it should combine larger
interests than were yet enlisted in its cause.
Such at that time was the state of education in England, that amongst
the influential classes, country gentlemen, lawyers, members of
parliament, peers, &c., few were found qualified for, or even capable of
taking any interest in the then _existing_ Sections of the British
Association.
Accident fortunately supplied an occasion for remedying, at least
partially, this defect. The opportunity occurred at the meeting at
Cambridge in 1833, and was instantly seized upon, although in a somewhat
irregular manner. Professor Quetelet had been deputed by the Belgian
government to attend the third meeting of the British Association. The
varied knowledge and enthusiastic love of science possessed by M.
Quetelet, might have qualified him to take part in any of its sections,
but it so happened that he had brought over with him some highly
interesting statistical documents which unfortunately could find a
reception in none. Under these circumstances, a gentleman[4] who fully
understood their value invited a few of his private friends most
interested in that subject to meet M. Quetelet in his own rooms in
college, for the purpose of talking over this valuable budget. The
author of these pages was one of those thus honoured. He perceived the
advantage that might be taken of the accident, and immediately suggested
to his friend that the invitation should be extended to all those known
to be interested in statistical inquiries, and that those present should
at once form themselves into a Statistical Section, and then apply to
the council for a bill of indemnity for the irregularity. The plan being
unanimously approved of, it was immediately acted upon, and before the
termination of the meeting a Statistical Section was not only recognised
by the Association, but was as fully attended as even the most popular
of the other sections.
At the concluding meeting of the Statistical Section at Cambridge it was
resolved, that a more permanent body was necessary to carry out the
views and wishes of the section, and it was agreed to establish a
Statistical Society in London. The author of these pages was deputed to
carry out those arrangements which terminated in its establishment.
The more pressing difficulty being thus removed, the principle of
extending the basis of the Association so as to unite the interests of
various classes, was steadily and unremittingly pursued. The Physical
and Mathematical Section was divided, and a new section, that of the
practical application of mechanical science, or Civil Engineering, was
formed. The next step was very important, but more difficult to
accomplish. It was proposed by an exhibition of the raw produce, the
processes, and the instruments for the production of manufactured goods,
to unite in the same common interest, not only all the consumers, but
all those who contributed to the production, or even to the distribution
of wealth.
The numerous foreigners who flocked to these annual meetings of the
British Association, might, it was naturally thought, be induced to
bring over with them new instruments of science, or objects of art and
industry, the produce of their respective countries. Whilst thus giving,
and receiving in return new ideas and valuable information, the
commercial interchanges between different nations would necessarily be
augmented by the steadily increasing knowledge of the wants of each, and
by the peaceful rivalry of all.
The first exhibition of this kind took place at Newcastle in 1838. The
number of exhibitors was not large, but it was hoped that with time and
encouragement this commencement might lead to much more extensive
expositions of more general utility. It was followed by another on an
enlarged scale, held at Birmingham in the succeeding year, after which
it was discontinued.
The following extracts from a letter addressed by the Author to the
Members of the British Association, were printed in 1839:—
“My reasons for not resigning the trusteeship of the British Association
at Newcastle were, that by retaining it until the following meeting, I
should give the Society more time to select my successor; and that by
remaining on the council until the meeting at Birmingham, I might be
enabled to assist more effectually in the arrangement of the collections
relating to the mechanical arts, which it was anticipated would be
amongst the largest yet called forth by the British Association.”
“The real merits of the British Association have been misunderstood by
the superficial; but it possesses in its bearings upon the pecuniary
interests of large masses of the community a power and an influence
which nothing but great misconduct can destroy. Look at the
manufacturers of produce and of machinery, flocking to our annual
meeting to interchange their ideas, enlightening their practical
experience by the reasonings of science, and returning laden with the
seeds of permanent ameliorations in their establishments. Look at the
exhibitions of the productions of our factories, and say whether the
humblest shopkeeper has not an interest in the existence of that body
which gives publicity to the objects in which he deals, and which
spreads them so largely before the eyes of those who can appreciate
their merit, as well as of those who are likely to become consumers.”
“These are material interests permanently engaged in our cause by the
strongest ties—those of mutual advantage, cemented by reciprocity of
kindly feelings.”
§ This is not the place to discuss the causes which have led to the
present state of things. It is sufficient here to observe, that if the
views of those who originally organized the British Association, had
been supported both from within and from without, in the manner which so
important a project in the history of science deserved, the Exhibition
of 1851 would have found itself led by the science of the country,
prepared by long experience on a smaller scale, yet under very various
circumstances, to guide with some reasonable prospect of success that
gigantic undertaking, and to elicit from it the many invaluable services
it might be expected to render to civilization.
Its legislative department would not have been committed to the guidance
of a body of men, all of them respectable, and some, indeed, eminent in
their several lines, but entirely inexperienced in the conduct and
arrangement of any such undertaking—persons, all of them amiable and
excellent in their private capacity, yet who have exhibited in their
corporate union an entire ignorance of the great principle on which
alone such expositions rest,—and who, contrary to the advice and the
remonstrance of the best informed, have forbidden the most important
quality by which men judge of commodities, their _Price_, from being
attached to the objects on which their judgment is to be pronounced.
§ Long, however, before the origin of these itinerant societies, the
voice of the statesmen of other countries, and the popular voice in
England, had called into existence societies for the promotion of the
arts connected with commerce and manufactures. In France, the
“Conservatoire des Arts et Metiers” was established. In England the
Society of Arts has endured above a century. Its novelty and utility
caused it to flourish for a time: its seat in the metropolis of a people
whose wealth and power arise entirely from the unbending energy with
which they apply themselves to advance the arts and to extend commerce,
added to its powers. Yet, even with these advantages, that Society has
never risen to the position it deserved, and has for years been
languishing in premature decay. Lately, indeed, a powerful impulse has
been communicated to its proceedings, but even the presidency of the
Prince-Consort has not yet raised it to its due position in the public
opinion.
The causes of this state of things are not remote. The position of the
Royal and of other societies is equally influenced by them. Although
intimately connected with the greatest interests of the country, they
can offer to those who give their time or intellect to advance such
objects, neither wealth nor rank—neither place nor patronage. They
constitute no distinct combination of men into a powerful class, like
the Bar, the Navy, or the Army: they are of no party, and finally, they
are not fashionable. It is true that the discoveries which such
societies profess to reward, are in many instances the source of wealth
to the few who, fortunately for themselves, possess those other
qualities necessary for its acquisition, but which are so rarely united
with genius. It is also true that wealth once acquired, will, if
discreetly employed, certainly lead its possessor to all those other
things, equally coveted as the great prizes in the lottery of life by
the Bar, the Military, and even by the Church. Nor is this to be
regretted, seeing that the aristocracy of this country thus fortunately
receives fresh blood and renewed intellect by adopting into its class
the sagacious merchant, or the skilful fabricator of a princely fortune:
the time may thus be postponed when the accident of birth will no longer
be admitted as a fit qualification for a legislator. But even here it is
the wealth of the aspirant that wins the position, not the integrity and
sagacity of the man.
In France the government itself took the lead in directing an
institution for the advancement of the arts. In 1795 it established the
Conservatoire des Arts et Metiers, in which are deposited an extensive
collection of drawings, models, and machines employed in the various
manufactures of the nation.
Subsequently, ten professors were attached to this institution, to
lecture gratuitously on those sciences more immediately connected with
arts and manufactures. One of these devotes himself exclusively to the
explanation of machinery in actual employment. There are also lectures
on descriptive geometry, and on mechanical drawing. The expense of this
establishment is about 6,000_l._ a-year.
§ The government of France perceived at a still earlier period the
advantages which would result from the juxtaposition, at proper
intervals of time, in one large building, of selected specimens of all
the produce of the national industry, and in 1798 the first of these
periodic meetings was held at the expense of the government. During
upwards of half a century, at intervals of about five years, France,
uninterrupted by the many changes in the form of its government, has
continued to maintain these valuable expositions with increasing success
and advantage. Prussia and Belgium also have adopted the plan of holding
these meetings.
But if the principles on which they rest are well founded, it is clear
that they are applicable to a still wider field: and that as in the
Associations of science, cultivators from all nations are invited to be
present, so in the Exhibition of the productions of industry the general
advantage of mankind is most advanced by the joint contributions of the
whole industrial world.
§ These views have long been felt and expressed, not merely by men of
speculation, but by those who take a practical part in the affairs of
life.
Enlightened French statesmen had long been aware of the advantage of
this species of competition, and only abstained from proposing it until
the conviction of the nation justified the foresight of its chiefs.
At length it was thought that the time had arrived for ascertaining more
correctly the general opinion. Previously, therefore, to making the
necessary arrangements for the Exposition at Paris in 1849, the Minister
of Commerce sent circulars to the several Chambers of Commerce
throughout France, in order to ascertain whether it was the general
opinion that foreign productions should be admitted to the competition.
The opinion of the public was not, however, sufficiently advanced to
justify the undertaking; and considering the political situation of the
country, the government wisely abstained from a measure which was not
yet entirely in unison with the feelings of the people.
Thus it has happened that it was reserved for Great Britain, the country
most interested in the cause, though the latest to adopt it, unprepared
by any previous experience at once to attempt this vast enterprise.
[3] The first was held at Leipsic in 1822.
[4] The Rev. Richard Jones, Professor of Political Economy at
Haileybury.
CHAPTER IV.
ORIGIN OF THE EXPOSITION OF 1851.
§ It is not now necessary to inquire minutely into the origin of the
present Exposition. It is sufficient to state that it appears to have
been proposed by some members of the Society of Arts, who urged it on
the attention of Prince Albert.
The magnitude of the undertaking, and the great principles on which it
rested, seem not to have been fully understood, and the public were very
imperfectly prepared either to appreciate its advantages or to
contribute to its support. A capitalist was therefore sought, and found
willing to undertake the risk of the speculation, and terms were agreed
upon, by which £20,000 was advanced for distribution in prizes, one of
which was to amount to £5,000. This contract contained some singular
stipulations, and formed the basis of the proceedings for several
months. It contained also a clause by which, on certain conditions, it
might be cancelled within a limited time.
In order to carry out this undertaking, it was proposed that a Royal
Commission should be issued, over which, of course, Prince Albert should
preside. As soon as these views became publicly known, they excited
great discussion, and were the subject of much criticism.
§ The Ministers could not of course commit themselves by publicly
avowing their disapprobation of an undertaking commenced under such high
auspices. It might, however, readily have been foreseen that they would
be averse to such a scheme, because whilst it was sure to give them a
great deal of trouble, it would afford them no compensation in the shape
of patronage.
Those, however, who usually reflect and retail the opinions of the
Government, were by no means silent; at first it was said to be Utopian,
then ridiculous, then, in the slang of official life, it was
“_pooh-poohed_;” at a later period, when great public meetings had been
held, and when public dinners began to give it an English character, the
best speech which has yet been made on the subject, containing the
far-sighted views of a statesman, was ridiculed as full of _German_
notions, by coxcombs whose intellect was as defective as their
foresight, and whose selfishness was more remarkable than either.
Another class of persons, the Belgravians, though actuated by the same
motives, were induced to join in the outcry for other reasons. As soon
as it became known that the locality of the building would be the
southern side of Hyde Park, they represented that the park would be
destroyed, and become utterly useless. As if a building covering twenty
acres out of above three hundred and twenty, could prevent the people
from enjoying air and exercise on the remaining three hundred.
Again, it was asserted that by cutting down a few trees within the
limits assigned to the building, the park would be desolated; the shady
walks destroyed; whilst all the while there was a goodly stock of
timber, old and young, abounding in the other three hundred acres.
Before this absurd delusion could be removed from the public mind, all
the plans were made specially to conform themselves to the enclosure of
these miserable trees. It was not discovered until after the Crystal
Palace was completed, that several of them were on the verge of
extinction, and that all would probably perish by exposure under such
unusual conditions. Some of the most decrepit and most inconveniently
situated trees have now been cut down.
§ The Belgravians found out other causes of complaint. They could not
tolerate the mass of plebeians of all nations who would traverse their
sacred square, and they threatened to spoil the London season by going
out of town. When it was suggested to them, that in these days of
agricultural distress, if they left town they might console themselves
by letting their houses at a high price, they refused to be consoled.
The Belgravians next consulted their “_medicine-men_,” who, seeing that
they wanted to be frightened, suggested to them that _some_ foreigners
were dirty,—that dirt in _some_ cases causes disease. The Belgravian
mind immediately made the inference that the foreigners would bring with
them the plague; then they dwelt on sanitary measures, and on the danger
to the public, until they themselves became nearly insane.
It was then suggested that the foreigners might become assassins by
night,—or take military possession of London by day. Their tradesmen
too, who hated the scheme, and knew the humour of their customers,
assured them that trade would be entirely ruined; whilst at the same
time, it was whispered that many of them had sent large orders to France
for goods to be exhibited at the Crystal Palace, and afterwards to be
sold to their capricious customers, either as French, or as English
surpassing French, just as the whim of the moment might cause a demand
for the one or the other.
This opposition of the inhabitants of Belgravia increased as the
preparations for the opening of the Exposition advanced. The working
classes had been favourable to the scheme from the commencement, and a
knowledge of its advantages seems to have advanced slowly in society
from below upwards.
That the inhabitants of this fashionable quarter were necessarily
exposed to some inconveniences cannot be denied. Their much-frequented
riding ground was for a time interfered with, but they should have
remembered that although the public at large _paid_ for the maintenance
of the park, the greatest portion of its advantages were _enjoyed_ by
those residing nearest to it.
Under these circumstances they ought to have been well content to forego
for a time these trifling advantages, and to suffer with a good grace
the little temporary inconveniences resulting from a plan which was
unrivalled for the advancement of the arts of peace, and calculated not
only to benefit our own country, but to contribute to the civilization
of the world.
Notwithstanding much opposition and many prophecies of failure, a Royal
Commission was at last appointed. It consisted almost exclusively of
members of parliament, and of persons holding official situations. It
was stated that not more than two of its members had ever seen a foreign
exposition, and although it included many men distinguished in other
departments of knowledge, there was scarcely one whose name was known to
the nations we invited as at all eminent in that over which the
Commission presided.
In England, a commissioner, however small his acquaintance with the
subject, is always deemed fully competent in virtue of his appointment.
The light in which this places us in the opinion of other nations is by
no means flattering to our national vanity. It has been admirably
described by an accomplished Italian resident amongst us in language
which an Englishman might be proud to own, and with a degree of moral
courage which few Englishmen would dare to exert on such a subject.[5]
It was easy to perceive that when so great a mass of people in distant
quarters of the world was set in motion for such an object, it would be
impossible to draw back, and that its own momentum would carry on the
scheme.
§ That the Prince who took so strong an interest in it, and who saw so
clearly and so far beyond the horizon which limited the view of those by
whom he was surrounded, should become its chief, was quite natural.
There are, however, circumstances in the state of society in this
country, and in the constitution of human nature itself, which render it
almost impossible to have unfettered discussion when a person of that
exalted rank takes the chair at the meetings of a Committee.
These objections are entirely unconnected with the individual person,
and if any amount of good feeling and skill in such a Chairman could
remove the difficulty, we have fortunately had amongst us several
Princes who might easily have accomplished it. But the forms of society
forbid in the presence of princes that full and free discussion by which
alone the united knowledge of a Committee can be brought into play.
Debates must take place and divisions occur: otherwise some individual
may take upon himself to assume what either is, or appears to him to be,
the sense of the meeting: this is much more frequently simply the
expression of _his own views_. Thus, perhaps, he prevents the statement
of his opinion by some timid man, which is possibly worth more than that
of all the rest of the Committee.
Again: in Committees presided over by persons of this elevated rank, it
is not an uncommon occurrence for some member, anxious for the success
of his _own_ views, privately to hint in conversation with other
members, that these are the wishes of their President.
To these objections, which are generally true, there is, however, one
exception. When the Chairman is eminently conversant with the subject,
while at the same time the minds of the Committee are like a sheet of
blank paper,—the best course that can then be pursued is to allow the
Chairman to interpret the sense of the Committee.
The first act of the Commission was most judicious. It was to annul the
contract with the capitalist who had undertaken the building and the
commercial management of the Exhibition. It is to be regretted, however,
that the actual amount of compensation which he was to receive, was not
finally settled at the time. The subsequent extent of the undertaking
having exceeded that which was originally contemplated, may render this
a question of some difficulty.
The next step was to appeal to the public for subscriptions to carry on
the plan. For this object delegates were sent to many of the large
towns, some of whom, not possessing more knowledge of the subject than
the Commissioners themselves, and having none of their tact, nearly
caused the failure of the whole scheme.
The knowledge and good sense, however, of the working and manufacturing
classes, supplied the deficiencies of these missionaries, and the
subject became popular amongst them. There were, indeed, many exceptions
even amongst these classes. Those whose business had been long
established, and who were manufacturing as largely as their capital
would admit, had no reason to seek additional publicity for the sale of
their produce. Upon them the Exposition would impose only trouble and
expense, without any corresponding advantage.
Others who possessed machinery of peculiar powers of production, or for
the fabrication of curious products, were unwilling to expose these
singular and costly machines to the eyes of their rivals from all
countries. The produce of such machines being generally novelties, they
found a ready sale for it, and therefore had no reason to seek the
Exhibition as the means of publicity.
The extent of the demand for space at the Exhibition, has been as was
naturally to be expected, so great, that it was quite unnecessary to
press any person to exhibit who was not fully aware that it was for his
own interest to do so.
With respect to the subscriptions, there are some observations which it
may be useful to make for the sake of all subscribers to future schemes.
It is said that the total amount subscribed is nearly 90,000_l._ of
which only about 60,000_l._ have been paid.
No subscription ought ever to be advertised until it has been actually
paid. It is quite unjustifiable to employ the money of _bonâ fide_
subscribers in paying for advertisements to gratify the vanity of those,
who are ambitious of appearing large donors, and who are yet so mean as
to decline fulfilling their pledges.
This practice has, unfortunately, of late years been too prevalent.
Persons of rank and position in the country have condescended to allow
their names to appear in lists, for subscriptions which they never
intended to pay, the effect of which has been to decoy others who
trusted to their respectability and truth. The public in future will do
well to abstain from subscribing to _any list_, however respectable the
names may apparently be, unless it is distinctly stated that the
subscriptions advertised have really been paid.
In the present case it would be a further waste of money to advertise
the defaulters: but the Commission have a remedy, and they owe it to the
genuine subscribers. Let a circular be sent to each defaulter,
announcing that unless his subscription is paid by a certain day, his
name will be returned to the clerk of the _Black list_, who has
directions to make an alphabetical index of defaulters, several copies
of which will be exposed to the public in various parts of the Crystal
Palace during the whole time of the exhibition.
If public opinion were fully ripe for such a vast industrial
undertaking, it ought to be entirely self-supporting. This seems to have
been the opinion of the Commission, and with every wish to assist that
object, and every desire to make allowances for the want of all past
experience on the subject, a few remarks may be made which may promote
the interests of some future Exposition, even though unavailing for the
present.
The first question is necessarily the position of the building, and the
facilities for access and egress. As this question is discussed in
Chapter VII., it is sufficient here to state, that the amount received
from the admission of the public will very much depend upon this point.
On the other hand, the difficulty and expense of conveying the things
exhibited, will not be very different in different localities. This
arises from the fact that if a package has to be taken from a boat, a
ship, or a railway, and to be conveyed by cart to the locality at which
it is to be exhibited, the expense and the danger of injury will be but
very slightly increased, whether it is carted an additional quarter of a
mile, or mile, or even a still greater distance.
Another very important question arises as to the price of admission to
the Exhibition. There is no doubt, that if it were entirely free to the
public, it would be almost entirely useless. Nor is it less certain that
various prices ought to be charged on different days. The Commission
seem to have made a very fair selection for the commencement of the
experiment. Perhaps it would have been better to allow Saturday to be
one of the cheapest days of admission, because in many workshops the
journeymen leave their work at an earlier hour on that day: by the
sacrifice of the half day’s work, they would then be able to spend a
considerable portion of the day in examining those objects in which they
take an interest.
Perhaps on a future occasion some such scheme of admission as the
following might be found most productive. After the exceptional days at
the commencement, occupying the first fortnight, the admission might be
charged thus:—
May June July Aug. Sept. Oct.
s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d.
Mon. 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 6 0 6 0 3
Tues. 10 0 5 0 2 6 2 0 1 6 1 0
Wednes. 5 0 2 6 1 6 1 0 1 0 0 6
Thurs. 2 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 6 0 3
Frid. 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 6 0 6 0 3
Sat. 1 0 1 0 0 6 0 6 0 3 0 3
The principle of this scale is, that each week day shall gradually
diminish in actual price, but shall always preserve its relative price.
Thus Tuesday is always the day of dearest admission, Wednesday of the
next dearest, whilst Saturday is always the day of cheap admission.
These periods might be distributed by weeks instead of months.
Whatever arrangement is made as to the price of admission, it is of very
great importance that the number of visitors at the various prices
should be noted and recorded for future use. It will indeed be
unfortunate if knowledge so important for any similar occasion, should
not be registered on the present.
For this purpose _every_ entrance should have one or more self-acting
turnstiles registering the number of those who pass through it. Not only
the public who pay, but the exhibitors and all who have free admissions
should be registered. At the end of each hour, when the clock strikes,
each gate-keeper should enter in a book the number indicated by his
register. Such a collection of facts, extending over the whole time of
the Exposition, would not only be invaluable for any future one, but
would furnish materials for other important inquiries.
The general state of the weather, which of course would have a powerful
influence, might be known from other registers: but it would be
advisable that at the end of each day some note were made of the general
state of the weather at the Crystal Palace itself.
§ After the first of these Expositions it seems probable that their
advantages will become so well known, that it may be quite possible to
let out the stalls to exhibitors under certain conditions. Foreigners
might still be admitted to exhibit without payment, because the expense
of carriage would more than compensate for the rent.
Some stalls might be granted without rent by the Commissioners, the
peculiar circumstances of each case having been considered. Again, other
stalls, or at least other means of exhibition, might be accorded to
those who contributed articles of actual use in the building; as for
example, a large striking clock, a steam-engine to drive the machinery
or to supply the fountains.
Other means might be readily devised of increasing the receipts, giving
at the same time increased convenience to the public. Thus, from the
great extent of the building, and from the crowd, it may become
difficult to pass easily from one part of the building to another. Now
if the stalls were placed back to back along the centre of the great
longitudinal avenues, a railway formed of wooden planks placed edgeways
might be raised above the middle of them at a height of about eight
feet, which would interfere but little with the stalls.
On this open railway cars mounted on wheels bound with india-rubber,[6]
in order to avoid all noise, might travel at the rate of from one to two
or perhaps three miles an hour. These cars might have luxurious
cushions, and hold parties of different numbers. One line in a side
aisle, the “express,” might be devoted entirely to conveying passengers
from one end to the other at the rate of three miles an hour, setting
down at six or more intermediate stations: the payment might be one
penny, or perhaps, on grand days, two or three pence. The other lines
should take parties slowly along, so as to allow time to see the crowd
below and the wonders of the exhibition, which might be rendered more
distinct by means of opera glasses. Each trip might occupy twenty
minutes or half an hour, and be charged threepence, sixpence, or a
shilling, according to the price of admission on that day. By these
means multitudes of ladies, children, and even of men, relieved from
bodily fatigue, might be able to acquire knowledge or derive pleasure,
which without these resources it would be impossible for them to enjoy.
It is probable that the light iron framing of such cars might be
provided gratuitously by some exhibitors, and the spring cushions and
ornamental drapery might be supplied by others, in consideration of the
advertisement thus afforded of the purveyor’s taste and skill.
The chariots of these railways should be drawn by means of a rope
connected with the motive power.
If dumb railways are not thought expedient, small galleries at least
might be made to which admission should be obtained by a small payment,
so that those who wanted to traverse quickly from one part to another of
the building, might thus, by avoiding the crowd, save time.
Umbrellas, and sticks, and great coats might be taken charge of by
ticket on payment of one halfpenny. Also, any visitor might be allowed
to deposit on his departure a bag containing his catalogue, note-book,
or any articles which it might be inconvenient to him to take home with
him each day, as is customary at the railway stations.
Other accommodations will suggest themselves, to be provided on the
payment of a very small fee; for example, soap and water and a clean
towel may be very desirable to some visitors, especially to those who
may examine the machinery.
It is probable that there may occasionally occur large crowds pressing
for admittance. It may be worth while to consider whether in such cases
an additional reserved entrance might not be opened, through which
ladies and children, and men whom age or indisposition has deprived of
the physical force requisite for encountering a crowd, might be allowed
to pass on the farther payment, say of sixpence or a shilling.
If it were possible to have a similar reserved enclosure close to the
building, in which carriages might remain on payment of a small fee,
much inconvenience would be saved to some of the visitors, and some
advantage would result to those who did not avail themselves of it, in
consequence of the diminished line of carriages at the public entrances.
[5] “What shall we do with the Glass Palace? By Spiridione
Gambardella.” London: Aylott & Jones, Paternoster-row.
The speech of the rash “commander of the Channel fleet” (page 9) is
worthy of the pen of the celebrated wit who bestowed that appointment.
[6] Or the rails themselves might have grooves lined with vulcanized
india-rubber.
CHAPTER V.
OBJECT AND USE OF THE EXPOSITION.
The approaching Exposition is considered by many as a great and splendid
show, calculated to give pleasure and excitement to hundreds of
thousands of persons. Even in this sense it would be beneficial, for it
is always important that the pleasures of the people should be
productive of some advance in their tastes and information. But its
great and paramount value depends on other causes. Its object may be
most concisely expressed by stating that—
The Exposition is calculated to promote and increase the free
interchange of raw materials and manufactured commodities between all
the nations of the earth.
Its object is not the exclusive benefit of England, and if any such
mistaken view is still entertained, it may without hesitation be stated
that it would be impossible by any mode of management to accomplish so
selfish an object.
It is the interest of every people, that all other nations should
advance in knowledge, in industrial skill, in taste, and in science. The
advances made in the two latter subjects acquire _permanent_ existence
only through the _publicity_ given to their enunciation and discussion.
Refining and elevating all by whom they are received, new principles in
taste or in science, as soon as they are accepted as truths, become the
universal property of mankind.
In whatever distant country any man devises means of diminishing the
cost of production of the commodity he deals in, the following effects
will result—
He will make larger profits than usual.
He will then diminish his price in order to get more customers.
His rivals in trade now find it necessary to undersell him in order to
get back their customers.
Whilst this competition goes on, the price of the commodity falls, a
larger consumption takes place and new purchasers will arise, which for
a time checks the fall.
Ultimately, his rivals in the trade either remove their capital into
other lines of business, or adopt the improved process.
In the mean time the first discoverer will, if a prudent and industrious
man, have realized a considerable capital, for he will be fully aware
that in the present state of science no monopoly can be permanent. He
will rather seek for a succession of moderate improvements, which
exciting no immediate inquiry or rivalry, shall increase the average per
centage of his profits, thus constantly keeping his manufactory one, or
at the utmost, only two steps in advance of his competitors.
When in consequence of such an improvement, a reduced price and an
enlarged demand has arisen in his own country, the manufacturer will
naturally make inquiries whether at this diminished price other
countries may not be induced to become purchasers. If this is the case,
the fact of their free interchange with him proves that they can acquire
his commodity at a less cost than they can themselves produce it.
But although the Exposition itself could not and ought not to have been
attempted for the sole benefit of this country, it is almost certain
that England will reap the greatest share of its advantages. This will
arise from the more extended system of her commerce, and from the habits
of her people. The profits of the merchant, other circumstances being
equal, depend upon the amount of his capital. Similarly, the knowledge
brought back by the traveller in foreign countries, or derived from his
observation in his own, will mainly depend on the stock of information
he carried with him to give in exchange.
§ To arrive at those principles by which the Exposition ought to be
regulated, it becomes necessary to examine the nature and extent of the
interests involved.
In all interchanges there are three distinct parties concerned—
The Consumer,
The Middle-man,
The Producer.
The overwhelming superiority both in amount of capital and in the number
of the first of these classes, the _Consumer_, is at once apparent, and
ought throughout the inquiry to be steadily borne in mind. In fact, each
individual of the other two classes is necessarily a member of the
first; for all men are _consumers_, and as such their common bond of
interest is to purchase every thing in the _cheapest_ market.
§ The class _Producer_ is equally indispensable for the purposes of
exchange, but its number is much more limited. The interest of each
individual producer is, that he should sell his _own_ produce at as dear
a price as possible, whilst he purchases that of all other producers as
cheaply as he can.
The class _Producer_, therefore, is not only comparatively small, but
has really a very divided interest, arising only from the difference
between the personal and the class interest of the individual.
§ The class _Middle-man_ is more extensive, comprising merchants,
brokers, factors, wholesale and retail shopkeepers, hawkers, &c. The
profits of this class are generally regarded by the public with some
degree of suspicion. It is often thought that their profits are
exorbitant. But in truth this is not frequently the case. The division
of employments necessarily produces middle-men, and the public in the
long run obtain the articles they require with more convenience and
economy, and at a less fluctuating price, than it would be without such
agency. But the number of intermediate agents in any commerce is itself
subject to change, in different trades and at various times: it is quite
possible that these changes may not have taken place with sufficient
promptitude, and thus the public may have suffered for a time either by
an excess or a defect in the number of middle-men.
The interests of middle-men are, individually, the same as those of
consumers. As a class, the extension of commerce is for their advantage,
because they are paid according to the amount of exchanges made. But
they have also another and a very powerful interest. They fear that if
the public were acquainted with the manufacturing price of articles, it
would consider the difference between that and the selling price as a
tax imposed by the middle-man upon the consumer. The middle-man
therefore has a direct interest in preventing the public from arriving
at a knowledge of the prices charged by the original manufacturer. It is
also the interest of the middle-man that the manufacturer should not
know the price at which his produce sells by retail: but, as it is in
most cases impossible to prevent this, few attempts at concealment are
made.
§ It appears, then, that the interests of these classes may be thus
summed up—
Consumers, including every human being, have a strong interest in the
freest competition as producing the lowest price.
Producers have an interest in selling their produce in the dearest
market, and therefore claim free competition. But they have no advantage
in selling it at the highest price: because a high price limits the
extent of the sale. Their object is that the profit on each article,
multiplied by the number sold, shall be the greatest possible.
Middle-men, although usually adverse to competition, have yet a direct
interest in the amount sold.
CHAPTER VI.
LIMITS.
One of the great difficulties in exhibiting together samples of the
produce and the industry of the world, must obviously be the magnitude
and consequent expense of any building capable of containing such an
exposition. In order to do this most effectively, and to secure the
greatest amount of space for the primary object, it became necessary to
lay down principles within the limits of which the objects exhibited
should be confined. No real difficulty opposed the definition of this
boundary, even if a liberal interpretation were admitted.
The Fine arts and the Industrial arts, although of the highest
importance each to the other, are separated by a sufficiently definite
line of demarcation, even at the points at which they most nearly
approach. The characteristic of the fine arts is, that each example is
an individual—the production of individual taste, and executed by
individual hands; the produce of the fine arts is therefore necessarily
costly. The characteristic of the industrial arts is, that each example
is but one of a multitude,—generated according to the same law, by tools
or machines, (in the largest sense of those terms,) and moved with
unerring precision by the application of physical force. Their produce
is consequently cheap.
The fine arts idealize nature by generalizing from its individual
objects: the industrial arts realize identity by the unbounded use of
the principle of copying.
The union of the two, enlarging vastly the utility of both, enables art
to be appreciated and genius to be admired by millions whom its single
productions would never reach; whilst the producer in return, elevated
by the continual presence of the multiplied reproductions of the highest
beauty, acquires a new source of pleasure, and feels his own mechanical
art raised in his estimation by such an alliance.
§ This distinction between the fine arts and those of industry, would
appear to place some of the latter in a class to which they are not yet
generally admitted. It might seem that all lace not produced by
machinery, must according to this view be admitted amongst the fine
arts.
There are in the Exhibition some beautiful examples of such lace amongst
the productions of other countries as well as of our own. They are made
by the united labour of many women. The cost of a piece of lace will
consist of—
1.—The remuneration to the artist who designs the pattern.
2.—The cost of the raw material.
3.—The cost of the labour of a large number of women working on it for
many months.
Let us compare this with the cost of a piece of statuary, which is
undoubtedly of a much higher class of art; it will consist of:—
1.—The remuneration to the artist who makes the model.
2.—The cost of the raw material.
3.—The cost of labour by assistants in cutting the block to the pattern
of the model.
4.—Finishing the statue by the artist himself.
In lace-making the skill of the artist is required only for the
production of the first example. Every succeeding copy is made by mere
labour: each copy may be considered as an _individual_, and will cost
the same amount of time.
In sculpture the three first processes are quite analogous to those in
lace-making. But the fourth process requires the taste and judgment of
the artist. It is this which causes it to retain its rank amongst the
fine arts, whilst lace-making must still be classed amongst the
industrial.
Here we may observe the strong analogy which unites these very different
processes. If we continue the examination we shall find other
resemblances, and by contrasting sculpture with lace made by machinery,
we shall see in the very nature of their production, the wide interval
which separates the industrial from the fine arts.
In the making both of lace and of statues, the remuneration to the
artists can only be reduced by producing a larger number of them through
more extended education. The expense of the raw material is small in
both. The expense of labour in lace-making is very large, and it is
perhaps considerable also in sculpture. The discovery of more convenient
localities yielding marble, may make some diminution in its cost; and
the improved manufacture of thread may slightly reduce the price of
lace. A reduction in the price of labour may to a very moderate extent
reduce the cost of the raw material of both. But it is evident that any
_very great_ reduction is not to be expected.
Let us now contrast this possible reduction with the past history of
some industrial art. The plain lace made at Nottingham, called patent
net, will supply us with a good example. In the year 1813 that lace was
sold in the piece at the rate of 21_s._ a-yard. At the present time lace
of the same kind, but of a better quality, is sold under the same
circumstances at 3_d._ per yard. Thus, in less than forty years the
price of the industrial produce has diminished to one eighty-fourth part
of its original price.
§ The fine arts, already possessing a building and an exhibition of
their own, which usually opens on the same day as that proposed for the
opening of the Palace of Industry, it seems difficult at first to
imagine why the limited space disposable within the latter edifice
should be occupied by any portion of a subject exclusively belonging to
the fine arts. Yet it has been decided that Sculpture shall be admitted
but Painting rejected.[7]
Supposing both departments of art to be equally excluded, there would
still be a propriety, and even almost a necessity to admit some examples
of each. New tools used by the sculptor, suppose for preparing the
block, might require an example of their mode of application; whilst the
effects produced on the surface of the marble by other tools, could only
be shown by comparative specimens.
Machinery of a very beautiful kind has been contrived for copying
accurately, on a reduced or an enlarged scale, both medals and statues.
The Venus de Medici itself could not be justly excluded from a purely
industrial exhibition,—if placed in the centre of a series diminishing
on the one side to a statuette of a foot high, and increasing on the
other to a figure double her own height. Such a series, though fairly
introduced as an illustration of industrial art, would, indeed, itself
be highly interesting to the fine arts, as exhibiting the effect of
change of magnitude, when the proportions remain identical.
Enamel painting would be excluded as belonging to the fine arts, but
every painting on porcelain partakes in fact of the nature of an enamel
painting. A service of porcelain would of course be admitted as a
specimen of mechanical art, however highly it might be adorned by this
form of painting.
New modes of engraving might be exhibited, analogous, for example, to
that by which medals are so beautifully represented. There are several
new methods of surface printing for multiplying original designs. In all
such cases it would be very desirable to place before the eye of the
spectator, the originals from which the copies were derived, and it
might also add to the utility and interest of the Exposition, even to
exhibit other forms of engraving of the same subject, for the sake of
comparison.
The instruments by which daguerreotypes and talbotypes are produced,
would assuredly claim a place; so also might a collection of their
results. It would also be instructive that some of these productions
should be accompanied by the original forms or paintings from which they
were copied.
The general rule, therefore, might be, that specimens of the fine arts
should not be admitted by themselves; but that they should not be
excluded,—as illustrations,—either of the use of some tool or instrument
by which their own production might be assisted,—or as forming parts or
decorations of objects of the industrial arts,—or for the sake of
comparison with the copies or imitations of them produced by these
latter arts.
[7] Since this was written, the beautiful effect produced by sculpture
in the Crystal Palace has fully justified the decision of the
Commission. In fact, the only real objection to the admission either
of sculpture or painting arises from the extent of space required.
CHAPTER VII.
SITE AND CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING.
The questions connected with the construction of the building, were
surrounded with considerable difficulties, even to the best informed. It
should be capable of containing specimens, not merely of all the
manufactured products of the world, but also of all the raw materials
now used, and even of such, as being presented to the attention of
competent persons, might probably become useful hereafter.
The site of such a building, its fitness for its purpose, and the cost
of its construction, were the chief points to be considered.
Its situation especially was the most important, because that
circumstance would greatly influence the number of persons visiting the
Exposition, and therefore the amount of the receipts out of which the
building was to be paid for.
The first principle which should guide the choice of a site, is
obviously the _convenience of visitors_; and a little observation, or a
moderate share of common sense, will show how the principle should be
applied.
It is known to all those who have observed the course of crowds of human
beings going to and returning from some centre of attraction, that if
the spot on which the assemblage is to take place is subject to our
choice, much of the difficulty of the arrangements will be removed.
Other circumstances being equal, that site is the best which admits of
the greatest number of independent channels by which the multitude can
arrive and retire. The means of access should be so arranged that
various divisions of the visitors would, according to the quarter in
which they reside, naturally take each its own most convenient course,
without the necessity of any instruction from police or attendants.
Various sites had been proposed. Hyde Park;—the Regent’s Park;—Primrose
Hill, still more distant;—fields on the south side of the Thames
intended to form Battersea Park.
It is fortunate that neither of the two latter was chosen, although they
had many advocates: for in all probability the receipts would have been
diminished by at least a third, if not by a half.
Various situations were pointed out in Hyde Park. One on the north
nearly facing Hyde Park Gardens—one on the south nearly opposite the
Barracks; this latter was ultimately chosen.
§ But a different position may be pointed out which combines so many
advantages that it is much to be regretted it was not placed at the
disposal of the Commission.
The distance between Cumberland Gate and the gate at Hyde Park Corner,
is about 1,300 yards, or nearly three quarters of a mile. On the eastern
side of the park, adjoining Park Lane, there is a narrow strip occupied
by plantations, the circular reservoir and gardens.
On the open ground adjacent to this strip, but rather nearer to
Cumberland Gate, the Crystal Palace might advantageously have been
placed. Its length being nearly 629 yards, each end would have been
about 350 yards from the two great roads of access. This site would have
possessed the following advantages:—
1. Its distance from the north or south entrance of the park would,
for the average of visitors, have been considerably less than that
of the present site.
To persons standing at Hyde Park Corner or at Cumberland Gate, the
respective ends of the building would have appeared, from its great
elevation, almost close to them.
2. There are very few trees upon it, and those few are still young.
3. It is the highest ground in the park, and could, therefore, be
better drained.
In its present position the building can scarcely be seen from either of
those positions. It is above half a mile from Hyde Park Corner: whilst
it is three quarters of a mile by footpath, and nearly a mile and a half
by carriage drive from Cumberland Gate.
The large majority of visitors from the north and the south will enter
the park through these two approaches. The average distance, therefore,
which each will have to travel in the park, will be nearly three
quarters of a mile.
Yards.
The distance of the nearest end of the present building
from Hyde Park Corner is about 940
From Cumberland Gate is, by footpath, about 1560
Ditto, by carriage, about 2490
The distance of the end of the proposed site from Hyde
Park Corner, is about 375
Ditto, from Cumberland Gate 375
If we consider how many persons might have entered close to a building
thus placed, through Grosvenor and Stanhope Gates, or through any
temporary ones near them, it will be perceived that this average
distance would in fact be much diminished.
Supposing that an equal number of visitors arrive by each approach, we
have some means of approximating to one portion of the inconvenience and
loss which the public will suffer from its present position.
In the first place the number of visitors has been variously estimated
from one to seven millions. Let us suppose it to be four millions. Each
of these four million visitors will, on an average, have to travel one
mile and a quarter more than would have been necessary to go to and
return from the Exposition. Thus five millions of miles will be
uselessly traversed. If the expense of transport were one penny a-mile,
and the value of time on an average four shillings a-day, the account
would run thus—
2,000,000 persons travel 1½ mile.
1,000,000
----------
6) 3,000,000 miles at six miles per hour.
----------
10) 500,000 hours.
----------
4s.=⅕l.) 50,000 days of ten hours each.
------
10,000l. value of lost time.
------
A similar calculation of the time lost by 2,000,000 persons travelling
three miles an hour would give 13,333_l._
The expense of travelling at 1_d._ per mile of the first 2,000,000, who
travel in carriages, gives—
12) 3,000,000 miles.
---------
20) 250,000
-------
12,500l. cost of carr. of two millions 1½ mile each.
10,000l. cost of time of ditto.
13,333l. cost of time of two millions at 1 mile each.
------
35,833l. total loss.
------
In this estimate the price of one penny a-mile may perhaps be thought
high, especially when it is known that many will go on foot, others in
omnibus, others in their own carriages: but in order to remain the same
number of hours in the present building, from the extra time required to
visit it, it will be necessary for many persons to spend one additional
day in London, which could scarcely be done under twenty pence even by
the poorest visitor.
The allowance of six miles an hour for travelling in omnibus or
carriage, considering the stoppages of the one, and the crowd on the
single road of approach for both, will be admitted to be moderate.
The rate of four shillings per day, or twenty-four shillings per week,
as the value of the time of the visitors, will probably be thought less
than its average value.
There can be no doubt that under these disadvantages the actual site
must cause the loss of a large number of visitors, who would have
partaken of the enjoyment in the more favourable position. The amount of
_pure loss_ thus suffered by the visitors as a class, must be withdrawn
from the sum they intended to expend on their visit.
One of the earliest acts of the Commission was to advertise for plans of
a building suitable for their purpose.
Certain principles were laid down. It should be _temporary_ in its
character—it should be economical in its cost—it should be fire-proof or
nearly so—it should be built and fit for use in an inconceivably short
time, and capable of being removed in still less.
A lithographed plan of the ground assigned for it, was circulated for
the use of all who chose to make suggestions, or to compete for the
prizes offered for the most approved designs; this insured a certain
amount of uniformity in scale, which rendered comparison easier.
Although, from necessity, a very short time could be allowed for
preparation, yet 240 designs for the building were offered.
These were exhibited to the public at the apartments of the Society of
Arts; a certain number of them were selected as worthy of praise, and
some as deserving more substantial rewards.
There appears to have existed from the beginning in the public mind, not
only in England but on the Continent, a belief that the Commissioners
would not be very rigid in interpreting their rules. This was probably
confirmed by the sudden and unlooked-for withdrawal of the large prizes
that had been promised to the public at the commencement. Accordingly,
the various plans seemed to vie with each other in violating the rules
laid down by the Commission; those selected for reward were not the most
consistent with them. In order to give confidence to the future, it
would have been expedient, previously to examining their merits, to have
rejected all which grossly violated the conditions proposed by the
Commission.
Beautiful plans might be suggested for magnificent buildings, if the
designers were alike reckless of cost and of time of construction, and
those who had honestly confined themselves to the prescribed conditions
felt, with some reason, aggrieved at finding the violators of them
applauded and rewarded.
Although there was, in the opinion of the Commissioners, much of beauty
and genius, and many suggestions of value, yet none of the plans
approached their own idea of what was requisite. It was therefore
resolved that the Commission should itself originate one, availing
themselves of the hints contained in these plans.
In the mean time, Mr. Paxton, who had devised and successfully carried
out a new kind of architecture, the chief material of which was glass,
came to their assistance. He drew the plans of his singular design, and
was fortunate enough to find in Messrs. Fox and Henderson a firm capable
of supplying all those mechanical details necessary for its success, and
even of contracting to execute the work in a period of time so short
that it will probably long remain unrivalled in the art of construction.
The Commission accepted this offer, and the present beautiful building
arose as if by magic. Amongst all the curious and singular products
which the taste, the skill, the industry of the world, have confided to
the judgment of England, there will be found within that crystal
envelope, few whose manufacture can claim a higher share of our
admiration than that palace itself, which shelters these splendid
results of advanced civilization.
The building itself was regularly manufactured. Simple in its
construction, and requiring the multiplied repetition of few parts, its
fabrication was contrived with consummate skill. The internal economy
with which its parts were made and put together on the spot was itself a
most instructive study.[8]
[8] The reader will find very interesting details and drawings of this
manufacture in the “Illustrated London News,” and in the “Expositor.”
CHAPTER VIII.
PRICES.
The great mass of consumers are always anxious to know the _price_ of a
commodity. To them it is the most essential consideration in a purchase.
The thoughtless rich care little about the price, and those who don’t
intend to pay, care still less about it. The most knowing of this latter
class, indeed, often deceive the vigilance of honest tradesmen by
affecting a peculiar earnestness about cheapness. It is quite true that
many well-known articles in great demand have a certain market price,
and some a certain fixed price; as for instance, a penny roll. In this
latter case the judgment of the purchaser is directed to its size, or
its goodness, or to both those qualities together.
§ It may be useful to trace out the course of purchases by retail, and
to show the fine gradations of impediment which are insensibly
interposed between the vendor and consumer, as obstacles to a full
examination of the article by the latter. Of course neither an article
of daily consumption ought to be taken as an example, nor yet one
immediately wanted by a consumer, whose time is so valuable that it
would be cheaper to go into the first shop he finds and purchase it at
any price.
§ Let us suppose that a lady having some leisure goes out in search of a
fan. She passes several shops in which they may or may not be kept for
sale.
She sees some fans in a shop window, but as they are _not open_ she
passes on, intending to return to them if she cannot suit herself
elsewhere.
A few doors beyond there are some fans _open_, but none of them exactly
suit her taste, and she does not like to give the owner of the shop the
trouble of opening a number of fans, none of which may please her.
In the next street she sees in the window of a shop some fans, which
_are open_. One of these appears to suit her, but there is no price
marked on it. She does not like to go into the shop and examine more
minutely whether the subtle implement she requires has sufficient
strength to withstand its ball-room trials, lest it may be too expensive
for her purse.
A short distance beyond another set of _opened_ fans present themselves
to her notice in the window of another shop, each of them with its price
distinctly marked upon it. One of these the hesitating lady prefers, _a
little_, to the last she had approved, and she resolves to enter this
shop and examine the fan. But perceiving before she enters, that there
is no attendant in the shop, she thinks the mistress may be at dinner,
or have gone up stairs to her baby, and she says to herself, “It is of
no consequence; I will not disturb her now.”
Still passing onward she finds a shop in the window of which is a pretty
fan, although not quite so good as the last, and within there sits the
shopkeeper—but the door is _shut_.
Although the fan was not the most suitable the lady had seen, yet had
that door been open, she would have entered, hoping that the fans
exposed in the window were samples of classes kept in store within.
At last she finds all these impediments removed; a fan that will nearly
suit her lies open in the window, with its price clearly marked, an
attendant is in the shop, and the door is hospitably _open_. She enters
and examines it, and finding it well made, asks whether there are others
of the same class of pattern, to which the reply is that it is the only
one remaining. Upon this she purchases the fan, although had she entered
several of the former shops, she might have found fans both more exactly
suited to her taste and at a less price. The _marking_ has decided her
choice. It is not to be imagined that all, or even the greater part of
these impediments, ever occurred to one person at the same time: but
there are few who have not at different times felt the effects of most
of them.
§ It is said that _ladies by education and birth_ occasionally amuse
themselves by entering shops and giving interminable trouble, having no
intention of making any purchase. This doubtlessly is a libel.
§ Several other minor impediments deter purchasers from some shops, and
incline them to frequent others; amongst these may be mentioned an over
officiousness in the attendants to recommend to the attention of the
purchaser other articles than those he requires. This pressure to induce
purchases is peculiarly offensive, and drives away the best customers.
The absence of a marked price upon an article, tends to defeat the
effect of competition, as well as to produce loss of time both to
consumer and vendor. It is therefore, to a certain extent, a cause of
increase of price.
Its effect is to cause the same article to be sold at different prices
in the same neighbourhood, thus counteracting that uniformity of price
at considerable distances, which is consequent upon rapid and cheap
communication.
§ As the extent to which this is carried even in a great city, may not
be known, the following occurrence will afford an illustration:—
A gentleman wishing to make the light of his reading lamp approach more
nearly to day-light, looked out for a lamp-glass of a blue tint. Having
observed one of the wished-for colour in a shop window marked at 1_s._
6_d._ he purchased it. After a considerable trial he was so satisfied
with the comfort it afforded to his eyes, that he wished to have other
lamps in his house similarly furnished. On returning to the shop at
which the blue globe was purchased, he found that its proprietor had
retired, and his successor was in a different line of business. Seeing
in the window of another shop in his own neighbourhood, a coloured globe
of the same size, he entered and inquired the price. To his great
surprise the price was stated to be 3_s._; and on asking if any
reduction would be made if he took a dozen or two, the answer was that
in that case the lowest price would be half-a-crown each.
This naturally led him to suppose that the cheapness of the first glass
arose from the accident of its proprietor being about to retire from
business, and he therefore decided upon confining his indulgence in the
luxury of white light to his single reading lamp. One day, however, he
accidentally saw in another shop window a similar globe of blue glass.
On inquiring within, he was informed that its price was 1_s._, and that
the price per dozen was 11_s._
Under these new circumstances he provided a blue globe for every lamp in
his house.
Now it is necessary to observe that these glasses, charged at 3_s._,
1_s._ 6_d._, and 1_s._, were offered for sale at three different shops
not distant from each other a mile and a half, and were not only of the
same size, weight, shade of colour and quality of glass, but had each
the same maker’s stamp upon them, and may possibly have been taken from
the same pot of glass. It is remarkable also that the cheapest glass
globe, although exposed in the shop window, had no price attached to it.
§ It is obvious, if it were the custom invariably to mark the price upon
each article exposed for sale, that such unreasonable differences of
price in the same article could not exist. It is certain that, if the
Royal Commissioners were to consult the dealer who charged 3_s._ for an
article sold by his neighbour at 1_s._, they would be informed that it
would be absolutely ruinous to have prices affixed to articles
exhibited. Such a tradesman would assure them, and with perfect truth,
that it would entirely destroy his trade. But if he cannot live upon the
ordinary profits of capital employed in his trade, are the unwary public
to pay two hundred per cent. beyond the market price, in order to
support a tradesman unfit for his business? If, on the other hand, the
Commissioners were to ask the opinion of the tradesman who sold the
glass at 1_s._, he undoubtedly would not object to the general practice
of affixing prices to each article. The opinion of the vendor of the
glass at 1_s._ 6_d._ was sufficiently expressed by its being attached to
that article.
§ There are several causes assigned for the admitted repugnance of
shopkeepers to allow the price of any article they sell to be marked
upon it.
It is broadly asserted that the public, being unable to judge of the
article, will be guided too much by the cheapness of its money price,
neglecting its other qualities, and will thus be induced to purchase
worthless things.
It is always somewhat suspicious when the vendor volunteers to take care
of the interest of the purchaser. It reverses the decision of the common
sense of mankind, expressed in the ancient proverb, “_caveat emptor_.”
Besides, it is by no means true that the public are so ignorant or
incapable of appreciating all those other qualities. In some articles
the difficulty is undoubtedly great, whilst in others it may require
time to be spent in their examination even by those who are as
conversant with the articles as the vendor himself. But why should the
time of both parties be wasted by an examination, when the price may be
such as to preclude its purchase, whatever may be its other merits?
§ Of all the various qualities which contribute to the excellence of any
given article, that which it is most easy to ascertain—that which it is
impossible to falsify—and that without the exact knowledge of which no
purchase can possibly be made, is the very one which it is wished to
withhold from the knowledge of the purchaser, until through the art of
the vendor, the finer feelings of the customer induce him to think
himself in some measure committed to purchase that of which he does not
entirely approve.
It is from circumstances like these, that the prejudice against retail
dealers arises and is confirmed in the public mind. There is no reason
why that class should not be as highly respected as the possessors of
extensive domains. To deserve that respect they have only to insist upon
all persons in their employment abstaining from the slightest deception
in serving their customers; to which rule it would be desirable to add,
that the leading members of each trade should unite in discountenancing
those who are guilty of any such practices.
§ The effect upon the sale of an article by the absence of its price may
be illustrated by another example. Some years ago a large bazaar was
held for some charitable object at the Hanover Square Rooms. It was
patronised by the highest rank, and the beauty of the fair shopkeepers
was even more attractive than the wares they had to dispose of. A
collector thought this a favourable opportunity of adding to his
collection a vase of porphyry: having paid the admission fee of 5_s._,
he entered, and soon perceived some beautiful specimens of the object he
desired. Having looked at them for some time, he selected in his mind
one which he would willingly have purchased if it were within the limit
(10_l._) which he had assigned for the gratification of his taste. There
was, however, no price attached to any of the vases, and fearing that
they were all beyond his means, he reluctantly departed without the
wished-for acquisition. It happened that he mentioned in the course of
the next year the circumstance to a friend who was acquainted with the
history of the vase in question. The vase for which he would willingly
have given 10_l._ was not sold at that bazaar, but some time after it
appeared at a less fashionable bazaar And was sold for 5_l._
§ Most of those who visit the Exposition will each according to their
means wish to retain some memorial of it. Many will have been
economising during the previous year in order to purchase some object of
utility or of pleasure either for their own use or to take back as
remembrances to their family and friends. It would be very difficult
amidst the vast variety of attractions, even if the price of each were
marked upon it, to select the most desirable article within those limits
of expense to which each purchaser is confined. But by forbidding the
marking of prices, this difficulty is converted into an impossibility.
The first step according to the decree of the Commissioners, would be to
go round and ask the price of at least a hundred, if not a thousand
articles. These must be written down by each inquirer unless the
Exhibitors supply him with printed lists. Even if he make a selection
out of these, it is a hundred to one that some other article in the
enormous collection would, if he had known its price, have pleased him
better.
§ If we examine the history of the earlier stages of society, we shall
see the constant tendency of its institutions to facilitate the mutual
exchange of commodities between its members, and to remove every
obstacle impeding their interchange. When the population was thinly
scattered over the country, the possessor of a fowl, wanting a pound of
butter, was obliged to go some distance to a neighbour either to
purchase the butter or to get it in exchange for the fowl. But it would
have cost him more time than the worth of the butter if he had visited
several neighbours to find out where it was the cheapest. To remedy this
inconvenience, market days were established in the villages and towns at
more or less frequent intervals. On these occasions each farmer sent one
of the family to the periodic market, who sold the produce of the farm
and purchased whatever might be required of their neighbours, who were
each represented by one of their own family at that common market.
Itinerant vendors of various manufactured articles flocked to these
markets because they there met their customers with less loss of time
and less fatigue.
Whilst these hawkers thus gained on the one hand, it must be admitted
that they lost on the other those occasionally extravagant profits
sometimes levied on the necessities of their isolated customers. But on
the whole they derived from their trade a more regular rate of profit,
because the competition side by side of rival goods and rival prices,
rendered that profit much less fluctuating. Their greatest gain,
however, arose from the time saved by all parties, which largely
increased the consumption of their respective articles of produce.
§ When towns became enlarged, the same principle of mutual interest led
to the selection of particular streets or quarters of the town by
particular trades. In many cities on the continent, the jewellers, as
well as some other trades, still occupy entire streets by themselves.
The next step seems to have been to hold a general exchange in a fixed
spot at certain periodic times. This was necessary for the merchants and
larger dealers, and for international exchanges. In great cities this
was again subdivided into various branches of business, as—The Corn
Exchange—The Coal Exchange, &c.
§ At these marts a class of men called brokers arose, whose business it
was to sell on commission for the producers, and to purchase on
commission for the merchants or other middle men.
The economy of time produced by this arrangement is very great. Let us
suppose an exchange or bazaar attended by a hundred purchasers and a
hundred sellers. Each purchaser, in order to become fully acquainted
with the state of the market, must ask at least two questions of each
seller—
1st. What is the price?
2d. What quantity have you for sale at that price?
This alone gives rise to _twenty thousand questions_. If, on the other
hand, a broker is employed, each of the two hundred persons who
constitute the market, will have to answer those two questions only to
his own broker; consequently, there will only be four hundred such
questions. If there are twenty brokers, these may meet together at the
market, and each stating his commissions both for purchase and for sale,
a list may be immediately formed by which the state of the market as to
supply and demand becomes known, and in the event of there being but
little difference in the quality of the articles, it becomes easy for
the brokers to arrange the requisite exchanges at prices which are
equitable for all parties.
§ Great, however, as this advantage is, it is small compared with
another which we shall now consider. When a bargain is made directly by
the two individuals interested in it, there usually occurs on both sides
an attempt to appear more or less indifferent about it, in order to
secure advantageous terms. Thus price is made to depend partly upon the
personal feelings and qualities of the parties, and the less impulsive
and more sagacious will gain considerable advantage over the hasty and
inexperienced. A certain degree also of misrepresentation often occurs,
and the price demanded is frequently greater than that which the seller
is willing to take: thus the quantity of time consumed by parties
themselves in bargaining, is always much greater than that in which
their brokers can do the business for them on more advantageous terms.
Again: the broker has an interest in effecting sales, because he is paid
in proportion to their amount. But he has no interest in favouring one
class of his customers more than another: his profits depend entirely
upon his knowledge, his industry, and his integrity. The necessity of
the intervening broker arises from the imperfections of mankind, and
when rigidly honest his services are invaluable. If one party is
perfectly aware of all circumstances relating to the state of the
market, he has no need of any broker, because he can acquire no new
information: on the other hand, those who treat with him may as well
save themselves the expense of a broker, because nothing can be
communicated on the subject which is not already known.
When these principles, which are found to prevail in large transactions,
are applied to the retail concerns of everyday life, the intervention of
the broker is not required. This arises from the multitude of the
transactions, the smallness of the individual amount of each, and the
immense variety of the articles of exchange.
§ Another class of middle-men now come into existence, namely,
Shopkeepers. The evils already pointed out still exist. One of the
questions, it is true, need not be asked, for the quantity of an article
held by a retail dealer, is usually much larger than the wants of any
individual customer; but the question of price still remains. The
removal of all these difficulties may be accomplished by the adoption of
one simple plan—let the price be affixed to each article.
Other advantages result from the publicity thus given to price. Many who
would not otherwise inquire the price, thinking it might be above their
means, will now become purchasers. Others, not themselves intending to
purchase, may incidentally cause their friends to purchase by quoting
the prices they have seen affixed to certain articles. Others again, may
be induced by the cheapness of an article to purchase it for uses for
which it was not originally intended,—as, for instance, a beautiful
chintz for papering a room.
§ In almost all works of industry, whatever may be the kind of
excellence of an article exhibited, it is possible to produce one of
greater excellence.
Take for instance a sheet of window-glass; its size might be adduced as
the ground of excellence. The beautiful process of “_flashing_” by which
it is made, is preceded by another in which the workman blows a large
globe of glass. The size of the expanded flat circle of glass, called a
“_table_,” depends on the magnitude of this sphere, which again is
limited by the power of the workman’s lungs. But when larger tables were
wanted, an observant workman found that if his mouth had been previously
washed out with water, a greater sphere was produced. In fact, a small
portion of the water, carried over with his breath, became converted
into steam by the heat, and thus increased the pressure within. This led
to a new limit, and there can be no doubt that by means of expensive
mechanical contrivances, still larger spheres might be blown.
§ Now the whole merit of any such new process, in the eye of the
manufacturer, would depend on the _price_ at which the produce could be
sold.
The same principle prevails in almost all works of the civil engineer.
With the talent now existing in that profession, scarcely any
undertaking is impossible. The real and most important limitation is the
_price_ of execution.
§ In the fine arts also the ultimate object still is the acquisition by
the public of the productions submitted to their examination. If,
however, the price is not stated, it may happen that a person of
moderate means, more capable of appreciating a work of art than richer
men, might be prevented from acquiring it by a feeling of delicacy. For
not liking to ask the price, and thinking probably that it is beyond his
means, the object may be sold to a richer competitor at a lower price
than he would himself willingly have given.
This consequence of the absence of price is injurious both to art and to
artists: it occasionally removes from the field of competition the best
judges of real merit. It is true that in several professions a certain
delicacy respecting money matters exists which is wanting in others.
Medical men and artists are peculiarly subject to its influence; but it
is not reported of any lawyer that he ever refused a fee, and it is
recorded of some Secretary of the Admiralty that he claimed _a quarter
of a year’s war salary_, on account of the two days interruption of
peace by the combat of Algiers.
§ Another result of the prices not being marked upon objects is, that
the public are unable to form any just estimate of their commercial
value; consequently, no proper public opinion arises to assist the
juries in their decisions. This is a matter of considerable importance:
the duty of a juror at an exposition is quite different from that of a
juror in a legal question. It is the business of the Industrial juror to
avail himself of the knowledge and the observations of all around him.
Much of what he thus hears he may be able himself to verify by
examination or experiment, and thus public opinion will be more matured,
and the decisions of the juries have greater weight.
§ Many of the qualities of the articles exhibited can only be
ascertained by use, or even by their destruction. In such cases a single
sample would often be purchased if it had its price affixed to it.
Another class, small indeed in number, but important from its functions,
suffers the greatest inconvenience from the absence of price. Those
engaged in studying the commercial and economical relations of various
manufactures, either for the gratification of their own tastes or for
the instruction of the public, are entirely deprived of the most
important element of their reasonings.
If _every article_ had its price affixed, many relations would strike
the eye of an experienced observer which might lead him to further
inquiries, and probably to the most interesting results. But it is quite
impossible for him to write to any considerable portion of 15,000
expositors for their list of prices, or even to go round and ask for it
in the building itself.
§ Price in many cases offers at once a verification of the truth of
other statements. Thus, to a person conversant with the subjects,
The low _price_ of an article might prove that it had been manufactured
in some mode entirely different from that usually practised. This would
lead to an examination of it, in order to discover the improved process.
The _price_ of an article compared with its weight, might prove that the
metal of which it is made _could not_ be genuine.
The _price_ of a woven fabric, added to a knowledge of its breadth and
substance, even without its weight, might in many cases effectually
disprove the statement of its being entirely made of wool, or hair, or
flax, or silk, as the case might be.
The exchange of commodities between those to whom such exchanges may be
desirable, being the great and ultimate object of the Exposition, every
circumstance that can give publicity to the things exhibited, should be
most carefully attended to. The price in money is the _most important
element_ in every bargain; to omit it, is not less absurd than to
represent a tragedy without its hero, or to paint a portrait without a
nose.
It commits a double error: for it withholds the only test by which the
comparative value of things can be known, and it puts aside the greatest
of all interests, that of the consumer, in order to favour a small and
particular class—the middle-men.
The composition of that Commission must be most extraordinary, where an
error so contrary to the principles and so fatal to the objects of the
Exposition, could have been committed. It is not too late to apply at
least a partial remedy to the evil, and it is scarcely credible that
those with whom it rests, can remain unconscious of the mistake into
which they have been led.
§ At the eighth meeting of the Commissioners, on the 28th Feb. 1850,
further conditions and limitations were submitted to them by Col. Reid,
one of which was—
“A price may be attached to the objects exhibited, and the objects, if
sold, may be marked; but no sales will be permitted within the
building.”
This judicious recommendation was, however, not adopted, for on the 11th
April, 1850, the following rule was published—
“The Exhibition being intended for the purposes of display only, and
not for those of sale....
“For the same reason the Commissioners have decided that the prices
are not to be affixed to the articles exhibited.”
Several strong remonstrances were addressed to the Commissioners against
the rule forbidding the affixing prices to the articles exhibited.
Efforts were made both in public and through private representations to
some of its individual members, by persons competent to advise, and
anxious for the success of a great and meritorious undertaking.
In the report of the Leeds Committee to the Commissioners the following
passage occurs:—
“They are, further, most strongly of opinion that the statement of
price is essential, _if the Exhibition is to be of any real utility_.
To the manufacturer or merchant price will be the test of comparative
value and excellence in the majority of cases; and the inspection of
particular fabrics, especially the products of other districts or
countries, for the purposes of information or improvement, will be of
no avail to them if price as well as style and finish is not before
them.”
From the secretary to the Hamburg Commission a communication was
received stating that—
“In consequence of the decision of the Commissioners with respect to
the prohibition to attach prices, it is the opinion that there will be
an _incurable deficiency_ in the Exhibition.”
From the Central Danish Commission a letter was sent, stating that—
“By reason of the regulation of Her Majesty’s Commissioners that
prices may not be attached to articles sent for exhibition, and Danish
goods being chiefly remarkable for their cheapness, a space of about
450 square ft. will be sufficient for Denmark.”
The Chevalier Bunsen transmitted a despatch from the Prussian
government, _objecting to the decision_ of the Commissioners which
_prohibits the affixing of prices_ to articles exhibited.
§ On the 14th November, 1850, an answer to this letter was approved, and
ordered to be sent to all foreign commissioners.
The following are extracts:—
“The arguments advanced by you in favour of authorizing the affixing
of prices to the articles exhibited, have received the maturest
consideration of Her Majesty’s Commissioners, who are fully sensible
of the great importance of the subject.
“At the same time, every wish is felt on their part, to give to each
exhibitor the _benefit_ to be derived by him from the knowledge on the
part of the public, of the cheapness of the articles exhibited by him.
They feel, however, as they have already intimated, that by allowing
the affixing of the actual prices to articles themselves, they should
be making themselves responsible for the accuracy of those prices in
all instances, and they would not consider themselves warranted in
assuming this responsibility in the case of an Exhibition of the
productions of all the nations in the world (however perfect may be
the machinery in an individual country, like Prussia, for ensuring
that accuracy, and for preventing the liability to deception). But Her
Majesty’s Commissioners authorize the attachment of a notice to those
Goods, of which the merit consists in the low price at which they can
be produced, to the effect that they are _exhibited for cheapness_,
and they have made it a condition that all persons making this claim
must send the prices in an invoice to the Commissioners, who will
instruct the juries to make this an essential element in their
determination of their awards.”
The Decision No. 16 was then altered as follows:—
“Prices are not to be affixed to the articles exhibited, although the
articles may be marked as shown for economy of production. But as the
cost at which articles can be produced will, in some cases, enter into
the question of the distribution of rewards, the Commissioners, or the
persons intrusted with the adjudication of the rewards, may have to
make inquiries, and possibly to take evidence, upon the subject; still
they do not consider it expedient to affix a note of the price to the
articles displayed. When the Exhibitor considers the merit of his
article to consist in its cheapness, and founds a claim on this
ground, he must state the price in the invoice sent to the
Commissioners.”
This rule is a model specimen of what very clever men united in a large
committee can assent to.
The first and last sentences of the oracular writing pronounce that—
Prices must not be affixed to any article exhibited for the judgment of
the public, _even though_ there should be _no other reason_ for
exhibiting it than its price.
The intervening sentence reveals to us that even Commissioners may in
some cases be themselves unable to judge without a knowledge of the
price—that it may perchance be so important that they must take evidence
upon it. Yet, with a very flattering deference to the sagacity of the
public, they seem to think _it_ can, without that information, form as
good an opinion as their own.
It may be remarked that the permission to ask of the attendant the price
of an article, on which much stress has been laid, depends on several
contingencies, namely:—that every article has an attendant;—that he is
at all times at his post;—and also that he _knows_ its price.
It is admitted that the Commissioners wish “to give each exhibitor the
_benefit_ to be derived by him from the knowledge [of price] on the part
of the public,” and also that the public cannot judge without that
information, and yet, with singular inconsistency, they forbid the
simplest and most natural mode of accomplishing this object, placing in
fact an impediment in the way of their own wishes.
The only argument which is urged in favour of this rule, occurs in the
reply to the Prussian application, in which it is stated, “after the
maturest consideration on the part of Her Majesty’s Commissioners,” they
feel “that by allowing the affixing the actual price to the articles
themselves, they should be making themselves responsible for the
accuracy of those prices in all instances.” This singular timidity in
fact involves the Commissioners in far larger responsibility, since
according to their own argument they admit that they are “_responsible_”
for any statement they “_allow_” the exhibitors to make; it follows,
therefore, that any statement they _command_ the exhibitors to attach to
the articles exposed must be still more firmly _guaranteed_ by the
Commissioners.
But they have very rightly ordered that every article shall have
attached to it a statement of the _reason_ for which it is exhibited.
Consequently _they guarantee the statements made by exhibitors_.
If, therefore, a piece of calico is exhibited entirely for the sake of
the _permanence_ of the beautiful colour with which it is dyed, the
beauty it is true may be evident to the eye, but the merit will consist
wholly in the _permanence_. If this is stated by the exhibitor, the
Commissioners themselves are responsible for its truth.
Again, some beautiful damasked fabric is exhibited; the only merit
consists in its being made entirely of flax. This statement must be
appended, or there is no use in exhibiting it; but if stated, the
_Commissioners are responsible_ that there is no silk intermixed:
multitudes of similar cases might be adduced.
But the truth is, that no such responsibility as that which they have
assumed, ought to be placed on the Commissioners; their duty is
sufficiently arduous, and their previous experience very limited. A
certain per centage of error and accident, will necessarily occur, even
to the most highly informed, and if they industriously exercise the
knowledge they may acquire in carrying on this undertaking, the public
ought to be grateful for their labours—to assist them in carrying out
their regulations, and remonstrate strongly only when their rules
violate the very foundations of those principles on which the whole
advantage of the Exposition rests.
§ Nothing could have been more simple than to have repudiated any such
guarantee, and to have left the public to trust to the integrity and
honour of the exhibitors, which, considering the danger and facility of
detection, would have been a sufficient security. The Royal, and almost
all other scientific Societies, place at the head of each volume a
distinct declaration that their authors alone are responsible, both for
the facts as well as for the reasonings contained in their respective
memoirs.
§ If the alternative were proposed, Shall the rule rigidly laid down
be?—
“No article shall have its price marked on it”—or,
“Every article must have its price marked upon it,”—the disadvantages
would be far less under the latter rule. The essential principle of the
Exposition being the increase of commerce and the exchange of
commodities, it might even be contended that sales should be permitted
on the premises. The chief objection to this arises from the impediments
it might offer to the free access of visitors to the examination of the
articles exhibited.
Means, however, might be suggested by which that objection would be
considerably removed. It might, for instance, be permitted to all those
exhibitors of articles of moderate size, that they should bring in with
them each morning a sufficient number of such articles, done up in paper
ready to be delivered to the purchaser on his handing over the money
price. This would apply to a large number of articles, as shawls,
dresses, &c.
In other articles, sold by weight, packets might be previously made up
of various weights, as one pound, three pounds, six pounds, &c. In those
sold by length, parcels of fixed numbers of yards might be prepared.
If this system were still thought to be inconvenient from causing crowds
in particular spots, it might be permitted to the attendants to take
orders for articles to be sent home in the evening, and paid for either
at the time or on delivery.
It is quite certain that under either of these conditions a much larger
quantity of merchandize would be sold immediately.
Many would purchase on the spot who could never return for that purpose,
or who were on the point of leaving London, and much trouble would be
saved to a large class of purchasers.
The effect of the purchases made in the earlier days of the Exposition,
would act as so many advertisements to attract visitors on the
succeeding days; some articles thus purchased would probably be sent
into the country by friends, and others be taken home by visitors, and
many additional country visitors would thus be attracted before the end
of the season.
Another and a very important advantage would also accrue from such an
arrangement. The manufacturers acquire their knowledge of the demand for
their productions from the factors and agents; these again from the
shopkeepers who sell by retail to the public. Under the proposed
circumstances, this knowledge would be acquired much more rapidly, and
in the course of the first two or three weeks the opinion of the public
would be known upon all the articles of most popular demand.
§ Upon the whole, the best plan seems to be that the rule should be—
“Every article must have its price attached.”
The exception should be exemptions granted by officers of the
Commission, and the ground of those exemptions should be stated on the
respective articles.
At the Exposition at Paris, in 1849, the general rule was that upon each
article its price should be marked. Certain exceptions occurred, and in
two instances the writer of these pages wishing to purchase specimens,
although assisted most willingly by M. Le Dieu, the indefatigable head
of the management always present on the spot, was unable, after some
correspondence and much inquiry, to purchase or obtain samples of the
objects he desired.
§ Perhaps the best way of complying with the rules of the Commissioners,
and yet giving the public what they tacitly admit the public will
demand, would be that the exhibitor should fix on each of his articles,
in a conspicuous manner, a letter or a number,[9] and that he should
have on the printed bill or card of address all the corresponding
numbers or letters, and opposite to each the price at which it was to be
sold at his warehouse or place of business. Each expositor might have a
quantity of these addresses hung up or placed upon his stall, with an
indication to the public that they were at liberty to take away these
cards or bills.
It may be worth while to make a few observations on the reasons which
probably influenced and misled the Commission on so important a point.
The tradesmen of London had been unduly and rather indelicately pressed
to subscribe towards the Exposition; many were compelled to subscribe
against their wishes. They saw few or none of the advantages which would
accrue to them from it, and they believed, (erroneously,) that it would
inundate the country with foreign and cheaper articles that would
supplant their own trade.
It was thought that, when the public became acquainted with the
wholesale as well as with the retail price of articles, such knowledge
would lead to a reduction of the retail profits. The public, it was
argued, would be reluctant to make a fair allowance for the various
items which contribute to swell the amount of the difference between the
wholesale and retail price of commodities.
§ It may be useful then to state broadly the principle, that it is
greatly for the advantage of the public, both as regards economy of time
and of money, that there should always exist a sufficient number of
middle-men of various orders.
The shopkeeper, who is the one in immediate contact with the public, and
therefore liable to the greatest misrepresentation, has, amongst others,
the following expenses to add to the cost of production, which must
necessarily increase the retail price:—
1. Commission to broker or other middle-man.
2. Cost of carriage from manufactory to shop.
3. Rent of shop itself, and perhaps, also of a warehouse.
4. Insurance of stock against fire.
5. Attendants to sell in shop.
6. Sending goods home to purchasers.
7. Expense of paper, string, &c. for packing goods delivered.
8. Loss by plunder of servants.
9. Expense of taking stock to diminish this loss.
10. Goods soiled or injured by exposing to sale.
11. Goods going out of fashion, cheapened by improved manufacture, or
superseded by new inventions.
12. Giving long credit.
13. Bad debts.
14. Payment for his own personal services, as retail trader.
15. Interest on capital employed.
§ Admitting, however, that these grounds fully account for a large
difference between the wholesale and retail price, they will by no means
justify several practices which are too frequent at some shops at the
west end of the town.
Different prices for the very same article are often demanded by retail
tradesmen, according to the supposed position of the purchaser. Fish,
for example, which varies much in price, and is at times very cheap,
will seldom be found charged in the household bill much below the
average price, unless the housekeeper is honest and looks sharply after
the matter. Few circumstances more annoy a customer or are more
injurious to the tradesman than this offence of having two prices.
When the same prices are charged equally to all customers, it often
happens that it is much higher in the western than in less fashionable
localities. This may arise from a vicious system of giving credit, and
the extra price is necessary to compensate for risk of loss, and of
capital lying unproductive. The effect, however, is injurious to the
tradesman: many of those who pay ready money and would therefore be his
best customers, desert the shop. Those whose means are small, go to a
greater distance for the daily or weekly purchases; whilst those
possessed of larger incomes, purchase the same articles, not only at a
cheaper shop in the city but in larger quantities, and therefore more
nearly at the wholesale price.
Our foreign visitors naturally ask how it happened that in the country
of Adam Smith so strange a mistake could have been made: they inquire
why none of the eminent disciples of that school were placed on the
Commission? They will learn with surprise that our Minister of Commerce
took, as befitted his office, an active part in it; that the great
economist, to whose profound views and extensive experience in monetary
affairs more than one minister has been indebted, was also a member;
that even the apostle of _free trade_ himself, whose successful
exertions have been crowned with merited reward, sat on the same
commission; and yet that the talents, the knowledge, and the eloquence
of such men, failed to convince the understandings of their colleagues,
who, in violation of the first principles of “_Free trade_,”
deliberately raised an obstacle against _competition_.
Since the first edition of this work was printed, the Crystal Palace has
been filled by the industry and peopled by the nations of the earth. The
fears of the ignorant, the hopes of the selfish, the vaticinations of
the shallow, have proved alike groundless. Opinions expressed by the few
who were competent to judge, which were then scouted as the ravings of
visionaries, have now become realized as facts.
However great the admitted advantages resulting from the Exposition have
been, still it has failed to produce anything like the information which
it was calculated to afford. Many of those who most rejoice in its
success regret that so much perseverance and energy have not, owing to
one fatal error, been permitted to accomplish the full amount of good
which they so well deserved to have achieved.
The public have now had ample opportunity of forming their own opinion
upon the question of _price_; and they are almost unanimous in their
decision that without having the _price_ on the articles they examine,
the collection is of little intrinsic use to them, although it is a very
agreeable and splendid show.
No attempt to answer the arguments on that question contained in the
first edition of this work has yet reached me. An entirely different
reason has now been assigned for the omission of _price_.
It is asserted that the shopkeepers of London persuaded the
Commissioners that if _prices_ were permitted to be fixed upon articles,
they, the shopkeepers, would destroy the Exhibition, by not exhibiting
anything themselves, and by their determination ruin the producer, if,
by affixing prices to his produce, he should expose the “_secrets of
trade_.”
One of the proverbs most frequently appealed to is—deprecation of
_protection_ by one’s _friends_: few cases have ever occurred in which
its application is more necessary.
These friends thus maintain that the reason for _forbidding prices_ to
be placed upon articles, stated by the Commissioners to have been
arrived at after mature consideration, and _officially_ communicated by
them to foreign governments,—was not the _real reason_.
The motive of the rule laid down by the Commission seems to have been a
conscientious wish not to mislead the public, and was at most only an
error of judgment.
The _friends_ of the Commission, however, have imputed to them a line of
conduct which, to use the mildest form of expression, is highly
undignified, and have suggested that they were driven to the adoption of
the rule by fears which were absurd.
Some of the fashionable shopkeepers at the West-end may have endeavoured
to alarm their too credulous customers by holding out such exaggerated
estimates of their own power; but the mass of London tradesmen are a
shrewder race, and estimate more truly their own influence. They well
know, in the present state of rapid communication throughout the land,
that any such attempt must necessarily fail. Imagine for a moment the
present race of butchers attempting to starve London by combining to
withhold meat. The utmost they could accomplish, if so inclined, would
be to put their customers to some small and temporary inconvenience, at
the expense of certain ruin to themselves.
The practical effect of forbidding prices has been very unfortunate. The
great and meritorious efforts by which the plan has been carried out,
have been shorn of much of their utility. A building of half the size,
containing only articles _each_ of which had attached to it a short and
clear statement of the grounds on which it was exhibited, and the price
at which it could be acquired, would have conveyed far more instruction
to the public, and have been far more effective for the promotion of
commerce, thus fulfilling much more completely the two great objects of
the Exposition.
To reply that prices may be obtained on inquiry, betrays a childish
ignorance of the whole subject. It is practically impossible to obtain
the required information; and those who have made the effort, have found
that even in the cases where an attendant is present to explain the
articles, he is often entirely ignorant of their price.
The effect of the absence of price on visitors is a source of painful
annoyance to themselves, and of loss to the manufacturers and
shopkeepers, from whom they would otherwise have purchased largely.
Foreigners are so sensible of this defect, that they have in many
instances printed priced catalogues of their own articles. Their
interpretation of our refusal to allow prices to be affixed is, that we
are unable to compete with other nations in economy of production.
The philosopher and the economist, by whose researches and comparisons
the public might have been instructed, wander through the lofty avenues
and splendid galleries of the Crystal Palace, tantalized by
expectations, raised but to be disappointed. They at last are compelled
to abandon their mission in hopeless despair, wilfully deprived, by the
managers of this industrial feast, of that information on which all
their conclusions must ultimately rest.
[9] As by one of the rules each separate article exhibited must have a
number, the same numbers might be used in the bills.
CHAPTER IX.
PRIZES.
The great feature of the original plan of the Exposition was to give
large prizes. One, at least, was to have been 5,000_l._, and the whole
amount of them 20,000_l._
The anticipation of these prizes gave hope and industry to thousands:
means were examined and measures taken by many a workman, at the expense
of great personal sacrifices, to enable him to complete a model of some
favourite scheme, by which he might hope to win one amongst the many
pecuniary prizes, and thus be repaid at least for a portion of his
efforts.
The announcement on the Continent of these liberal arrangements was
received with unbounded astonishment and admiration. The magnitude of
the great prize seemed to foreigners incredible, and the liberality of
offering it to the competing world, was altogether beyond their
conception of the character assigned to us as a nation.
It was certainly very unfortunate that such an announcement should have
been made and then withdrawn. But as the question will probably arise
again, it may be useful for some future occasion to inquire now into the
principles on which pecuniary prizes should be awarded.
Science, literature, and industrial art are in some measure subject to
the same laws in the distribution of pecuniary rewards. It is desirable
that such prizes should be given to those objects only which, possessing
very considerable merit and utility, are of such a nature as not to
repay the first inventors.
§ One effect of such rewards would be to increase very much the number
of minds engaged in making inventions. This itself is a matter of more
importance than might at first be thought, as will be shown on some
future occasion in examining the question of monopoly.
The inventor, the capitalist, and the manufacturer of articles are
usually distinct persons. Of these the inventor is generally the least
rewarded. The capitalist and the manufacturer can almost always make
their own way to wealth, and if successful their reward is usually
large, and almost always greater even than the highest prize which could
be offered by the managers of such an Exhibition as is now contemplated.
If it were a condition for obtaining a prize that no patent should be
taken out, then the prize may be considered as the purchase money of the
patent for the use of the public. If a patent is desired by the
inventor, a medal or an honorary prize might be given, with the addition
in certain cases of a reward in money.
Perhaps an enumeration of some objects which might become fit subjects
for prizes, may best illustrate these views.
§ One of the inventions most important to a class of highly skilled
workmen (engineers) would be a small motive power,—ranging perhaps from
the force of half a man, to that of two horses, which might commence as
well as cease its action at a moment’s notice, require no expense of
time for its management, and be of moderate price both in original cost
and in daily expense. A small steam-engine does not fulfil these
conditions. In a town where water is supplied at high-pressure, a
cylinder and a portion of apparatus similar to that of a high-pressure
engine, would fully answer the conditions, if the water could be
supplied at a moderate price. Such a source of power would in many cases
be invaluable to men just rising from the class of journeyman to that of
master. It might also be of great use to many small masters in various
trades. If the cost per day were even somewhat greater than that of
steam for an equal extent of power, it would yet be on the whole much
cheaper, because it would _never consume power without doing_ _work_. It
might be applied to small planing and drilling machines, to lathes, to
grindstones, grinding mills, mangling, and to a great variety of other
purposes.
§ In all large workshops a separate tool, or rather machine, is used for
each process, and this contributes to the economy of the produce. But
many masters in a small way are unable to afford such an expense, not
having sufficient work for the full employment of any one machine.
Of this class are many jobbing masters who live by repairing machines.
Such also are that class of masters who make models of the inventions of
others and carry out for them their mechanical speculations. To these
two classes, that of amateur engineers may be added.
The lathe with its sliding rest is the basis of their stock. With this
they can drill, and with the addition of a few wheels can cut screws.
The further addition of a vertical slide will enable them to plane small
pieces of metal by means of facing cutters on the mandril. By other
additions the teeth of wheels may also be cut, and in some rare cases, a
lathe may be converted into a small planing machine. The loss of time in
making the changes necessary to enable the lathe to fulfil all these
different functions, necessarily confines its use to the peculiar
classes alluded to above, but to make these changes is often less
expensive than to be obliged continually to send to larger workshops
where the heavier portion of their work can be executed. It would
certainly be desirable, if some good plan cannot be devised for bringing
the whole of such operations within the reach of _one_ machine of
moderate price, that at least a system should be devised for combining
them in _two_ separate machines.
Some readers may possibly think such combinations as have been
mentioned, too minute and special for the subject of a prize: but when
it is considered that they bear upon the interests of one of the best
classes of workmen, and how important it is for the welfare of the
community that skill, industry, and intelligence should be assisted in
their efforts to rise in the social scale, these details will be
excused.
§ The improvements which have been made in the economy of working
voltaic batteries, lead to the expectation that they may be employed as
sources of artificial light. Although the light thus obtained is not yet
sufficiently steady for general use, it may possibly become available
for light-houses.
Galvanic light offers some advantages for this purpose on account of its
intensity and of the facility it affords for darkening and restoring the
light, by breaking and renewing the galvanic circuit.
But it would be possible to adapt the same principle of occultations to
ordinary lighthouses. It would only be necessary to apply mechanism
which should periodically pull down an opaque shade over the glass
cylinders of the argand burners. This should be instantaneously thrown
back by a spring. A series of obscurations corresponding to the digits
of any number, and separated by any intervals, might thus be continually
repeated.
Ready means might thus be supplied of clearly distinguishing one
light-house from another. For this purpose it would be necessary to
denote the light-houses on any coast by different numbers.
Any digit might be expressed by an equivalent number of occultations and
restorations of the light: thus—
1 2 3 9
0.0 0.0.0 0.0.0.0, &c., 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0
Again, the character of the digit might be indicated by occultations
preceded and followed, by shorter or longer intervals of light.
At the commencement, the first digit of any number, might be
distinguished by a previous uniform continuance of the light during ten
or twenty seconds, whilst the separation of each digit from the next in
order might be denoted by a short pause of two or three or more seconds.
Thus, if the number of a light-house were 253: after a cessation of any
obscuration during ten seconds, two occultations should follow each
other at intervals of about a second. A pause should then occur during
three seconds, after which five occultations should occur, at intervals
of one second, as before. Another pause of three seconds must then
happen, and be succeeded by three other occultations occurring at
intervals of one second each; after which ten seconds must elapse before
the cycle thus described is repeated.
These might be thus represented:—
2 hundreds. 5 tens. 3 units.
0000000000·0·000·0·0·0·0·000·0·0·0000000000
\-------------------------------/
Thus, at about every half minute the number of the lighthouse would be
repeated.
In this manner any number under 1,000 may be expressed in less than one
minute; since the largest, 999, would require
Seconds.
For each digit 9, or in all 27
Two short pauses between the digits 6
One long long pause at end of the number 10
---
43
Every light-house, therefore, would be continually repeating its own
number.
It would contribute still more to prevent mistakes, if the light-houses
on a coast were not numbered in succession; for should any mistake be
made in counting the obscurations, it would most probably be detected if
the digits of the numbers of the light-houses on the same part of the
coast were as different as possible.
Lighthouse numbered in succession—
234 235 236 237 238
Ditto irregularly—
142 324 581 787 612
If a mistake of a single obscuration were made in the units of the
number 237, and it had been counted 236, this observation might, until
repeated, mislead the sailor, and induce him to suppose himself opposite
the preceding light-house. On the contrary, if the irregular mode of
numbering were adopted, the mistake of 786 for 787 could not mislead,
because the seven in the hundreds place would point out the error. It
would, however, be better to have the figure in the tens’ place also
different in any two light-houses so near that a possibility of mistake
is likely to occur. The general benefit which would result to all
maritime nations, renders the practical application of these principles
a peculiarly fit subject for a prize.
Since the first edition of this work was published, an occulting light
has been exhibited for about three weeks, representing during each night
the constant repetition of one of the following numbers, 136, 227, 354,
432.
As might easily have been anticipated, its effect was quite satisfactory
in determining those numbers. At about a distance of a quarter of a
mile, its occultations were even more distinct than at shorter
distances.
Successive improvements have occurred, until it now seems desirable to
revise and simplify the light-houses of the world, by making them speak
one universal language, intelligible even to the commonest capacity. No
time could be more favourable than the present for establishing an
international system of signals, founded on numbers, and adapted to the
wants and convenience of all nations. The following brief outline of
such a plan requires, therefore, no apology.
The present modes of identifying lighthouses are by
1. The _colour_ of the lights.
2. The _number_, _distance_, and _relative position_ of the lights
exhibited.
3. The _variations_ in colour or intensity, or in the time during
which the lights are partially or totally obscured, compared with
that during which they are visible.
4. By striking bells or gongs in foggy weather.
There are around the coasts of Great Britain about 290 light-houses and
light-ships. They exhibit nearly 390 lights. Of these, about one hundred
lights are coloured, chiefly red. Fifty-five are revolving lights,
varying in their periods from five seconds to four minutes. In foggy
weather fifteen of these toll bells, and thirty-three strike gongs. It
is proposed to abolish all the revolving lights, and to retain white
light, to distinguish by its occupations the number of the light-house
which it is destined to indicate.
With respect to those lighthouses which indicate ports, next to the
information as to the name of the port, the most important question is
the depth of water at its entrance. This may be given by allowing the
occupations of the white light to indicate the number of the port, after
which a glass of green or of any other colour being interposed, the
number of occultations mark the number of feet of the depth of water at
the time.
A float in a well, to which the tide has access by a small aperture,
will serve the double purpose of raising the weight that drives the
mechanism for occulting, and of prescribing, according to the height of
the tide in feet, the corresponding number of occultations of the green
light.
Thus a constant alternation will go on during the whole night of
repetitions of the _number_ of the port, by occultations of white light,
and of the number of feet which indicate the depth of water at its
entrance, by green light.
There are certain cases of obscuration of lights by fog in which bells
and gongs are continually sounded. These convey information of danger,
but do not identify its position. The same principle which gives
numerical accuracy to light-houses, and even the same mechanism, may be
made to operate during fogs with equal effect on sounds. Thus, by
striking the gong the requisite number of times to indicate the
hundreds, the tens, and the units denoting the light, allowing, of
course, the usual pauses and the same long intervals, the number of the
light-house or light-ship may be known as quickly and as certainly by
means of bells, or gongs, or other sounds, as by the occultations of its
light.
It may be worth examining what musical notes are heard at the greatest
distances through fogs, and the sounds of what instruments penetrate
farthest amidst the roar of winds and waves. The shrill whistle of the
steam carriage should be tried against the deep tones of the organ and
the loud noise of the trumpet. The most powerful sounds produced by air
require but little physical force for their generation; and whenever the
directions in which it is necessary to give warning are known, the
sounds employed may be concentrated by reflectors, in the same manner as
light.
The depth of water at the entrance of harbours may easily be indicated
in the day-time by a tide-telegraph governed by the same float which
produces the occultations during the night. Its form may be as below,
[Illustration: The tide-telegraph.]
in which the arms projecting on the left side indicate the tens; those
on the right side the units. The long arm for the fifth saves trouble in
counting. These arms must be movable on centres within the mast, and
must be governed by cams connected with the float, so as to indicate at
any time the state of the tide. If it were found necessary to
distinguish light-houses during the day, then signs expressing their
permanent numbers might be painted upon them, or fixed to masts rising
out of each. The right side of the telegraph might, if required, be used
as a day telegraph for communicating with vessels.
By means of such light-houses it would be easy to convey telegraphic
messages either to vessels in distress, or for other purposes. It would
simply be required to use the light itself or a subsidiary one to
indicate a series of numbers corresponding to those in some known
Telegraphic Dictionary. No danger of any mistake could arise during the
few minutes thus employed, because any other vessel on counting the
succession of obscurations would not only perceive that the light-house
was telegraphing, but would also know the object of the message. A small
apparatus might easily be contrived for the use of vessels, by which
they might ask any questions necessary for their safety. Such means for
ships sailing in company, or even for fleets, might enable them to
proceed on their voyage during the night, and to communicate any orders
even with greater facility than in the day.
Sir David Brewster proposed in the _Edinburgh Philosophical
Transactions_ a plan for distinguishing light-houses by optical means.
The light transmitted through a thin film, when analysed by a prism,
appears either single, or subdivided into two, three, four or more
parts. Light-houses, therefore, might thus be distinguished from one
another numerically.
CHAPTER X.
JURIES, ETC.
A clear statement of the _principles_ on which each jury is to award
prizes, should be placed before them. These principles ought to be well
discussed, and in that discussion manufacturers should be invited to
take a part.
The first object of the jury should be to lay down rules by which these
principles are to be carried out. Each class of the subjects to be
rewarded will have its own rules. They will generally be few in number,
and capable of being expressed in few words: some of these are suggested
below, but merely by way of example.
One of the most general rules will indicate the means by which the jury
can ascertain the fact, that the material of the manufacture under
consideration is truly the substance it is represented to be.
For instance: some woven fabric is examined, professing to be made
either entirely of wool, or wholly of flax. It may be quite true that
experienced manufacturers and dealers, are able to detect any
adulteration of either material by admixture with the other. But
statements of facts made on authority, never possess the same weight
with the public as those which are accompanied by information enabling
any individual among that public to verify the fact for himself.
The form of the fibre as shown by the microscope is one test. A more
simple one is to burn some fibres in the flame of a candle. Every fibre
which, when thus treated, produces the smell of burnt feathers, is
animal matter of some kind, as wool, silk, horse-hair, &c. The burnt
fibres of hemp, flax, cotton, and other vegetable matters have a totally
different scent; a fact of which any one may readily assure himself by
making the experiment.
It may perhaps be necessary in some cases to wash the fabric under
examination, lest in what is termed the “getting up for the market,”
some animal matter or size might mislead. But the jury ought to be
acquainted with all such difficulties, and they should state the method
they took for investigating them.
The microscope is of great use in the detection of adulterations in most
vegetable substances.
§ Every object produced is subject to certain defects, and possessed of
certain excellences: these should be clearly enumerated. Whenever such
statements are expressed by numbers, the information will be more
satisfactory.
Thus, in cutting tools, as applied to various metals, it is very
important that the angle at which the tool is applied, should be stated:
it is also necessary to state the angle which the edge of the tool
receiving the shaving cut off, makes with the surface cut. The velocity
of the tool in cutting should be stated, also the names of the fluids,
if any, used in cutting.
The durability of woven fabrics, as well as of a great variety of other
manufactured articles, is a most essential quality, on which, combined
with the price, their chief value to the customer depends.
It is very desirable that the jury should find satisfactory means of
testing this most important character, which is not discernible, even by
the most curious and instructed spectator.
The knowledge of the weight required for tearing asunder any woven
fabric, as a ribbon, a stay-lace, tape, &c., together with the breaking
weight of their individual threads, and the number of these threads in
an inch, may in some cases be very valuable, especially in coarse
articles, such as sailcloth, sacking, &c.
In other cases, the articles may be submitted to twenty or thirty
washings and dryings, during which it may repeatedly be examined. The
greatest change will most frequently occur on the first washing, which
removes the dressing.
§ In many articles the durability of different parts varies
considerably. In some cases one part will wear out, if replaced, many
times before the remainder of the article is at all injured by use. In
all such cases the jury should adopt such rules as the following:—
Examine the durability of each part, and also the difficulty and the
expense of replacing it when injured.
Examine also, for the same purpose, what parts are most exposed to
injury or destruction by accident.
Examine also the _relative_ expense of putting the article in a working
state when first purchased and brought home.
These rules will be best understood by an illustration. Let us suppose a
jury to be examining the relative merits of several cottage stoves for
cooking. Of course the first inquiry will be as to which admits of the
best performance of the operations of—
Boiling, Baking,
Stewing, Supply of hot water,
Roasting, Ironing,
Broiling, &c.
The cost of the fuel must not only be given, but also its weight,
because the price of fuel varies in different localities. The capability
of using different sorts of fuel in the several stoves, and the amount
of fuel so consumed for its equivalent of coal, should also be stated.
These and other comparative inquiries having been made, the durability
of that part of the stove which is subjected to the direct action of the
burning fuel, must be examined. It will be made either of iron or of
earthenware; and the relative merit of the various stoves will, as far
as this point is concerned, consist in the facility and economy with
which such parts can be removed, and the corresponding new parts be
purchased and replaced in their proper position. It is always desirable
for the consumer that the vendors of such articles should keep a stock
of the parts liable to wear out, and that the latter should undertake to
replace them at a fixed price.
Those parts of the stove which project so as to be liable to accidental
blows, and those which from their more constant use are much exposed to
accident, as the hinges and the latches of doors, should then be
examined. These, if of cast-iron or other brittle material, and
constituting part of the substance of the door, should be sufficiently
strong to resist fracture: if they are attached to it by rivets or
otherwise, they will be lighter and stronger when made of wrought-iron.
The last inquiry is into the expense of fixing the stove for use. It may
be set in brickwork, within the chimney, in which case it will require a
bricklayer and a large mass of materials in the shape of bricks and
mortar, and possibly of stone. Or it may stand on its own base
containing its own ash-pit, and by means of a small iron pipe the smoke
may be conveyed into a flue. In this case almost any workman with hammer
and chisel and a small quantity of mortar or cement, can fix it ready
for use.
Again, the stop-cock for the water-cistern may be either hard-soldered,
riveted, or screwed in. If the latter, it can easily be unscrewed or
reground when necessary. The same remark applies to the leaden
supply-pipe; it may be connected by soldering, or by a union joint. In
the former case these parts will require the aid not only of the tinman
or coppersmith, but also of the plumber.
§ The expense of repairing a machine does not in all cases depend on the
cost of the part replaced, or even on the actual cost of replacing that
part alone. It often happened in the earlier days of locomotive engines,
that the expense of some small reparation necessary to keep the machine
in good working order, did not amount to ten shillings; whilst the
expense of removing and replacing other parts, without which the workman
could not get at the defective part, amounted to fifty or eighty
shillings, or even to a still larger sum.
Thus facility of getting at all the parts of an engine for the purposes
of repair, or even of examination, is one of the advantages which the
broad possesses over the narrow gauge.
§ In many articles exposed to great or sudden force, and to much wear
and tear, it is very desirable that if any breakage occur, it should
happen at that point where the consequences would be the least dangerous
to the persons using it, and the reparation of it least expensive.
During a series of experiments made by the author in 1839, on the Great
Western Railway, it was necessary, amongst a variety of other curves, to
cause a pen to draw upon long rolls of paper the curve described by the
centre of a carriage, projected on the plane of the road. When
everything is in proper order, this line ought to be parallel to, and in
the middle between, the two rails. But it is well known that instead of
answering these conditions, it often describes a _serpentine_ curve,
arising from that snake-like motion of a train which the carriages
acquire by rolling alternately towards each rail, until they are checked
by the flanges pressing against it.
To accomplish the drawing of the line above-mentioned, it was necessary
to have depending from the carriage, a very stout jointed wooden arm,
terminating in an iron _shoe_ with a steel projection. This _shoe_ was,
by a powerful spring, pressed close to the rail in the middle point
between the two side wheels of the carriage, and by a communication with
the pen the required curve was described.
But such an apparatus was exposed to very rough work, and, in fact, was
generally broken three or four times during each experimental journey.
If the broken part had fallen between the wheel and the rail, it might
have caused a serious accident. To prevent this the following
precautions were taken—
The wooden arm was strengthened with thin strips of iron, except at one
part about an inch long. At this part of the wood a small notch was cut
with a saw. The lower portion had a strong iron eye fixed into it, which
was connected loosely to a hook by a rope passing through a hole in the
middle of the carriage.
Whenever the apparatus broke, it was always at the notch. The position
of the loose rope holding the broken part was such, that the tendency
was immediately to drag it into the middle of the road under the centre
of the carriage. This at once removed it from interference with the
wheels. The pen describing the curve soon gave notice by ceasing to move
laterally, that the arm was broken; on which one of the assistants
immediately took hold of the loose rope, and pulling the broken fragment
close up to the bottom of the carriage, prevented the possibility of any
further danger.
§ If each jury were to explain concisely the means employed by them to
examine the qualities of each class of objects submitted to them, much
valuable information would result. A collection of these rules for the
judgment or verification of articles, if reduced into order, and
published in a small compass, by a competent person, at the close of the
Exposition, would be invaluable to the public. The result would be
beneficial to all _honest_ tradesmen, and injurious only to the
_fraudulent_. Such means when put into the hands of the public would
soon enable it to distinguish the genuine from the sophisticated
articles, and to select those which in point of excellence and
durability are best suited to the means or wants of the purchaser.[10]
The increased knowledge of the public would be felt by the retail
dealers, and would make them more anxious to obtain excellent and
durable goods from the manufacturer.
§ Several of the papers issued by the Commission bear honourable
testimony to the sagacity of those who composed them. They treat the
persons addressed as reasoning men, explaining to them the results
contemplated: thus whilst offering their own most strenuous exertions,
they admit that these would scarcely prove effective without the
co-operation of the public in a plan devised for the common advantage of
all.
In former days had there been water-fowl in our parks, some such notice
as this would have been placarded:—
“Whoever throws stones at, or frightens these birds, shall be prosecuted
with the utmost severity of the law.”
In the present day we read the much more effective address,
“These birds are recommended to the protection of the public.”
However ragged the coat of the passer-by, his feelings not his fears are
addressed, and his pride is gratified by being appointed as it were a
temporary trustee for the safety of his feathered friends. The advantage
of acting upon this principle is not confined merely to its direct
efficiency for its purpose. A still more important benefit remains
latent, one which never ought to be lost sight of in the enactment or
the administration of laws.
_It enlists public opinion in favour of law and of order._[11]
Thus aiding the prevention, the detection, and the punishment of
offenders, it renders the interference of the police far less necessary,
and when called for, more effective.
§ This principle might perhaps be applied with advantage to the
admission under regulations of certain classes of _skilled_ workmen by
means of tickets, for a limited number of days.
Most effective assistance might be rendered both to the police and to
the attendants at the Exposition by the following plan:—Allow a certain
number of persons, in whom the executive can repose
confidence,—generally master manufacturers or employers,—the privilege
of recommending a small number of their best and most regular workmen or
assistants, to whom should be granted tickets of admission, subject to
the following conditions:—
1. Tickets of admission shall be granted for periods of from three to
any greater number of days. Some tickets being for the first three days
of each week, or otherwise, as may be convenient.
2. They shall either be gratuitous or obtainable by a small payment.
3. Each ticket-holder shall wear the ticket by a string from the button
of his coat, or as may be arranged.
4. He shall, when required by the police or attendants, assist in any
duty they may desire for the safety or general convenience of the
expositors.
5. Whenever he observes any irregularity, or has reason to believe that
thieves or improper persons have obtained admission, he is to inform the
nearest policeman.
6. Whenever he observes any machine or any object exhibited, to be out
of order, or in danger of being injured, or its parts misplaced, he is
to communicate the fact to the nearest attendant, who will refer him to
the proper superintendent of that department. He will explain the defect
he has pointed out, and if asked by the superintendent, he is to put it
in order, or suggest to him some other person then present, who may be
better able to complete the reparation.
7. Each master should be required to pledge his word that he will only
recommend trustworthy persons. Each workman admitted might simply be
required to give his word of honour that he would assist.
These regulations ought to be printed and stuck up in various parts of
the building.
It would, indeed, be desirable to have a certain number of boards placed
in the most public parts of the Exposition, on which should be fixed and
properly classified all rules, and other information useful to the
public. Also notices as to prices and hours of visiting the Exposition
might from time to time be affixed. Each board ought also to have a plan
of the ground-floor and galleries of the building, on which the names of
the different subjects and countries occupying the various parts, might
be readily ascertained by the visitors.
[10] Several valuable papers containing rules of this kind have lately
appeared in the _Lancet_.
[11] The ancient law of rendering the hundred responsible for damages
done by a mob, is founded on this principle. It is so important, that
the reader will, perhaps, pardon another illustration.
Amongst boys as amongst men, a degree of pugnacity exists, to the
annoyance of the more quiet portion. This was checked at a certain
school by giving full permission to the boys to fight whenever they
liked, and at the same time prescribing certain simple rules for the
combat, as follows:—
1. When two boys wish to fight, they must inform the chief usher of
their wish.
2. He must appoint a time for the combat, not sooner than three,
nor more than six hours, after the notice.
3. At the appointed time, if the lads are still desirous of the
contest, the chief usher must take the pugnacious ones to an
enclosure, where they cannot be seen by their comrades. He then
desires them to fight until they are tired, he standing by to see
fair play.
4. Any boy present or assisting at an illegal fight will be
punished.
The consequence is that their honour or their ill-humour is soon
satisfied. No party is made, to back them; no friends call out to
them, “Give it him, Tom!” “At him, Jack!” Their pugnacity is not, as
it has been in some instances at public schools, unnaturally excited
by the stimulus either of betting or of brandy.
After long experience, it was found that quarrels rarely arrived at a
fight. It was the _interest_ of all the rest of the school to make
some just and amicable arrangement.
CHAPTER XI.
ULTERIOR OBJECTS.
Besides those universal advantages which will result, in a greater or
less degree, to every nation maintaining friendly intercourse with its
neighbours, there are others arising from the Exposition, which may be
secured by a little industry and small expense, if timely thought is
bestowed upon them.
There are also opportunities for advancing several kindred subjects to
which it may be useful to allude.
The most obvious is the facility it will afford of making extensive
collections of examples of the present state of many industrial
products.[12] All woven manufactures, for example, might be arranged in
books. A small piece of each article being pasted in, might be followed
by a short statement of the various facts relating to it—as, for
example, a piece of plain cambric—
PLAIN CAMBRIC. (Date.)
Woven in a ---- loom, at ---- by ----
Number of threads in warp.
Number of threads of weft, in ten inches length.
Breadth of piece in inches.
Length of piece in yards.
Weight per square yard.
Price per yard retail.
Price per piece of ---- yards, as sold by the manufacturer.
Coloured woven goods might be similarly arranged as regards colour, and
the note connected with them ought to contain the name and locality of
the dyer, and also the nature of the dye used. Such volumes would
hereafter become highly instructive, and save many costly experiments.
But it will be necessary to provide against, or to allow for the fading
of the colouring matter. This could be done only by preserving some
portion of it unchanged by time or exposure. Woven fabrics will not
supply this test, but another department of manufacture would, if
properly treated, give by the permanence of its colours, invaluable aid
not only to many arts, but also to the naturalist and the man of
science.
§ The enamel colours used on porcelain, have the permanent character
required. Different manufactories excel in different colours. The first
step therefore would be to invite each manufacturer to send tablets of
porcelain of a given size, on which are to be painted a number of small
squares, containing all the pure colours he employs. Besides these
squares, a certain number of other squares should contain two or more
combinations of these colours, two by two, or in such proportions as are
usually employed.
The comparison of these tablets would indicate where the purest and most
useful porcelain colours could be obtained. The next step would be that
a small committee of manufacturers and men of science, should decide on
the number of combinations and shades of colour it might be desirable to
bring together as permanent and standard objects of reference.
The different makers of porcelain should then each receive an order for
a certain number of tablets containing those colours in which they
respectively excel. Each small square should be numbered. A sufficient
quantity of the proper materials constituting each colour, should then
be mixed in the proper proportion, and applied at the same time, to the
same number on each tablet; and these tablets should be exposed to the
fire under as nearly as possible the same circumstances of heat, and for
the same length of time.
Thus an extensive system of unchangeable colours might be obtained, and
if 500 sets were made, they might be distributed in all the great cities
and universities of the world. It might perhaps be found that certain
colours were deficient, and this would of course stimulate discovery by
making known the want. Thus, in the course of upwards of twenty-five
years, during which the author has been collecting on a small scale,
such tablets of colours, he has been unable to meet with any specimen of
an enamel colour at all approaching to the pure scarlet of the common
geranium.
The utility of such sets of standard colours would be very great,
enabling all nations to speak a language regarding colour at once
accurate and universal. It might serve as the starting point and the
test of many analogous collections of materials tinted by colours of
more transitory duration, whose relative degree of fixity might thus be
measured: as silks, cottons, linens, woollens, leather, paper, and many
other materials.
There are two coloured substances which seem to promise a higher degree
of permanence than those just mentioned—sealing-wax and glass. For these
admit of the renewal of their surfaces by grinding, in case atmospheric
or external causes should have altered or impaired the superficial
colour.
A collection of small squares of sealing-wax would be cheaper, and might
if duly verified by comparison with the porcelain standard be in many
cases a useful instrument. Glass also might supply a suit of transparent
colours of great interest. A complete collection of the enamel colours
used for the mosaic work made at Rome would also be instructive.
§ Perhaps the most important advantage which such an Exposition can
confer, is to instruct the consumer in the art of judging of the
character of the commodity he is about to purchase. Besides the money we
pay in return for the skill, labour, and capital expended in producing
each article we purchase; a further, and often a very considerable sum
is paid in order to assure us that it possesses those qualities which
the vendor has asserted. This is called the _cost of verification_; in
some cases, as in that of white sugar, it is very small, for almost
every one can see by its external character the degree of goodness of
that article. In other cases nothing less than a whole life spent in
acquiring a knowledge of his subject, can be of any avail, as _in the
case of the purchase of a field_. The verification of the fact that the
vendor has really the right to sell it, can, in many cases, be arrived
at only by a profound chancery-lawyer, and sometimes requires an expense
even beyond the value of the field itself.
When the purchaser has been convinced that he is no judge of the
goodness of an article, he usually buys it at some shop having the
reputation of selling only the best of the kind. In this case he justly
pays a higher price to the vendor, who ought to be remunerated for his
skill in selecting good articles from the manufacturer or merchant, and
for his integrity in not taking advantage of the ignorance of his
customer.
It may be contended that it is cheaper for the purchaser to pay for the
use of the skill and integrity of the vendor than to spend his own time
in acquiring the same skill; and in many instances this is true. Still,
however, the integrity remains to be paid for, and if simple and ready
modes of verification were more generally known, a very large portion of
this loss of time would be saved.
In all those articles which are easily verified the retail price varies
but little; whilst on those that are difficult to verify, the price of
the same article, although apparently of the same quality, will be found
to vary considerably at different shops.
The duties of the various juries who will examine and recommend the
articles for which prizes are to be awarded, will require much
consideration. It cannot be expected, even after long experience through
several successive expositions, that it would be possible to form a jury
which should satisfy every exhibitor. Much, however, may be done, even
at the first, by a sincere desire to arrive at just conclusions, and by
an earnest endeavour to inform the public of the principles, and to
point out the observations, which have led their judgment to the
decisions at which they may arrive. Each of the purely mechanical arts
is allied to one or more of the sciences; almost all their various
processes are amenable to, and explicable by known laws; it is possible
for him who is a perfect master of his own craft, so to explain them
without technical terms, and in the language of common sense, that most
persons of tolerably liberal education, and possessing a fair average
intellect, may not only understand the effect produced, but admire the
ingenuity by which it was attained.
§ It is of great importance that an effort should be made to remove that
veil of mystery which unfortunately, even in minds otherwise well
instructed, often shrouds the principles on which perfection in
manufactures, in science, and still more remarkably in the fine arts,
depends. These principles nevertheless are founded immutably on the
nature of the material world around us, as well as upon our own internal
feelings. Those which regulate taste are as general, although its rules
are not so precise, as those which relate to physics. Nor need it be
dreaded that a knowledge of the _grounds_ of that admiration which works
of genius ever command from cultivated minds, should diminish the
pleasure derived from their contemplation.
Show to the student some mechanism effecting results apparently beyond
the reach of the art, and he becomes impressed with the immense distance
between his own intelligence and that which contrived it. Explain to him
the simple means and the beautiful combinations by which it is effected,
you then raise him in his own estimation, and the studious disciple thus
instructed, will ultimately arrive at the conclusion that the only
distance which is really _immense_, is that existing between the
perfection of the highest work of human skill and the simplest of the
productions of nature.
§ In questions relating to taste the subject matter is so idealized,
that the enthusiastic and the timid equally dread its contact with the
more sober powers of reasoning, lest the process of analysis should
disenchant its visionary scenes, and dissolve the unreal basis of their
delight. Taste the most perfect, without a knowledge of the principles
on which it rests, resembles the barren instinct of animals: like them,
it gathers but little improvement from experience, and like them it
perishes with the extinction of the individual life; its labours leave
no inheritance to its race.
Taste united with an intimate knowledge of its principles, and still
more if conjoined with the power of eliminating from the fleeting
relations amongst the objects of its attention, those resemblances
which, when sufficiently multiplied and defined, lead up to the
discovery of higher generalizations, confers upon its enviable possessor
a double source of happiness; it adds the delight of an intellectual
triumph to those romantic feelings which are excited by the beautiful,
the lovely, or the sublime in Nature, or which are suggested by the most
perfect representations of art.
The comprehension of the cause of our pleasure renders us more acute to
perceive those elements which conduce to its existence, to trace their
connexion, to estimate their amount, to mould into form, and to call up
for the happiness of others and of ourselves, their endless
combinations.
There is, however, for that rare union of judgment, imagination, and
taste, which we call genius, when each exists in due proportion and in
rich abundance, a yet higher object, a still nobler ambition. To have
given to mankind those models, which, after twenty centuries, still
rivet their attention, commanding unbounded admiration and defying
rivalry, is indeed a splendid achievement, justly repaid by the undying
fame which accompanies the names of those benefactors to mankind.
But great as undoubtedly our gratitude ought to be for such gifts, it is
trifling compared with that which civilized society would owe to him,
who should instruct us in the _principles_ that guided the intellect as
well as the hands, of those by whom such immortal works were executed.
In the fine arts, and in the arts of industry, as well as in the
pursuits of science, the highest department of each is that of the
discovery of principles, and the invention of methods. To investigate
the laws by which human intellect picks with caution its uncertain track
through those obscure and outlying regions of our knowledge which
separate the known and the certain from the unknown;—to teach us how to
cast as it were an intellectual and temporary connecting line across
that chasm, by which a new truth is separated from the old—confident
that when arrested by that isolated truth it will have fixed itself upon
one solid point, amidst a floating chaos of error,—confident also that,
when once the fixity of that single point has been assured, it is always
_possible_, however formidable the task, to link it by innumerable ties
to established knowledge, and thus to fill up the intervening space even
to the very boundary of its enlarged domain:—to achieve such a conquest
in any science surpasses all other discoveries, for it supplies tools
for the use of intellect, and enlarges the limits and the powers of
human reason.
§ One of the great advantages of the Exposition will arise from the
interchange of kindly feelings between the inhabitants of foreign
countries and our own. The classes who visit us will consist neither of
the very elevated nor of the very low. They will all of them, probably,
possess more instruction and information than the average of their class
amongst their countrymen: consequently they will consist of persons the
most likely to derive instruction from their visit, and therefore to
return home with pleasing impressions.
It has been found on the continent that the periodic unions of men of
science have had an excellent effect in removing jealousies and
establishing friendships. It has not unfrequently happened that two
philosophers have met in such societies, and have entered into
discussions which have enabled each to appreciate more justly the talent
of the other, before one of them was aware that he had formerly
criticised a work of his new friend, in terms which their present good
understanding would effectually prevent him from repeating.
The experience we have had of the visit of the National Guard of Paris,
strongly confirms this view. It brought out the better feelings of our
nature towards our neighbours, and all classes took their share in
endeavouring to make those visits agreeable. On their return home, the
feeling excited by the visit was conveyed far beyond the actual
visitors; and it has left on the population of Paris a permanent advance
in good will towards Englishmen.
§ Several objects may be suggested whose discussion would be of the
greatest importance for the advancement of the industrial arts, but
which are not within the scope of the Exhibition. There are, however,
other places of meeting where some of these might be discussed. The
Society of Civil Engineers might entertain some inquiries, whilst the
Statistical Society would be the most appropriate place for others.
A few of these objects may be shortly alluded to.
§ The law of patents is, perhaps, one of the most interesting as well as
of the most difficult questions. Amongst our visitors, doubtless, there
will be several who have studied the subject in their own country and
who might assist us by their information and experience.
§ We have another law—that of partnership—which presents greater
obstacles to the advance of the mechanical arts than even the defective
state of the patent law. In England, whoever enters into a partnership,
however small a share of the profits he is to receive, yet his whole
fortune becomes responsible for any losses. In most other countries
there are a class of partnerships called anonymous, or _en commandite_,
in which persons willing to risk only a limited sum are entirely
relieved of all further responsibility.
The effect of our English system is highly unfavourable to inventors. It
prevents in all but a few cases a small capital from being raised by the
joint contributions of persons more immediately acquainted with the
character and prospects of the inventor, and who are in that respect
best fitted to measure the chance of his success.
A far greater impediment, however, arises from its entirely preventing a
considerable quantity of capital from being directed to inventions. Its
operation may be thus explained.
There exist in this country a great number of persons of manufacturing
and commercial habits, whose knowledge of men is considerable, and whose
judgment of the capabilities of a proposed scheme or invention, is
cautious and judicious.
Persons of this description often possess capital, or such credit as
easily to command its use. If partnerships could be entered into, in
which the liability was limited, many persons so circumstanced would
naturally use their skill and knowledge in selecting a certain number of
schemes, in each of which they would embark a small sum. By thus
spreading the risks over an extensive field, the profits to the
capitalist would be much more certain: whilst many an excellent
invention now lost for want of capital to carry it out, would thus
enrich its inventor and benefit the country.
§ Connected with the subject of patents is another, which is of some
consequence to the public. Many of those capable of improving the arts
by new inventions, have no desire to secure their discoveries by patent
and thus to render them profitable to themselves, but are willing to
give the public the entire advantage.
Now it is supposed that, if an inventor, under the existing law,
publishes the drawings of an engine which has not actually been
constructed, a machine-maker might make the machine, take out a patent
for it, and supply the public to the exclusion even of the inventor
himself.
If the invention is a purely mechanical contrivance, it is quite
possible with mere drawings and with the aid of the Mechanical Notation
to demonstrate the possibility of its construction and of all its
movements, with the same certainty as that with which a proposition in
Euclid is proved.
It seems then desirable, that some mode of publication should be
arranged by which the public should really enjoy the gifts which science
may present without risking monopoly by an interloper.
$ The subject of co-operation is one of the greatest importance, and
like many other social questions neither its principles nor its limits
seem to be clearly understood. It is of the utmost importance that the
masses should be enlightened on a subject so exciting, and bearing so
directly on their interests. But until it has been further investigated,
and numerous instances having a practical connexion with its principles
have been collected, it is hopeless to attempt a popular treatment of
the subject. It would be highly desirable that those of our foreign
visitors who have at all studied that most important question, should
communicate to us the results of their experience.
§ The _Mechanical Notation_ to which a slight allusion has been made, is
a system of signs by which all machinery may be perfectly described even
without the necessity of any explanation in words. It forms in fact an
universal language, which will be, when generally employed, capable of
being read by every people, just as the Arabic numerals are at present.
It has now been in use for more than twenty-five years, during which
time many improvements and additions have been made. A considerable
portion of it was published in 1826.[13] Amongst the subsequent
additions there is one called the Mechanical Alphabet, which consists of
very simple but expressive signs placed above those letters of the
alphabet used to express certain parts of machinery. Possibly from 100
to 200 of such signs may be required. Now before any publication is made
of those already used, it is of the greatest importance that they should
be thoroughly revised, and that practical mechanicians familiar with
every branch of the art, should contribute information respecting the
requirements in their different departments. Those also who are most
experienced in the art of mechanical drawing, ought to confer together
respecting the new rules according to which all drawings should have
letters attached to the various parts of the machinery they represent.
The _universality of the language_ is of such importance, that it would
be quite mischievous hastily to publish to the world any other than a
well-considered system of signs. The Exposition of 1851 furnishes an
opportunity for such a revision.
§ Considerable discussion has arisen respecting the ultimate fate of the
Crystal Palace. Three questions have been agitated:—
1. Shall it be pulled down?
2. Shall it be removed to another locality?
3. To what uses can the building be applied if it is retained?
Public opinion has undergone a great revolution since the opening of the
Exhibition; but however strongly it may now be expressed, it ought not
to interfere with public faith. If, after all the protestations and
pledges of the Commission, that the building was to be of temporary
duration, it should be permitted to remain permanently in its present
locality, little faith will be given in future to the promises of public
bodies. The pledge contained in the document by which the Commission was
appointed, viz. that 20,000_l._ should be given in prizes, has neither
been redeemed nor forgotten; and the treatment of the income-tax by the
successive political parties has added little to the respect with which
official promises are regarded.
If the country had originally maintained its undoubted right to use its
own parks for its own purposes, the building might then have remained;
but the inhabitants of Belgravia, having raised a violent opposition to
the selection of that locality, were only pacified on receiving the
strongest assurances that the building should be removed after it had
fulfilled its original purpose. In justice therefore to them, it must be
taken down.
The second question, Shall the Crystal Palace be removed? is by no means
decided by the answer given to the first. It would be perfectly
consistent with good faith to remove it to any other part of the park
not contiguous to Belgrave Square.
The third question, therefore, To what uses can the building be applied?
must now be examined, in order to arrive at a definitive decision upon
the second.
A wish seems to be very generally entertained for the preservation of
the building; and various uses have been suggested to which it might be
advantageously applied.
Mr. Paxton wishes to convert it into a winter garden.
M. Gambardella, in his highly interesting pamphlet, “What shall we do
with the Glass Palace?”[14] has proposed to have within its walls
alternately exhibitions of painting and of sculpture.
Permanent galleries of the fine arts have also been proposed.
Collections of the industrial arts, and models, have also been
suggested.
A portion of it might also be appropriated to the building of several
theatres for lectures, of various sizes, capable of containing from 100
to 2,000 persons.
The great principle to be borne in mind is, that, whatever the future
destination of the building, it must be self-supporting. The best and
most certain test of its utility to the public is furnished by the fact
of their being willing to pay for the enjoyments it affords them.
The plan of having a considerable portion of the building devoted to a
winter garden would supply a great want in our wet and uncertain
climate. The temperature ought not to be high, so that exercise might be
taken under shelter. No dogs, horses, or carriages ought to be admitted.
A large portion of those residing in the immediate neighbourhood would
subscribe, and also many who possessed carriages. But the number of
subscribers would depend chiefly on the position chosen for the
building. In its _present_ locality, the prejudices of the wealthier
class would be increased by the injustice of retaining it in violation
of the strongest pledges, and it would probably have a very limited
number of subscribers.
Perhaps it might be desirable to add reading-rooms for newspapers and
for the periodical literature of the day. Subscriptions to these might
be either for limited periods, or even for a single day. A
refreshment-room, also, would be required.
If, however, the building were removed to the situation proposed in the
seventh chapter of this volume, it would be accessible to a much larger
number of subscribers. Its two ends being then placed at a small
distance from the two great thoroughfares passing Hyde Park Corner and
the Marble Arch, a large number of its visitors would arrive by the
omnibuses which pass each of those well-frequented localities.
Space might readily be found either for periodical or permanent
galleries of painting and of sculpture. An objection has been made to
the former, namely, that the light in the glass palace is not fit for
the exhibition of paintings. It is singular that it should not have
occurred to such objectors that this is almost the only building in
which, from its very nature, there exists the most unlimited control
over both the quantity and the direction of light that may be required.
The profit to be derived from this part of the establishment will, as in
the former questions, depend greatly on the situation of the building.
Another plan, mentioned in the first edition of this work, was, to have
collections of the produce and manufactures exhibited on the present
occasion. Few applications of the building would be more appropriate,
and scarcely any could be more useful, than this. Fortunately, the
Executive Committee have undertaken the task, and it cannot be doubted
that the exhibitors will willingly lighten their labour by giving every
assistance in their power. One or two suggestions may here be offered,
for the purpose of impressing on the exhibitors at future Expositions
the great importance of attaching to each object a brief and condensed
account of facts connected with it. In the article of raw materials
there will not be much difficulty, as there are many instances of
excellence in that department. The case of drugs from Liverpool is a
good illustration. Their price, however, is omitted, because it was
forbidden. In the permanent collection, this most important element
will, of course, occupy its proper place. It might also be useful to
give the date of the first importation of each drug, and the first
application to its various uses. The quantity, also, of the chemical
element on which its use is founded contained in a given weight of the
substance would, if known, be highly interesting: as, for instance, the
quantity of quinine in a given weight of bark.
In making a collection of machines, there is some fear of occupying a
very large space without a corresponding advantage. A lace frame, making
in one breadth of fifteen feet from sixty to a hundred repetitions of
the same lace, would, commercially speaking, be the most advantageous;
but such a frame with only ten repetitions would be more useful for
instruction. The various self-acting mules, also, would easily fill a
large room. Perhaps the collection might be confined to working models:
these might be made, from time to time, to replace the larger machines,
and funds for that purpose might be derived from the payments of the
visitors both to the exhibition and to the lectures which ought to be
given to explain the collection.
In making a collection of specimens of manufactured articles, as well as
of produce, it would in many cases add little to the expense if a
sufficient quantity were purchased to divide into many samples. Thus,
the collections of foreign countries and of our own cities might be
enriched by authentic specimens. This view applies more particularly to
collections of woven fabrics.
A well authenticated collection of cotton, flax, wool, and silk, in the
raw state, through all their successive stages of manufacture, up to the
woven fabrics of which they constitute the basis, if accompanied by the
prices of each at intervals of ten years during the last century, would
furnish materials of the most valuable kind, and would greatly aid the
economist, the statesman, and the philosopher, in discovering and
putting to the test the principles connected with their several
inquiries.
It is not necessary, or even desirable, that this collection should
consist of articles of fancy: it ought to be composed of all those
fabrics which, although at first rare and costly, have ultimately become
objects of habitual consumption by large classes of the community.
Another purpose of great importance to which a portion of such a
building might be applied, is the construction of convenient theatres
for the delivery of lectures, and for the discussion of questions of
interest. The want of such buildings in the western part of the
metropolis has long been felt, and acts injuriously on the progress of
knowledge.
In the present state of society, oral statements of the great principles
which govern it, illustrated by striking facts drawn with judgment from
varied sources, would, if delivered with ability and good taste, attract
large audiences. Even science itself might be rendered popular by such
means. Yet if any highly gifted person, qualified for such a task, were
willing to devote to the subject the time necessary to assure the
success of his efforts, he would now be stopped at the very threshold,
for he could find no convenient theatre in any part of the west of
London, which he could hire for the delivery of such a course of
lectures.
The only theatre capable of holding 1,000 persons, is that of the Royal
Institution in Albemarle Street. Let us suppose the lecturer capable of
attracting 1,000 subscribers, each willing to pay a sovereign for a
short course of lectures. How would the sum thus raised be divided? He
could lecture at that theatre only by the permission of the Managers,
who would scarcely pay him more than 100_l._[15] for the course. The
1,000_l._ therefore, which the public would willingly pay for the
instruction they received would be thus divided:—
To the intellect which charmed them £100
To the rent of the room in which they listened 900
------
£1,000
------
If the 900_l._ were the remuneration of the creative mind, and the
100_l._ were the payment for the use of the room and the necessary
attendants, the information of several classes of society would be far
other than it now is, and the status of the lecturer would be entirely
altered. At present, however great the talent of the instructor, his
position is not exactly that which the interests of society demand. The
term, _itinerant_ lecturer, has long been one of reproach, and even now
it is not thought quite dignified in a gentleman to give a lecture _for
money_. The reason is obvious: nothing is thought respectable in England
which does not produce wealth. Any shrewd and unscrupulous fellow, who
swindles on a gigantic scale, will, if he succeed, be immediately
received with welcome into what is called the best society. Neither wit
nor talent are necessary for his admission: if, indeed, he be horridly
vulgar, a few additional hundreds of thousands will procure him
absolution in fashionable eyes, even for that most deadly sin.
Enable the instructor to receive his due portion of that reward which
the public are willing to pay, and he too will become rich, and
therefore eminently respectable. With this increased remuneration, minds
of a higher order will be attracted to the study of the most difficult
of arts,—that of teaching; and the time will arrive when accomplished,
enlightened, and independent men may earn from five to ten thousand
a-year without courting a constituency for parliamentary influence, or a
minister for justice to merit he is incapable of appreciating.
Such results, however, demand the use of convenient theatres of various
sizes, placed in situations easily accessible.
It appears then that, on every ground which has been considered, the
utility of the Crystal Palace will depend almost entirely on the
situation chosen for its ultimate position.
Looking at the question in a purely commercial view, considering the
difficulty of access from the north to its present locality; contrasting
it with the facility of access from every quarter in the site proposed;
it is not too much to presume that its revenue would be so greatly
enlarged by the removal, that it would justify an expenditure of forty
or even of fifty thousand pounds.
[12] The French chamber has devoted 50,000 francs to the purchase of
specimens.—(_Illustrated News_, 2d. Feb. 1851.)
[13] Phil. Trans. 1826, p. 250.
[14] Published by Aylott and Jones, Paternoster Row.
[15] It is far from the author’s intention to reproach in the
slightest degree the Managers of that most valuable Institution. Every
member having a right to be present at every lecture, it is not in
their power to do otherwise.
CHAPTER XII.
INTRIGUES OF SCIENCE.
Several causes have justly lowered the position of science in England.
The conduct of the Royal Society, and of men of science themselves, has
equally contributed to this result. In a work on the Decline of
Science[16] in 1830, I exposed the wretched mismanagement of the Royal
Society, but not until in conjunction with Wollaston and other eminent
men, I had found the inutility of every effort we made to improve it
from within. Our reform bill stands recorded upon the minutes of the
council, with the signatures of Wollaston, of Young, of Herschel, and of
others whose names ought to have commanded respect: but it was defeated
by an ingenious manœuvre.
The facts stated in the work alluded to, have never been disputed: one
answer[17] only having, as far as I am aware, ever been attempted to any
part of that volume. It appeared in the Annals of Philosophy, and was
first mentioned to me by the late Francis Baily, F.R.S. Not having then
seen it, I inquired whether he thought any reply necessary; his answer
was, “_No: it is a full admission of the truth of your statement._”
§ In France the body who elect to offices in the Institute, are men of
the highest intellectual attainments, whose suffrage it is an honour to
receive, and who, during the existence of the monarchy, constituted one
amongst the classes out of whom Peers of France were selected.
In England, out of about 800 Fellows of the Royal Society, the greater
part of them know nothing of science, and of course their votes swamp
those of the members most competent to pronounce opinions. The new mode
of admitting fellows of the Royal Society, has had a good effect in
improving the qualification of those admitted; but unfortunately, its
operation is so slow that it will be many years before the Society is
relieved from its incumbrances.
§ In the Academy of Sciences at Paris, the office of Secretary is an
object of ambition even to men of the highest scientific attainments. It
is usually held by persons of the greatest eminence, who are themselves
at the same time carrying out original inquiries on subjects connected
with their official duties. It is sufficient to cite the names of
Delambre, of Fourier, of Cuvier, and of Arago.
In England the Secretary of the Royal Society of London occupies no such
position. To some of our most eminent men, it may, when young, have been
an object of ambition to hold it for a few years: but considering the
very moderate pay of 100_l._ a-year, and how considerable a portion of
time must be occupied by its duties if conscientiously fulfilled, it is
rare that any man of original talent and independent feeling will join
in the intrigues by which it is too frequently obtained.
In consequence of this state of things, the officers of the Royal
Society are most frequently third or fourth-rate men, who not having
sufficient occupation in their own professions, seek the office as a
means of adding to their income. Or, they may be, in some cases,
military men, who being paid by the public for other duties, are glad to
get relieved from them without the loss of their emoluments. Persons
holding offices in the Royal Society ought by their scientific eminence
to confer dignity on their office: instead of acquiring a position in
the world by its acceptance.
§ Again, the justice of the decisions of the Council in awarding their
medals, has been publicly impeached. A very few years since, a general
meeting of the Society was summoned on the requisition of several of its
members, to inquire into the circumstances attending the award of
certain Royal medals. It was admitted by the President that there had
been considerable irregularities in some of the awards, and the Council
only escaped a vote of censure in consequence of some little want of
management in those who proposed it.
During this discussion one of the Fellows of the Royal Society got up,
and remarked that although this case was very bad, it became trifling
when compared with the circumstances attending the very first award of
the Royal medals; for on that occasion the Council had wilfully violated
the laws they had themselves established for their distribution, and
that on his formally demonstrating the facts by reference to their own
minutes, they with singular consistency refused to alter their unfair
and unjust decision.
§ Difficulties of another kind arise respecting the Presidents of
Societies. When the office of President is really or practically a
permanent one, it is very difficult to carry on the business of the
Society if the President is a person of exalted rank, or if he do not
permanently reside in London.
In either case it usually happens that a secretary or treasurer, or
other officer who is resident, insensibly becomes the means of
communication with the President, who is naturally anxious to be
acquainted with the feelings and wishes of the body over which he
presides. The most honest officer can scarcely fail to have some little
bias towards his own opinions: he will naturally mix more with those who
approve of, than with those who differ from them, and will consequently,
although perhaps unintentionally, communicate to the President a
one-sided view of his own, as the dominant opinion of the Society.
The President, on the other hand, however really anxious he may be to
introduce any amendments which he conceives advantageous for the
Society, will naturally doubt their policy if informed that they are not
in unison with the opinions of the body. He will communicate with his
treasurer, secretary, or other officer, and almost always express his
concurrence in the course proposed to him as being the most agreeable to
the body at large.
The officer, receiving such a reply, will naturally mention at the
Council the opinions of the President. He may even from good nature
allow the Council to think that the President himself _originated_ the
views he only _adopted_ because he believed them to be those of the
Society.
Under such circumstances, it is difficult to oppose the expressed wishes
of the absent President, and strangely enough, without any intentional
deceit, President, Council, and Society are supposed to be unanimous in
doing what each by itself thinks inexpedient.
§ It is true that by great kindness, good sense, and decision of
character, the Prince or absent President may in some cases mitigate or
prevent these evils. Such cases, however, are the exception, not the
rule.
§ In a work containing views on the state of science in England,
foreigners at least will expect that I should take some notice of my own
calculating engines.
I had hoped that the history of the transactions between myself and the
government respecting them, as related in the eleventh chapter of the
History of the Royal Society by Mr. Weld, together with the two
criticisms on that work in the Athenæum,[18] would have rendered any
further explanation on my part unnecessary. Many persons, however, who
admit these as fully explaining the part I was compelled to take, have
at the same time expressed to me their doubts that some occult agency
was at work to prejudice the government, and have asked who were its
scientific advisers on such an important subject, during the long period
in which the Difference Engine was in abeyance.
§ I have not been blind to the passions and interests of men. My own
pursuits were of such a character that they interfered with those of
none of my colleagues in the paths of science; and perhaps I may have
trusted too much to this circumstance as exempting me from rivalry and
jealousy.
As a reformer both in science and in politics, I knew that I should
excite enmity in the minds of some honest men, and also in those of many
other persons who dreaded inquiry into jobs not yet exposed. When I
published the Decline of Science, in 1830, I certainly was not aware how
many would include themselves in the latter class: but had I foreseen
it, I should not have altered my course. To have met and to have
defeated intrigue by watchfulness, might not have been a difficult task,
but it would have required too great a sacrifice of time devoted to far
higher objects. It was, moreover, an occupation for which I had little
taste.
The time, however, has now arrived when, having given up all expectation
of constructing the Analytical Engine from the drawings which I had
caused to be made at very great expense, I think it right to state the
result of my own observations, and especially to point out the facts
that have come to light to confirm them. These, if they do not open the
eyes of some, who, having been themselves deceived, have done me
injustice, will at all events be of use for the future, and may save the
young and inexperienced enthusiast of science from embarking in
undertakings, honourable to the country, but ruinous to himself.
It has often been remarked, that an event in itself trivial sometimes
leads to results with which it seems to have no conceivable connexion.
A beaver constructing his dwelling on the plateau of the Andes, may have
turned the course of a river, which otherwise would shortly have joined
the Pacific, into a valley through which, after lengthened wanderings,
it now flows into the Atlantic Ocean.
So, by some strange combination of circumstances, a quarrel in which I
had no part, and with whose origin I am unacquainted, seems to have had
an unanticipated effect in impeding the construction of the Calculating
Engines.
At the time of the foundation of the Astronomical Society, Sir James
South, whose observatory and whose house were hospitably open to every
cultivator of astronomy, was on terms of intimate friendship with almost
all of those persons at that period most eminent in science. It is
sufficient to mention the names of Wollaston and Davy, and to add that
when the late Mr. Fallows was appointed Astronomer at the Cape, although
previously a stranger, he became for several months the guest of Sir
James South, who assisted him in acquiring that practical knowledge of
instruments so necessary in his new avocation.[19]
§ In 1829 Sir James South was elected President of the Astronomical
Society. It now appears, however, that previously to this appointment,
_a party had been formed_ adverse to Sir J. South, which party, with the
view of thwarting him, placed in the office of Secretary the Rev.
Richard Sheepshanks, Fellow of Trinity Coll., Cambridge.[20]
In March, 1831, the Board of Visitors of the Royal Observatory of
Greenwich, met at the Admiralty, to consider the propriety of separating
the duties of Superintendent of the Nautical Almanac from those of
Astronomer Royal. The new arrangement was advocated, amongst others, by
Sir J. South, and after some discussion, in which Capt. Beaufort and
myself took part, it was ultimately carried. As we were leaving the
meeting-room, Mr. Sheepshanks addressing me said: “I am determined to
put down Sir James South, and if you and other respectable men will give
him your support, I will put you down.” He at the same time told me he
“intended to put Captain Beaufort down.”
During the course of 1832, it was found that the large equatorial
mounting which had been contrived and executed by Troughton, for his
friend Sir J. South’s twelve-inch object-glass, was an entire failure.
This produced at the time a difference between two friends who esteemed
each other highly, and who had been for years united by reciprocal acts
of kindness in ties of “_very intimate_” friendship. Well acquainted
myself with the character of the parties, and the circumstances of the
case, I have not the slightest doubt that this unfortunate affair might
easily, by the exertions of judicious friends, have terminated in the
entire restoration of their former friendship. But this was a course
which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks took effectual means to prevent. Having
himself a “_personal_” quarrel with Sir James South, he “_offered_” his
services to assist Messrs. Troughton and Simms. He “_offered to go_”
himself to examine the instrument in Sir J. South’s observatory, and
“_got his friend, Professor Airy, to go with him_” for the purpose of
remedying the defects of the Equatorial.
Notwithstanding he was told by Mr. Simms that “_Sir J. South had
declared that no person could have been pitched upon more obnoxious than
yourself_,” he still persevered in obtruding himself into Sir J. South’s
observatory as the agent of Troughton and Simms, until it was at last
discovered that no after contrivances or expense could correct the
errors of an instrument itself radically defective in principle.
It may readily be supposed that the continuance for months of these
visits by Mr. Sheepshanks and Professor Airy, and the _irritating
correspondence_ consequent upon them, which, though _nominally_ that of
Troughton and Simms, was really “_directed by_” the Rev. R. Sheepshanks,
destroyed all hope of a reconciliation. The parties then had recourse to
the Court of King’s Bench, and it was curious to observe the vigour and
energy with which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks applied himself to the
exercise of his earlier studies.[21]
Having _volunteered_ his services to Messrs. Troughton and Simms—he
“_wrote every letter_” for them during the subsequent law-suit—he acted
for them in all the various characters of “_friend_” and “_adviser_”—of
“_workman_” and “_agent_”—of “_attorney_” and “_counsel_;”[22]—he made
an “_affidavit_” in the case—became a _witness_ himself—and undertook to
_intimidate witnesses_ on the opposite side.
This latter performance is fortunately rare in England, and is so
remarkable that it is necessary to give some account of the proceedings.
Not wishing to become involved in so disagreeable a case, I had refused
to be a witness on the part of Sir J. South. Having, however, had some
conversation on the subject with the late Lord Abinger (then Mr.
Scarlett), he represented to me that my evidence was essential for the
justice of the case, and upon that ground I reluctantly waived my
objection to appear as a witness.
Having been examined in chief on the seventeenth day of the Arbitration,
I remained in the room a few minutes after the Arbitrator had left it.
The Rev. R. Sheepshanks, the only other person then present, addressing
me said, “it was necessary to _discredit me_ because I had supported Sir
J. South.” He added that “he would, at a future time, _attack me_
publicly on _another subject_, on account of the part I had taken in
this matter.”
The remembrance of his former threats more than four years before at the
Visitation at the Admiralty, added to the knowledge of the unremitting
perseverance with which he had carried on his hostility to Sir J. South,
satisfied me that it would be unsafe for the cause of truth, and
possibly injurious to myself, if I were not to take measures for making
known the nature of the weapons which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks was
employing. As he had ventured, _after_ my having given evidence on oath,
to threaten me with injury, with the hope of inducing me to modify that
evidence on cross-examination, it appeared to me probable that he might
have been tampering with the evidence of other witnesses in the same
cause, who from their position or circumstances in life, might be
compelled by the fear of his vengeance to shape their evidence so as to
adapt it to his views.
The Rev. R. Sheepshanks discovered on reflection no impropriety in this
course of intimidating witnesses, or of attacking those who could not be
induced to take up his own private quarrels. He thus defended both.
“_I think it allowable to throw down the gauntlet in this manner._”
“_I have another ground of dispute with Captain Beaufort, and certainly
intend to put him down._”
The gallant Admiral has survived many a dangerous day, and needs not the
pen of a friend to protect his honest and well-earned fame.
The reader may perhaps be astonished at the statement made in the
preceding pages, and feel disposed to consider it an _ex parte_
statement. It _is entirely_ an _ex parte_ statement: it is not necessary
for its support that the reader should give credence even to that small
part of it which appears to rest on my own evidence before the
Arbitrator. _The whole of it is founded entirely on the testimony of
the_ Rev. R. Sheepshanks _himself._ Every statement of those which are
marked as quotations was either elicited from him on his
cross-examination, or in the few instances in which it came from myself,
its correctness was confirmed by his subsequent admission or
re-statement. After my statement, and the Rev. R. Sheepshanks’ reply to
it, the Arbitrator addressing him said—
“With respect to the matter of fact, you agree?”
Rev. R. Sheepshanks. “Yes, we agree as to the matter of fact.”
Professor Airy, who was afterwards appointed Astronomer Royal, had long
before become as deeply engaged as his friend Mr. Sheepshanks in this
most unfortunate quarrel. Years of aggravating delay and discussion
resulted from the procrastinated reference, and at length one of the
parties, Mr. Troughton, being dead, a decision not satisfactory to
either was given in December 1838. But the inextinguishable desire “to
put down Sir James South” survived the lawsuit which was only used as a
means, and reappeared from time to time through the aid of the press, in
forcible but somewhat unmeasured charges and recriminations between the
Astronomer Royal, the Rev. R. Sheepshanks and others on the one side,
and the astronomer of Campden Hill on the other.
It was a curious though a very painful study, to observe from time to
time the various consequences of this feud.
Against those men of science who refused to forsake their ancient social
relations with Sir James South, a system of disparagement was maintained
which could not fail in the course of time to produce its effects. The
avowed object of the party of which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks was the
organ, was, in his own expressive words, to _discredit and put down
every respectable person_ who supported Sir J. South.
It was melancholy to observe the gradual change in the expression of
opinions by some of those qualified from their knowledge to guide the
opinion of the public. Intimidated at first into silence; the
uncontradicted assertions of those around them then got possession of
their minds, until at length, without any new examination, they were
flattered into an acquiescence in, if not indeed into the expression of,
opinions entirely opposite to their former ones. These new views were
doubtless conveyed by their flatterers to other ears, and thus the
process of “_discrediting every respectable person_” opposed to them,
was carried on under the authority of honourable names.
One after another almost all Sir James South’s old friends and
acquaintance amongst _men of science only, however_, were alienated from
him.
One man was alarmed by the fear that some inaccuracies in his
astronomical publications should be severely criticised. Of another it
was hinted that his mathematics were all wrong, and might be shown up.
Those who were timid feared the anger of the dominant party; those who
were young might have their prospects blighted by even appearing in
friendly relations with him who supported the unequal conflict; those
who were old loved repose, and found it easiest to appear to side with
the most numerous party; whilst those who saw through the whole of it,
had better things wherewith to occupy their minds, than to attend to
such affairs.
It is obvious to all who have observed society that such a system of
“_discrediting_” carried on for a series of years, especially against
one too much occupied or too proud to expose it, must end in
establishing the set of opinions propagated by the party. Honest and
even tolerably well-informed persons, will at length be misled, and be
found to adopt them.
Opinions thus propagated must have had their influence widely spread,
and unless those members of the various administrations with whom
decisions relative to the Difference Engine rested, had been either
highly skilled in mathematical science, or deeply read in human nature,
it would have been almost impossible for them not to have been misled.
The former qualification is unnecessary; the latter is indispensable for
a statesman. Of the _eight_ Prime-ministers with whom I have had
communications relative to the Difference Engine, _one_ only personally
examined it; doubtless not with the view of criticising the mechanism,
but of reading the character of its author. Had my _official_
intercourse with that eminent man commenced earlier or continued later,
the fate of the Calculating Engines would probably have been far
different.
It is always difficult to trace intriguers up to a direct intercourse
with government. In the present case, the vanity of some of them
overcame their judgment, and they gave themselves out as advisers of the
government on scientific subjects. To these I shall not at present
refer, but confine myself to citing from official documents two cases of
direct communication with the government by persons on whose judgment it
appears to have relied.
The Whigs seemed to have had great confidence in the devotion of the
Rev. R. Sheepshanks to their interests, since they took the
extraordinary step of appointing him, although a Clergyman, one of the
Boundary Commissioners under the Reform Bill, and he is, I believe, at
present one of the Standard Measure Commission.
The Astronomer Royal, besides his situation at Greenwich, has been a
member of several Commissions:—
The Tidal Harbour Commission.
The Standard Measure Commission.
The Harbour of Refuge Commission.
The Railway Gauge Commission.
The following are extracts from his Annual Reports:—
“The Board of Admiralty, on my representation of the interruption to
our business caused by the rating of so many Chronometers, and _by my
own employment on public business unconnected with the Observatory_,
immediately sanctioned the employment of an additional
computer.”—_Astron. Royal, Rep. June 1841_, p. 7.
“On former occasions I have avowed without scruple that I do not
consider the Royal Observatory as a mere isolated place for the
conduct of Astronomical observations. I consider it a part, perhaps
the most important part, of the scientific institutions of this
country.”—P. 18.
“In concluding this long report, I have been uniformly supported by
the _confidence of the government_.”—_Astron. Royal, Rep. June 1844_,
p. 20.
The following extract of a letter from the Astronomer Royal to the late
Sir Robert Peel, shows that his time was so occupied with the labours of
the Railway Gauge Commission, that he was unable to draw up a memorial
which he had himself proposed, even though it related to an astronomical
subject—our colonial observatories.
* * * * “I have been so closely employed on the papers of the Railway
Gauge Commission, that it has been impossible for me to draw up a
memorial before the present time. * * * *
“April 16th, 1846.
To the Right Hon. Sir Robert Peel, Bart., &c.”
“By the giving opinions on subjects of railways and _other mechanical
matters referred to me by Government_, it has appeared that our
energies are not wholly absorbed in the mere Astronomy of the
Observatory.”—_Astron. Royal, Rep. June 1846_, p. 10.
(N.B. The italics do not occur in the original quotations.)
Now it is evident from these extracts from Reports of the Astronomer
Royal to the Board of Visitors and from other facts, that he wishes
himself to be considered the general referee of Government in all
scientific questions.
The office of Astronomer Royal is one of great importance: it requires
the undivided energy and talents of one person, and great as Mr. Airy’s
abilities undoubtedly are, yet it is highly injudicious to divert them
from their legitimate object,—the direction of the many arduous duties
of the establishment over which he presides.
During many years I have frequently found, in my communications with
members of Government on subjects connected with the Calculating
Engines, difficulties on their part which remained entirely
unexplained;—unseen obstacles which were never alluded to, but whose
existence could not be doubted.
Although frequently warned by personal friends that it was unwise to
neglect such machinations as those which I have, at length, been
reluctantly compelled to expose; yet I was unwilling for a long time to
believe that they were directed against myself.
I have now traced the connexion of the Rev. R. Sheepshanks, (who had
avowed his determination “_to discredit me_,” and also to “_attack me on
another subject at a future time_,”) through his friend the Astronomer
Royal, with the Government. According to the Astronomer Royal’s own
statement, he was their adviser on all scientific subjects. The
Government had no other official adviser, and would scarcely have
ventured to decide upon points connected with some of the most profound
questions of mathematics, on their own responsibility.
There are, I am aware, other channels than those of official reports, by
which the Government may have been influenced. I do not, therefore,
expect to find any formal report denying the practical utility of the
Calculating Engines, or the possibility of constructing them.
If there is any such, I claim as a matter of justice, that it be
published. The Difference Engine and the Analytical Engine, are
questions of pure science. If the Astronomer Royal has maintained that
they are either useless or impracticable, then the grounds of that
opinion _must_ have been stated, and, if published, the solidity of
those grounds might be examined.
It now becomes necessary to take a very brief review of the conduct of
Government with respect to the Difference Engine. Having contrived and
executed a small model of a Difference Engine, I published a very short
account of it in a letter to Sir Humphry Davy, in the year 1822. At the
wish of the Government I undertook to construct for them an engine on a
much larger scale, which should print its results. I continued to work
at this Engine until 1834, refusing in the mean time other sources of
profitable occupation, amongst which was an office of about 2,500_l._
a-year. Circumstances over which I had no control then caused the work
to be suspended.
After eight years of repeated applications, and of the most harassing
delay, at the end of 1842 the Government arrived at the resolution of
giving up the completion of the Difference Engine, on the alleged ground
of its expense.
In the mean time, new views had opened out to me the prospect of
performing purely algebraic operations by means of mechanism. To arrive
at so entirely unexpected a result I deemed worthy of any sacrifice, and
accordingly spared no expense in procuring every subsidiary assistance
which could enable me to attain it. Each successive difficulty was met
by new contrivances, and at last I found that I had surmounted all the
great difficulties of the question, and had made drawings of each
distinct department of the Analytical Engine.
Having expended upwards of 20,000_l._ on the experiments and inquiries
which had led me to these results, it would not have been prudent to
attempt the _construction_ of such an engine. I thought, however, that
there were several offices in the appointment of Government for which I
was qualified, and to which, under the circumstances, I had some claim.
I hoped if I had obtained one of these, by fulfilling its laborious
duties for a few years, and by allowing the whole salary to accumulate,
that I might then have been able to retire, and adding the money thus
earned to my own private resources, that I might yet have enough of life
and energy left to _execute_ the Analytical Engine, and thus complete
one of the great objects of my ambition.
Having neither asked nor been offered any acknowledgment for all the
sacrifices I had made, I felt that I had some just claims to one of
these appointments. Every application was unsuccessful; whatever may
have been the reasons, the conduct of Government has been exactly that
which might have been expected had they been the _allies_ or the _dupes_
of the party which thought it necessary, from enmity to Sir James South,
to “discredit” the author of the Analytical Engine.
One only of the many reports which were circulated, I thought it worth
while to contradict, and that cost me more trouble, and wasted more of
my time, than the refutation of the calumny was worth. It was boldly and
perseveringly stated that I had received from the Government a large
pecuniary reward for my services. The fact was, not merely that I never
_did_ receive any such reward, but that I was almost constantly
_advancing money_ to pay the engineer who was constructing the Engine
for the Government, before I had myself received the amount of his bills
from the Treasury.
On tracing up these rumours, they were usually found to arise from a
species of dishonesty very difficult to convict. Thus one person
circulated them widely; when asked for the grounds of the charge, he
referred to certain Parliamentary Papers, and affected to believe that
the sums paid _for the workmen_ were paid to the _inventor_: of course
_he_ could no longer safely propagate the falsehood. Another then took
up the tale, until he was met by the same question, when _he_ not only
expressed his delight at being informed of the truth, but half convinced
his indignant, though credulous auditor, that _he_ would assist in
propagating the correction. Thus the assertion was continually repeated,
until honourable and upright men, who had been deceived and discovered
the deception, were so frequent in society, that it became dangerous to
the character of the traducers to continue the circulation of the
calumny.
Even since the first edition of this work has appeared, one of these
calumnies has been again revived, in the statement that—
The reason why the Government gave up the construction of the original
Difference Engine was, that Mr. Babbage refused to finish _it_, and
wished them to take up the Difference Engine No. 2.
An attempt has been made to prove its truth by a quotation from this
volume, in which the accuser, mistaking dates, assigns the drawings of
the Difference Engine No. 2, which did not exist until 1847, as the
causes of the discontinuance of No. 1, which was given up in 1843. This
charge too is made in the face of a distinct denial by Mr. Babbage that
the late Sir Robert Peel could have been influenced by any such
_supposed_ wish, because he had in his possession a written _disavowal_
of it from Mr. B. himself; it is also made in the teeth of the very
words used by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, in his letter to Mr.
B. regretting the necessity of giving it up, assigns as its cause “_the
expense_.” Both these latter statements had been already published in
1848.
[16] Reflections on the Decline of Science in England, and on some of
its Causes. 1830.
[17] A small pamphlet, the production of an amiable and excellent
foreign philosopher, cannot be considered an answer: since it did not
_contradict_ the facts, and only answered opinions on science, which
were _not_ maintained in that book.
[18] Athenæum, 14 Oct. 1848, and 16 Dec. 1848.
[19] Sir James South, in conjunction with Sir John Herschel, completed
the examination of 380 double and triple stars; a work for which the
authors were awarded the great Astronomical prize of the Institute of
France in 1825, and the Medal of the Astronomical Society of London in
1826.
[20] “When he [Sir J. S.] was elected President, I [Rev. R. S.] was
elected Secretary to keep him in order.”
[21] At an earlier period of his life, his studies were directed
towards the profession of the law.
[22] On the 19th July, 1836, at the 23d meeting under the Arbitrator,
the Rev. R. Sheepshanks _cross-examined_ Mr. Savage the Architect.
CHAPTER XIII.
CALCULATING ENGINES.
It is not a bad definition of _man_ to describe him as a _tool-making
animal_. His earliest contrivances to support uncivilized life, were
tools of the simplest and rudest construction. His latest achievements
in the substitution of machinery, not merely for the skill of the human
hand, but for the relief of the human intellect, are founded on the use
of tools of a still higher order.
The successful construction of all machinery depends on the perfection
of the tools employed, and whoever is a master in the art of tool-making
possesses the key to the construction of all machines.
The Crystal Palace, and all its splendid contents, owe their existence
to _tools_ as the physical means:—to intellect as the guiding power,
developed equally on works of industry or on objects of taste.
The contrivance and the construction of tools, must therefore ever stand
at the head of the industrial arts.
The next stage in the advancement of those arts is equally necessary to
the progress of each. It is the art of drawing. Here, however, a
divergence commences: the drawings of the artist are entirely different
from those of the mechanician. The drawings of the latter are
Geometrical projections, and are of vast importance in all mechanism.
The resources of mechanical drawing have not yet been sufficiently
explored: with the great advance now making in machinery, it will become
necessary to assist its powers by practical yet philosophical rules for
expressing still more clearly by signs and by the letters themselves the
mutual relations of the parts of a machine.
As we advance towards machinery for more complicated objects, other
demands arise, without satisfying which our further course is absolutely
stopped. It becomes necessary to see at a glance, not only every
_successive_ movement of each amongst thousands of different parts, but
also to scrutinize all contemporaneous actions. This gave rise to the
Mechanical Notation, a language of signs, which, although invented for
one subject, is of so comprehensive a nature as to be applicable to
many. If the whole of the facts relating to a naval or military battle
were known, the mechanical notation would assist the description of it
quite as much as it would that of any complicated engine.
This brief sketch has been given partly with the view of more distinctly
directing attention to an important point in which England excels all
other countries—the art of _contriving and making tools_; an art which
has been continually forced upon my own observation in the contrivance
and construction of the Calculating Engines.
When the first idea of inventing mechanical means for the calculation of
all classes of astronomical and arithmetical tables, occurred to me, I
contented myself with making simple drawings, and with forming a small
model of a few parts. But when I understood it to be the wish of the
Government that a large engine should be constructed, a very serious
question presented itself for consideration:—
Is the present state of the art of making machinery sufficiently
advanced to enable me to execute the multiplied and highly complicated
movements required for the Difference Engine?
After examining all the resources of existing workshops, I came to the
conclusion that, in order to succeed, it would become necessary to
advance the art of construction itself. I trusted with some confidence
that those studies which had enabled me to contrive mechanism for new
wants, would be equally useful for the invention of new tools, or of
other methods of employing the old.
During the many years the construction of the Difference Engine was
carried on, the following course was adopted. After each drawing had
been made, a new inquiry was instituted to determine the mechanical
means by which the several parts were to be formed. Frequently sketches,
or new drawings, were made, for the purpose of constructing the tools or
mechanical arrangements thus contrived. This process often elicited some
simpler mode of construction, and thus the original contrivances were
improved. In the mean time, many workmen of the highest skill were
constantly employed in making the tools, and afterwards in using them
for the construction of parts of the engine. The knowledge thus acquired
by the workmen, matured in many cases by their own experience, and often
perhaps improved by their own sagacity, was thus in time disseminated
widely throughout other workshops. Several of the most enlightened
employers and constructors of machinery, who have themselves contributed
to its advance, have expressed to me their opinion that if the
Calculating Engine itself had entirely failed, the money expended by
Government in the attempt to make it, would be well repaid by the
advancement it had caused in the art of mechanical construction.
It is somewhat singular, that whilst I had anticipated the difficulties
of construction, I had not foreseen a far greater difficulty, which,
however, was surmounted by the invention of the Mechanical Notation.
The state of the _Difference Engine_ at the time it was abandoned by the
Government, was as follows: A considerable portion of it had been made;
a part (about sixteen figures) was put together; and the drawings, the
whole of which are now in the Museum of King’s College at Somerset
House, were far advanced. Upon this engine the Government expended about
£17,000.
The drawings of the _Analytical Engine_ have been made entirely at _my
own cost_: I instituted a long series of experiments for the purpose of
reducing the expense of its construction to limits which might be within
the means I could myself afford to supply. I am now resigned to the
necessity of abstaining from its construction, and feel indisposed even
to finish the drawings of one of its many general plans. As a slight
idea of the state of the drawings may be interesting to some of my
readers, I shall refer to a few of the great divisions of the subject.
ARITHMETICAL ADDITION.—About a dozen plans of different mechanical
movements have been drawn. The last is of the very simplest order.
CARRIAGE OF TENS.—A larger number of drawings have been made of modes of
carrying tens. They form two classes, in one of which the carriage takes
place successively; in the other it occurs simultaneously, as will be
more fully explained at the end of this chapter.
MULTIPLYING BY TENS.—This is a very important process, though not
difficult to contrive. Three modes are drawn; the difficulties are
chiefly those of construction, and the most recent experiments now
enable me to use the simplest form.
DIGIT COUNTING APPARATUS.—It is necessary that the machine should count
the digits of the numbers it multiplies and divides, and that it should
combine these properly with the number of decimals used. This is by no
means so easy as the former operation: two or three systems of
contrivances have been drawn.
COUNTING APPARATUS.—This is an apparatus of a much more general order,
for treating the indices of functions and for the determination of the
repetitions and movements of the Jacquard cards, on which the Algebraic
developments of functions depend. Two or three such mechanisms have been
drawn.
SELECTORS.—The object of the system of contrivances thus named, is to
choose in the operation of Arithmetical division the proper multiple to
be subtracted; this is one of the most difficult parts of the engine,
and several different plans have been drawn. The one at last adopted is,
considering the object, tolerably simple. Although division is an
inverse operation, it is possible to perform it entirely by mechanism
without any tentative process.
REGISTERING APPARATUS.—This is necessary in division to record the
quotient as it arises. It is simple, and different plans have been
drawn.
ALGEBRAIC SIGNS.—The means of combining these are very simple, and have
been drawn.
PASSAGE THROUGH ZERO AND INFINITY.—This is one of the most important
parts of the Engine, since it may lead to a totally different action
upon the formulæ employed. The mechanism is much simpler than might have
been expected, and is drawn and fully explained by notations.
BARRELS AND DRUMS.—These are contrivances for grouping together certain
mechanical actions often required; they are occasionally under the
direction of the cards; sometimes they guide themselves, and sometimes
their own guidance is interfered with by the Zero Apparatus.
GROUPINGS.—These are drawings of several of the contrivances before
described, united together in various forms. Many drawings of them
exist.
GENERAL PLANS.—Drawings of all the parts necessary for the Analytical
Engine have been made in many forms. No less than thirty different
general plans for connecting them together, have been devised and
partially drawn; one or two are far advanced. No. 25 was lithographed at
Paris in 1840. These have been superseded by simpler or more powerful
combinations, and the last and most simple has only been sketched.
A large number of Mechanical Notations exist, showing the movements of
these several parts, and also explaining the processes of arithmetic and
algebra to which they relate. One amongst them, for the process of
division, covers nearly thirty large folio sheets.
About twenty years after I had commenced the first Difference Engine,
and after the greater part of these drawings had been completed, I found
that almost every contrivance in it had been superseded by new and more
simple mechanism, which the construction of the Analytical Engine had
rendered necessary. Under these circumstances I made drawings of an
entirely new Difference Engine. The drawings, both for the calculating
and the printing parts, amounting in number to twenty-four, are
completed. They are accompanied by the necessary mechanical notations,
and by an index of letters to the drawings; so that although there is as
yet no description in words, there is effectively such a description by
signs, that this new Difference Engine might be constructed from them.
Amongst the difficulties which surrounded the idea of the construction
of an Engine for developing Analytical formulæ, there were some which
seemed insuperable if not impossible, not merely to the common
understandings of well-informed persons, but even to the more practised
intellect of some of the greatest masters of that science which the
machine was intended to control. It still seemed, after much discussion,
at least highly doubtful whether such formulæ could ever be brought
within the grasp of mechanism.
I have met in the course of my inquiries with four cases of obstacles
presenting the appearance of impossibilities. As these form a very
interesting chapter in the history of the human mind, and are on the one
hand connected with some of the simplest elements of mechanism, and on
the other with some of the highest principles of philosophy, I shall
endeavour to explain them in a short, and, I hope, somewhat popular
manner, to those who have a very moderate share of mathematical
knowledge. Those of my readers to whom they may not be sufficiently
interesting, will, I hope, excuse the interruption, and pass on to the
succeeding chapters.
§ The first difficulty arose at an early stage of the Analytical Engine.
The mechanism necessary to add one number to another, if the carriage of
the tens be neglected, is very simple. Various modes had been devised
and drawings of about a dozen contrivances for carrying the tens had
been made. The same general principle pervaded all of them. Each figure
wheel when receiving addition, in the act of passing from nine to ten
caused a lever to be put aside. An axis with arms arranged spirally upon
it then revolved, and commencing with the lowest figure replaced
successively those levers which might have been put aside during the
addition. This replacing action upon the levers caused unity to be added
to the figure wheel next above. The numerical example below will
illustrate the process.
597,999 Numbers to be added.
201,001
-------
798,990 Sum without any carriage.
1 Puts aside lever acting on tens.
-------
798,900 First spiral arm adds tens and
1 puts aside the next lever.
-------
798,000 Second spiral arm adds hundreds, and
1 puts aside the next lever.
-------
799,000 Third spiral arm adds thousands.
Now there is in this mechanism a certain analogy with the act of memory.
The lever thrust aside by the passage of the tens, is the equivalent of
the note of an event made in the memory, whilst the spiral arm, acting
at an after time upon the lever put aside, in some measure resembles the
endeavours made to recollect a fact.
It will be observed that in these modes of _carrying_, the action must
be _successive_. Supposing a number to consist of thirty places of
figures, each of which is a nine, then if any other number of thirty
figures be added to it, since the addition of each figure to the
corresponding one takes place at the same time, the whole addition will
only occupy nine units of time. But since the number added may be unity,
the carriages may possibly amount to twenty-nine. Consequently the time
of making the carriages may be more than three times as long as that
required for addition.
The time thus occupied was, it is true, very considerably shortened in
the Difference Engine: but when the Analytical Engine was to be
contrived, it became essentially necessary to diminish it still further.
After much time fruitlessly expended in many contrivances and drawings,
a very different principle, which seemed indeed at first to be
impossible, suggested itself.
It is evident that whenever a carriage is conveyed to the figure above,
if that figure happen to be a nine, a new carriage must then take place,
and so on as far as the nines extend. Now the principle sought to be
expressed in mechanism amounted to this.
1st. That a lever should be put aside, as before, on the passage of a
figure-wheel from nine to ten.
2d. That the engine should then ascertain the position of all those
nines which by carriage would ultimately become zero, and give notice of
new carriages; that, foreseeing those events, it should anticipate the
result by making all the carriages simultaneously.
This was at last accomplished, and many different mechanical
contrivances fulfilling these conditions were drawn. The former part of
this mechanism bears an analogy to memory, the latter to foresight. The
apparatus remembers as it were, one set of events, the transits from
nine to ten: examines what nines are found in certain critical places:
then, in consequence of the concurrence of these events, acts at once so
as to anticipate other actions that would have happened at a more
distant period, had less artificial means been used.
§ The second apparent impossibility seemed to present far greater
difficulty. Fortunately it was not one of immediate _practical_
importance, although as a question of philosophical inquiry it possessed
the highest interest. I had frequently discussed with Mrs. Somerville
and my highly gifted friend the late Professor M‘Cullagh of Dublin, the
question whether it was possible that we should be able to treat
algebraic formulæ by means of machinery. The result of many inquiries
led to the conclusion, that if not really impossible, it was almost
hopeless. The first difficulty was that of representing an indefinite
number in a machine of finite size. It was readily admitted that if a
machine afforded means of operating on _all_ numbers under twenty places
of figures, then that any number, or _an indefinite_ number, of less
than twenty places or figures might be represented by it. But such
number will not be really indefinite. It would be possible to make a
machine capable of operating upon numbers of forty, sixty, or one
hundred places of figures: still, however, a limit must at last be
reached, and the numbers represented would not be really _indefinite_.
After lengthened consideration of this subject, the solution of the
difficulty was discovered; and it presented the appearance of reasoning
in a circle.
Algebraical operations in their most general form cannot be carried on
by machinery without the capability of expressing _indefinite_
constants. On the other hand, the only way of arriving at the expression
of an indefinite constant, was through the intervention of Algebra
itself.
This is not a fit place to enter into the detail of the means employed,
further than to observe, that it was found possible to evade the
difficulty, by connecting _indefinite_ number with the _infinite in
time_ instead of with the _infinite in space_.
The solution of this difficulty being found, and the discovery of
another principle having been made, namely—that _the nature of a
function might be indicated by its position_—algebra, in all its most
abstract forms, was placed completely within the reach of mechanism.
§ The third difficulty that presented itself was one which I had long
before anticipated. It was proposed to me nearly at the same time by
three of the most eminent cultivators of analysis then existing, M.
Jacobi, M. Bessel, and Professor M‘Cullagh, who were examining the
drawings of the Analytical Engine. The question they proposed was
this:—How would the Analytical Engine be able to treat calculations in
which the use of tables of logarithms, sines, &c. or any other tabular
numbers should be required?
My reply was, that as at the time logarithms were invented, it became
necessary to remodel the whole of the formulæ of Trigonometry, in order
to adapt it to the new instrument of calculation: so when the Analytical
Engine is made, it will be desirable to transform all formulæ containing
tabular numbers into others better adapted to the use of such a machine.
This, I replied, is the answer I give to you as mathematicians; but I
added, that for others less skilled in our science, I had another
answer: namely—
That the engine might be so arranged that wherever tabular numbers of
any kind, occurred in a formula given it to compute, it would on
arriving at any required tabular number, as for instance, if it required
the logarithm of 1207, stop itself, and ring a bell to call the
attendant, who would find written at a certain part of the machine
“Wanted log. of 1207.” The attendant would then fetch from tables
previously computed by the engine, the logarithm it required, and
placing it in the proper place, would lift a detent, permitting the
engine to continue its work.
The next step of the engine, on receiving the tabular number (in this
case the logarithm of 1207) would be to _verify_ the fact of its being
really that logarithm. In case no mistake had been made by the
attendant, the engine would use the given tabular number, and go on with
its work until some other tabular number were required, when the same
process would be repeated. If, however, any mistake had been made by the
attendant, and a wrong logarithm had been accidentally given to the
engine, it would have discovered the mistake, and have rung a louder
bell to call the attention of its guide, who on looking at the proper
place, would see a plate above the logarithm he had just put in with the
word “_wrong_” engraven upon it.
By such means it would be perfectly possible to make all calculations
requiring tabular numbers, without the chance of error.
Although such a plan does not seem absolutely impossible, it has always
excited, in those informed of it for the first time, the greatest
surprise. How, it has been often asked, does it happen if the engine
knows when the _wrong_ logarithm is offered to it, that it does not also
know the right one; and if so, what is the necessity of having recourse
to the attendant to supply it? The solution of this difficulty is
accomplished by the very simplest means.
§ The fourth of the apparent impossibilities to which I have referred,
involves a condition of so extraordinary a nature that even the most
fastidious inquirer into the powers of the Analytical Engine could
scarcely require it to fulfil.
Knowing the kind of objections that my countrymen make to this
invention, I proposed to myself this inquiry:—
Is it possible so to construct the Analytical Engine, that after the
cards representing the formulæ and numbers are put into it, and the
handle is turned, the following condition shall be fulfilled?
The attendant shall stop the machine in the middle of its work, whenever
he chooses, and as often as he pleases. At each stoppage he shall
examine all the figure wheels, and if he can, without breaking the
machine, move any of them to other figures, he shall be at liberty to do
so. Thus he may from time to time, falsify as many numbers as he
pleases. Yet notwithstanding this, the final calculation and all the
intermediate steps shall be entirely free from error. I have succeeded
in fulfilling this condition by means of a principle in itself very
simple. It may add somewhat, though not very much, to the amount of
mechanism required; in many parts of the engine the principle has been
already carried out. I by no means think such a plan _necessary_,
although wherever it can be accomplished without expense it ought to be
adopted.
CHAPTER XIV.
POSITION OF SCIENCE.
Science in England is not a profession: its cultivators are scarcely
recognised even as a class. Our language itself contains no _single_
term by which their occupation can be expressed. We borrow a foreign
word [_Savant_] from another country whose high ambition it is to
advance science, and whose deeper policy, in accord with more generous
feelings, gives to the intellectual labourer reward and honour, in
return for services which crown the nation with imperishable renown, and
ultimately enrich the human race.
The first question which presents itself to a government desirous of
advancing science, is to consider what departments of knowledge it is
important that it should reward. This is a point upon which much
misunderstanding prevails, and with regard to which interested parties
have studiously endeavoured to delude the public.
As the fund which can be applied to this purpose even by a generous
nation, is moderate, the first limitation of its application ought
naturally to be,—to confine it to those discoveries which are from their
very nature not immediately capable of becoming a source of profit.
One of the most common errors, is to reward persons who have merely
acquired an extensive knowledge of various departments of science, but
who have neither extended its boundaries by new methods, nor added new
principles to its theories.
§ An analogous mistake often occurs to wealthy and benevolent persons
residing in the country, who, finding in the son of their village
blacksmith or other artificer, some great aptitude for figures,
immediately conclude that if properly trained and then sent to College,
he will turn out a great mathematician. Now although in very rare
instances such cases may have occurred, the general result is quite
different. The lad thus selected, if as is usually the case he is
somewhat above the average intellect, will under such favourable
circumstances probably acquire a considerable knowledge of science, and
become a very respectable member of society. But if the benevolent
person who thus totally changed the position in life of this young man,
had first made inquiries at our national schools, he would probably have
found several out of every hundred scholars, capable under similar
treatment of acquiring a still larger amount of that knowledge.
§ With the increasing extension of science the labour of some of its
details becomes excessive, and those who are able to afford the expense,
gladly employ computers to relieve them from the more irksome portions
of their toil. The reduction of astronomical and meteorological
observations are of this kind. When once the formulæ to be used are
decided upon, and a skeleton form is ruled or printed and a system of
checks is devised, the remaining work may be executed by persons of very
moderate attainments. This may be extended to the computation of the
orbits of planets, of comets, and of double stars, and such assistance
may usually be had on very moderate terms. In more extensive operations,
the liability to error from the want of sufficient checks, and the great
tediousness and even uncertainty of the result must remain, until
mechanism shall entirely relieve the mind from these difficulties.
§ Let us now consider what is the present situation of men of science in
England.
The estimate which is formed of the social position of any class of
society, depends mainly upon the answer to these two questions:—
What are the salaries of the highest offices to which the most
successful may aspire?
What are the honorary distinctions which the most eminent can attain?
Offices of a strictly scientific nature are few, and their salaries are
generally of small amount: amongst these there are—
A few of the professorships at our universities.
The Astronomer Royal.
The Astronomers of some of our Colonial Observatories.
The Master of Mechanics to the Queen.
The Conductor of the Nautical Almanac.
The Director of the Museum of Economical Geology and of the Geological
Survey.
Various officers of the same institution.
Some of the officers in the Natural History department of the British
Museum.
The most valuable of these, that of Astronomer Royal, receives about
1,300_l._ a-year, including a pension of 300_l._
Thus there is amongst this class one solitary prize of at the utmost
1,300_l._ a-year, and that is confined to one department of science.
Offices for which men of science are at least as fit as any other
persons, are numerous, though they are very rarely attained by those who
pursue it.
It may, perhaps, have been expected that the recent appointment of Sir
John Herschel to the Mastership of the Mint, should have been noticed in
the previous list. But until the motives which dictated it are known, I
have no observation to make, except that it is gratifying to me to find
that the great principle of the “claims of science,” for which I have
all my life been contending, has been thus as it were, unconsciously
admitted by the minister: and had the accident of birth placed me in his
position, the appointment would have been the same, although the motives
for it might have been different.
Let us now turn to the _honorary distinctions_ which await science.
During the eleven years of the present reign, one solitary instance is
to be found of a baronetcy given for science, and that too occurred only
at a festival (the coronation) at which baronetages and peerages were
showered upon those whose sole claim was founded on the mere support of
party.
During the same interval, about half a dozen of those who cultivate
science, have been knighted.
It appears then that the highest position a man of science can attain,
and that but very rarely, is a baronetcy; that the highest salary is
about 1,000_l._ a-year. When this is compared with the most successful
prizes in the army, the navy, the church, or the bar, it shows at once
the inferior position occupied by science.
Connected with the navy is an office which ought to be held by a person
eminently uniting science with practical skill. The Surveyor-General of
the Navy has to decide upon questions of the greatest difficulty. The
mathematical theories and inquiries on which the various qualities of
sailing vessels and steamers depend, are of the most complicated kind,
and are not even yet sufficiently advanced to serve as secure and
absolute guides. Yet without a knowledge of their present state, and a
power of advancing those theories, it is hopeless to expect the greatest
and most valuable additions to the science of naval architecture. This
can only be accomplished by one who combines a great facility in
applying such portions of them as admit of it, to the practical facts
which experience is continually bringing to light.
The talent for commanding a fleet is by no means rare: the most
successful in that line may attain fortune, the peerage, and a large
pension. The talent for investigating the laws regulating the forms of
ships, is of the very rarest order. Even if its possessor should happen
to be of the naval profession, his greatest reward could only extend to
knighthood, and a thousand a-year during the tenure of an office of
great labour. Of course, naval men having the requisite talents, would
never turn them into so unprofitable a direction: yet it would be
difficult to say how many millions of money have been, and continue to
be, uselessly expended for want of that knowledge.
Amongst those situations in the appointment of the government, there are
many in which a knowledge of various branches of science is highly
useful. A considerable number of these are filled by officers of
engineers, artillery, and other corps of the army and of the navy. Thus
those whose service is already paid for by the country, are excused from
doing their ordinary duty, and are paid again for doing another and
perhaps a more agreeable duty.
Under the delusive plea that _military_ and _civil_ engineering are the
same science, military engineers have been placed in situations for
which they were unfit, and civil engineers have been excluded, to the
injury of that profession, and to the much greater damage of the
country. The Ordnance Magnetical Observatories will furnish an example
of the _economy_ which, it is pretended, results from such arrangements.
Some ten or twelve years ago, it was proposed by Humboldt that various
governments should establish magnetical observatories at different
points on the earth’s surface, so chosen that by the united information
thus obtained, we might arrive at more accurate and correct ideas of the
state of the earth’s magnetism. That plan has been pursued with great
advantage to science. A magnetical observatory was built at Greenwich,
and continuous observations were made which have been reduced and
published annually under the direction of the Astronomer Royal. The
expense[23] of the Magnetic and Meteoric Observatory, excluding that
portion of the Astronomer Royal’s salary which may be considered due to
his services in the direction of this department, but _including the
whole of the making and recording the observations themselves_, is
720_l._ annually.
There are other magnetical observatories in several of our colonies in
which observations are made. These observations appear to be sent for
reduction to an establishment at Woolwich, under the superintendence of
Colonel Sabine.
Now the first and most obvious course would have been to have employed
an additional number of computers at Greenwich, who should use the same
formulæ and methods of reduction. This would ensure perfect uniformity,
and would apparently be the most economical plan.
The course that is actually pursued is to have a separate establishment
at Woolwich, with an officer, and several non-commissioned officers on
extra pay, so that the account stands thus:—[24]
£ s. d.
One officer, extra pay 182 10 0
One non-commissioned officer, ditto 27 7 6
Three non-commissioned officers, ditto 68 8 9
Contingent, not exceeding 200 0 0
------------
Apparent expense £478 6 3
But to this must be added—
The full pay of Lieut.-Colonel 300 0 5
His extra pay 273 15 0
Full pay of one officer, if a Captain 192 16 3
Ditto one non-commissioned ditto[25] 20 0 0
Ditto three ditto ditto 50 0 0
-------------
Real expense £1,314 17 11
In the estimate for civil service for 1850[26] the following items
occur:—
£ s. d.
Extra pay to Colonel Sabine, Royal Artillery, for
services in connexion with the Magnetic and
Meteorological Observations, for ten years, from
7th May, 1839, to 7th May, 1849, at 15s. a-day 2,739 15 0
Deduct 3s. 4d. per day granted him from 1st June,
1841, to 7th May, 1848, as compensation for loss
of command pay 434 8 0
--------------
£2,305 7 0
This certainly requires an explanation. Here is an officer not doing the
services of his profession, who it seems has been allowed a compensation
for what he _might_ have received if he _had_ rendered those services:
notwithstanding which, at the end of ten years, he claims and is allowed
the above sum of £2,305 7_s._ for services the payment of which it would
seem by this account was never contemplated during those ten years.
It is also to be remarked that Colonel Sabine does not reside at
Woolwich, where the only effective portion of the work is carried on.
§ But to return to our argument: it is singular that even the principles
on which science ought to be rewarded, are not entirely settled.
Should all equally great discoveries be rewarded in the same way,
without regard to the different positions in society which the
discoverers occupy? If this principle were admitted, the rewards must be
very large, or there would be none for the higher classes of society.
Of all steps in the social scale, that which first elevates a man into
the class of Gentlemen is by far the greatest. In this country, where
the differences of rank are great, there is fortunately, until we
approach royalty, no absolute line of demarcation between any classes,
except the one alluded to; even the peerage to a private gentleman is
not so great an advance.
It is without doubt very desirable that all classes should contribute to
the intellectual advancement of the country. But unless different
advantages are proposed to different classes, it is not possible to
apply any general stimulus to all.
§ Those who maintain that science is its own reward, cannot have
remarked the vicious circle in which they reason. The delight derived
from discovery is indeed a high intellectual reward, but the force of
this maxim is only known practically to those who have already advanced
in the career of discovery: it can, therefore, never direct the inquirer
into that line. All men are subject to the same feelings and passions.
It is assuredly true that men of wealth and rank will be happier if they
cultivate their faculties, and add to the amount of human knowledge: but
they cannot be aware of this truth until they are considerably advanced,
consequently it cannot have induced them to commence this cultivation.
§ But it is for the interest of those who are the consumers of
knowledge, that all other minds should be induced to advance it:
therefore it is our interest to place even before the highest classes,
at the commencement of their career, motives for its pursuit. Having
raised such expectations, justice requires us to fulfil them; nor can we
regret that the advantages derived from the course into which we have
invited them, should have proved beneficial to them beyond even the
limits of our prediction.
It is of the very nature of knowledge that the recondite and apparently
useless acquisition of to-day, becomes part of the popular food of a
succeeding generation. Thus the nobleman who spends his wealth in
constructing unrivalled instruments, and his nights in scrutinizing with
them the remotest boundaries of space into which human vision has yet
penetrated, is preparing a source of pleasure and happiness for the
descendants of those very peasants whom his practical skill in
engineering has raised by his own instructions above the ranks in which
he originally found them.
§ Another question has been raised, but not yet answered, respecting
those pensions which have been awarded for scientific discoveries. A
certain definite limit has been fixed by practice, which has never yet
been exceeded in pensions assigned to science. The sum of three hundred
a-year, the maximum of reward to science, is almost the minimum of
reward for other services.
The most important question is, Whether these pensions are given as the
reward of scientific services rendered to the country, or as charity to
enlightened and studious persons who happen to be poor? In the one case,
they are an honour which a philosopher may be proud of receiving from
his country: in the other, they are no more than a higher order of
pauper relief, which an independent gentleman can scarcely condescend to
accept.
Another important question, though of a different nature, also arises
here. Are these pensions, thus small in amount, fit to be offered to
those who, in order to arrive at their discoveries, have themselves in
some cases spent out of their own private fortune, sums far larger than
the fee simple of the rewards thus offered to them.
Is it just that the _same rewards_ should be given to persons filling
well-endowed scientific offices, supplied with all the means of
discovery which the most perfect art can produce, as to other
philosophers, who, at the expense of their own personal comfort and
perhaps of the interests of their family, have purchased the costly
means by which they have succeeded in _equally_ improving their several
departments of science?
For the honour and the advancement of science, it is necessary that
these questions should be distinctly answered. It is to be hoped that
some independent member of parliament will at last press them in a
manner which no ministerial shuffling can evade.
[23] See App. to Rept. of Select Com. on Misc. Expenditure, p. 222.
[24] See p. 221 App. to Rept. on Misc. Expenditure, p. 848 (543) II.
[25] The pay of the non-commissioned officers has been assumed as
somewhat less by ten per cent. than their extra pay.
[26] See p. 41, App. to Rept. on Misc. Expenditure, p. 848, (268) IV.
CHAPTER XV.
THE PRESS.
Some of the principles for the discovery of truth, professed and acted
upon by those who administer the laws of England, and by those who
practice in its courts, are certainly repugnant to the first impressions
and feelings of honest men, if not also to common sense. It is,
therefore, absolutely necessary, in order to remove these impressions,
to state the ground on which those principles are defended. That ground
may be shortly expressed thus—
It has been found by long experience that it is more for the advantage
of truth and justice that professional men should be stimulated by fees
and the hope of advancement, to put forward or conceal every fact, to
advance, withhold, or oppose every inference and argument, _solely_ as
it may be of advantage to the party by whom they are employed.
It is also stated that the public are aware of this convention, and,
therefore, are not deceived by the speeches of the advocate.
Without asking whether the long experience alluded to has ever been
fortified by the trial and the failure of an opposite course, it may be
at once stated that this mode of arriving at truth is contrary to the
result of long experience in matters of science. In all discussions on
those subjects, it is found far more conducive to truth, if either party
in discussing a mooted point discover in his own argument a flaw,
unobserved by his opponent, that he should immediately point it out, and
that they should both apply their minds to repair it, and if
unsuccessful, admit it. The same course is pursued with regard to facts;
every circumstance, however apparently remote, is contributed by both
inquirers to the common stock, without the slightest care as to its
bearings on one or the other side of the question. Facts thus conveyed
for the first time to the mind of one of the parties, often recall to
his memory analogous facts, and thus the materials of reasoning or of
induction become largely increased.
§ To this supposed legal principle, it may be fairly objected that it is
entirely a theoretical view. To be convinced of this it is enough to
appeal to every man who has ever sat on a jury or heard one addressed by
counsel. He well knows that the very first effort of the learned
advocate is to attempt to persuade the jury that he is no advocate at
all. This line is sustained throughout his address, and his great object
is to convince them that he himself personally believes both the facts
to which his witnesses testify, and the inferences he adduces from their
evidence. The more skilful the advocate, the more he endeavours to
persuade the jury that he is merely an impartial observer, assisting
them in arriving at a just conclusion.
The effects of long habit in thus mystifying less practised reasoners,
cannot fail to be injurious to the moral character of the man. Take a
case of title to property, on which a barrister is consulted. Suppose
the holder has no right whatever to it, yet will the barrister by every
means his knowledge and ingenuity can suggest, help his client to rob
some other person of his property. It is useless to say that in such
circumstances the attorney conceals certain facts of his case, and does
not put the facts to the counsel in this plain way. On such occasions
the most skilful counsel are always employed, and they are certainly
competent, _if they choose it_, to ascertain the real state of the case.
In criminal cases such attempts to mislead juries are still more
reprehensible.
§ If the principle now discussed is sound, it is capable of application
to another subject—the press. But strangely enough, lawyers, more than
any other class, abuse the press because it treats its subject
commercially, and refuse to admit that rule in the case of editors of
newspapers, which they claim as a sanction for themselves. A little
examination, however, will show that the conduct of the press is much
more defensible than that of the bar.
The public require a daily account of all facts connected with politics
and the institutions of the country; it also demands analyses,
discussions, and opinions on the bearings of all such facts upon its
interests. As opinions amongst the public are often much opposed to, or
widely different from each other, it is clear that this demand cannot be
satisfied without many newspapers. Now, looking solely to the commercial
profit arising from its sale, it is tolerably certain that some one
paper supported by greater capital, and conducted with greater skill,
will endeavour to represent the opinions of the largest class of those
who purchase these sheets of diurnal information. The first place being
thus occupied, other journals will arise to represent the opinions of
smaller, yet, perhaps, of powerful classes. Thus the opinions of all
parties, and, in some measure, their relative strength, become known to
each other. This is an end much to be desired.
If the opinions of the public change, those of the leading journal must
of course follow, even though they are directly opposed to those
advocated by it a few days before. Such a change undoubtedly shocks the
feelings of many who remain constant to their own views, and cases often
occur in which these latter give up their usual paper. It must, however,
be admitted that there are few political or economical questions on
which one side is morally right, the other morally wrong. That a given
man has or has not got possession of another man’s estate, that a man
has or has not committed a murder or other crime, must, in most cases,
be well known to his counsel; if in either case the wrong-doer escapes
punishment, an injury is done to society. But whether a given line of
policy or a given law, is more or less beneficial or even injurious to
the State, is generally dependent on so many causes that very few are
able to foresee their consequences with tolerable certainty.
The most general and unsophisticated opinion is, that no man is
justified in advocating, even when unpaid, doctrines in which he does
not himself believe. With respect to the press, it is possible that the
writer of the second article may be a different individual from the
person who wrote the first article; but even were he the same person,
the bar at least have no right to find fault with him.
§ The press then may advantageously be considered as expressing the
opinions of classes, not of individuals. It has greatly improved in the
last quarter of a century, in consequence of the general improvement of
all classes.
There is now also fortunately established a certain professional feeling
amongst its members that reports of speeches, or of facts, ought to be
_rigidly exact_. Abstracts of speeches will occasionally be coloured not
by additions, but by selections or omissions, according to the side of
the question advocated by the writer. Yet even here the more popular
papers are careful to do justice to all parties. It is the more
important that this latter rule should be admitted as a principle,
because, from the great length of the debates themselves, they are
rarely read by persons much occupied, except when questions of great
interest occur.
To such persons an _impartial_ abstract is invaluable.
In the leading articles greater latitude is allowable. These, if the
theory which has been explained is admitted, are avowedly the
expressions of the opinion of its customers. The power of the press is
undoubtedly great, yet it is bound by the strongest ties of interest not
to abuse that power. It is clearly its interest to seem consistent, and
consequently to employ, at almost any expense, the best means of
ascertaining the opinions of the country _before_ they are publicly
expressed. Having attained this knowledge, it will get the credit of
appearing to lead public opinion.
Its powers of doing good when honestly conducted, are yet larger than
its powers of mischief. Yet even here its power is of necessity limited.
It cannot advocate even the _best_ course of policy on any important
subject unless it is tolerably certain that it will succeed in
convincing its customers that it is _really_ the best. It _ought_ not to
advocate that best course, because the falling off of its subscribers
might then disable it from as effectually assisting the _second best_.
It, however, neither ought, nor is it ultimately its interest, to
conceal those opinions from its subscribers.
The power it possesses, of exposing knaves and swindlers, by means of
its correspondents, and of sending highly intelligent commissioners from
time to time to inquire personally into the situation of various classes
of the population, are of great value, and could only be exercised by a
wealthy as well as by a powerful press.
CHAPTER XVI.
PARTY.
“Of all the tyrannies that molest this terrestrial scene perhaps there
is none so arbitrary, so extravagant, or so grotesque as the tyranny
of party. There is none that so frequently subjects the wise to the
caprices of the fool, and the good to the designs of the knave.”—_The
Times, Dec. 1850._
There are two great principles of government which divide the opinions
of mankind.
1st. Unchangeableness; or, “Let things alone:”—the law of the Medes and
Persians.
2d. Progress; or, the continual advancement of mankind in the
improvement of their Institutions.
No number of persons sufficiently extensive to deserve the name of a
class, have ever advocated the principle of _Retrocession_. Some few
enthusiasts have indeed believed in a golden age, and have advocated the
pastoral, or even the hunting life. These, however, were not persons
capable of collecting, examining, and weighing the evidence on which
alone an opinion on the comparative happiness of people existing in a
savage or in a civilized state of life can justly be formed.
A larger number exist, the admirers of the past, each perhaps the
worshipper of his own peculiar age. Had he lived in those times,
enjoying only the ordinary capacity he now possesses, but endowed with
all the increased knowledge of the present day, he might then have
attained a position more commensurate with his wishes, though quite
disproportioned to the industry of his exertions or the calibre of his
intellect.
§ In our own country, “the wisdom of our ancestors” is with some the
hackneyed theme of unbounded admiration.
Our ancestors were generally wise and sagacious men: they applied their
energies and their knowledge, as far as it went, to their _existing_
wants and necessities. Those amongst them who deserved that character,
would, if questioned, have expressed in language the precept to which
their deeds conformed. Availing themselves gratefully of all the
knowledge bequeathed to them by their predecessors, they struggled to
advance it for their own and their children’s benefit, and thus they
might have counselled every generation to their latest posterity:—
“You have received from us, tested by many trials, the treasured
knowledge, gathered under difficulty and danger, of our country’s
experience.
“Let the great object of each generation be to purify that body of
knowledge from its partial errors, to add to it the greatest amount of
new truths.
“Remember that accumulated knowledge, like accumulated capital,
increases at compound interest: but it differs from the accumulation of
capital in this; that the increase of knowledge produces a more rapid
rate of progress, whilst the accumulation of capital leads to a lower
rate of interest. Capital thus checks its own accumulation: knowledge
thus accelerates it own advance. Each generation, therefore, to deserve
comparison with its predecessor, is bound to add much more largely to
the common stock than that which it immediately succeeds.”
§ A question has not unfrequently been proposed by those who apply their
foresight to remote rather than to immediate objects—
“What will become of our posterity when our coal-fields are exhausted?”
The best answer to this question is, that when that distant day arrives,
if our posterity, with the accumulated knowledge of centuries, shall
have failed to find any substitute for coal in the many other sources of
heat which nature supplies, they will then deserve to be frost-bitten.
§ It is remarkable that the great parties adopt opposite principles in
pursuance of the same line of reasoning.
The advocates of things as they are, wish to stop all change, in order
to _prevent revolution_. Those who inculcate continual progress, support
it, because it makes all changes gradual, and thus, in their opinion, it
_prevents revolution_.
It is by sudden changes in laws and institutions that the greatest
misery is inflicted on mankind. Those gradual changes which are spread
over a considerable period are foreseen, and men make preparation
beforehand to accommodate themselves to the new but expected
circumstances.
If the changes effected by the Reform Bill, had been spread over the ten
preceding and ten subsequent years, few will deny that it would have
been a better measure, and more effective for its purpose. The
experience derived from its earlier changes would then have been
available for its later uses. The pertinacity, however, with which all
reform was resisted, led to such a state of affairs, that after the
refusal to transfer the franchise from East Retford, revolution was
averted only by vast and _immediate_ concession.
§ The terms Tory and Whig had been the watchwords of these two parties,
until, at last, the public lost all confidence in either. With the
increasing wealth of the country, and with the greater application of
observation, of reasoning, and of science, to its many arts and
manufactures, a vast increase has been produced in the numbers, the
power, and the influence of the middle classes. Many individuals who
have raised themselves by their intellect and industry into this class,
have been so fully impressed with the advantages of previous training,
that they have made efforts to give their children an education more
extensive and more liberal than any which, until lately, our
universities had attempted to supply.
It is to the growth of this class, which includes men possessing from
500_l._ to 5,000_l._ a-year, that we are indebted for much of the
strength which public opinion now exerts upon the ministry of the day.
Notwithstanding the vast influence of wealth and of rank throughout the
country, there are still amongst these middle classes, thousands whose
moderation renders them rich; who, therefore, can afford to be honest,
and whose approbation is neither to be purchased by wealth, nor won by
the seductions of rank and of fashionable life.
Such men, on all public questions, influence widely and justly the
opinions of those around them. There are such in the House of Commons;
and, with the extension of knowledge, many more will be added to their
number.
Thus the very weakness of an administration may possibly become an
advantage, since it thus becomes impossible for government to carry any
measure entirely opposed to the calm good sense of the people. This,
however, admits of one excepted case. If a party to advance its own
interests will pander to some strong passion, to some prejudice of
ignorance or of bigotry, it may for a time succeed, though it will
ultimately lose in character.
In the meantime, the people have found out that Party is made use of
only for the aggrandizement of a few families; that it has degenerated
into a clique, banded together for mercenary purposes, without
enthusiasm or genius to compensate for its meanness, and with little of
talent to palliate its want of integrity.
The reign of party, however, verges towards its end; the supplies on
which it feeds are sapped by economical reform. That almost all places
under Government are greatly overpaid admits of no denial. The demand
for them is notoriously great, and it is equally notorious that nothing
but the strongest political interest has any chance in the contest for
them.
The government of England is nominally a limited monarchy, but
practically almost an oligarchy. A large number of its appointments are
shared by a few families, into which some daring and unscrupulous
intruders occasionally force their way, by opposition which it is easier
to quell by place than to answer by argument: or into which less gifted
and more cunning supporters sometimes obtain an entrance by a judicious
alliance.
§ It is strongly asserted that government cannot go on without party.
That those who maintain this opinion are incapable of so conducting it,
must be at once admitted.
Without, however, entering into the debateable question of the _limits_
of party, it is sufficient to state another principle, which no honest
man will deny, and then to leave to the advocates of party to reconcile
it with their doctrine.
_It is morally wrong to endeavour to convince any one of the truth of an
opinion in which the advocate himself does not believe._
If this principle were practically acted upon, how much of the valuable
time of both Houses of Parliament would be saved! In looking over a
debate, or still better, a _division_, the private opinions of many of
the speakers are often well known by their friends to be quite at
variance with the doctrines they advocated in their speeches. The
quasi-honesty of those who admit the truth in private, is however
venial, when compared with the hypocrisy of those who are equally false
on both occasions.
Party, then, as it practically exists, is one of the evils of the
political state of England.
The remedy must come partly from the reduction of temptation, by
diminishing the salaries of all those places and appointments for which
there is such immense competition; partly from the effect of public
opinion; and ultimately, to a far greater extent, when any sincere
desire exists to restrain it, from improved methods of distributing
patronage.
But one defect seems almost always to accompany a high state of
civilization, namely,—a great deficiency of moral courage in large
classes of persons, who from knowledge and position ought rightly to
contribute their share to the formation and expression of public
opinion. The first evil which this produces, is an excessive zeal and
energy in a few of those who are most strongly convinced. These bear the
brunt of the attacks of all who are interested in the support of abuses.
If, unhappily, they are not independent in fortune as well as in spirit,
these, the forlorn hope of reform, are sure ultimately to be trampled
upon and destroyed by the jobbers—they die with ruined fortunes and
broken hearts.
Many of those who shared their opinions, and urged on their enthusiasm,
but who warily abstained from expressing their own thoughts _in public_,
now venture to avow those principles, to which opinion has at length
advanced: these reap the rewards won by the energies and sacrifices of
their martyred friends. For such, the epithet the poet applied to Bacon
is not unfit:
—“the wisest—meanest of mankind.”—POPE.
A very serious evil arises from this timidity in expressing opinions.
The whole state of society presents a counterfeit surface,—no man knows
how many or how few really share his opinions: its whole fabric is in a
state of unstable equilibrium; it is liable at every moment to most
unlooked-for changes, from accidents apparently trivial.
The following is one amongst many examples which might have been
selected of the different standard with which Party measures services
rendered to the public by those within and those without its own limits.
In the year 1847, when some millions of English money were sent over to
save the people of Ireland from perishing by famine, it became necessary
to organize a system of accounts and of regulations, for the direction
of those officers who were sent over for the purpose of personally
superintending the distribution of this relief.
These arrangements were made by the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury,
Sir C. T----, K.C.B., at extra hours; but it does not appear how many
months he was so employed.
The office at that time held by this gentleman, was one for which he
received a salary of £2,500 per annum; and certainly this liberal salary
ought to have commanded the devotion of his whole time, if necessary, to
the public service. It would seem that some application was made from
the Treasury, and that Lord John Russell acceded to it with unwonted
liberality. He gave the remuneration in a manner thought
unconstitutional by several eminent members of the House of Commons, and
to an extent justly considered extravagant by the public.
The following extracts from Hansard will explain the matter.
“The Chancellor of the Exchequer.—With regard to Sir C. T----, the
case was an exceptional one; but his services on the extraordinary
emergency alluded to were so very great that it had been thought right
to make a Treasury minute, awarding him £2,500. The item would be
found in the ‘Civil Contingencies’ laid before the House.
“Mr. Disraeli,—while readily acknowledging the great services rendered
by this gentleman, could not forget that the Order of the Bath had
been conferred upon him—a reward bestowed upon him as for services
which could not be paid by a pecuniary grant. The vote of £2,500 was
surely conceived in rather bad taste; and a _preux chevalier_ like Sir
C. T----, bearing his blushing honours, might well be supposed to
recoil from receiving an extra year’s salary.
“Mr. Gladstone—condemned the conduct of Government in this matter. It
was their duty to have submitted a vote to the House, not to have
taken on themselves to reward a public servant. If there was one rule
connected with the public service which more than any other ought to
be scrupulously observed, it was this, that the salary of a public
officer, more especially if he were of high rank, ought to cover all
the services he might be called upon to render. Any departure from
this rule must be dangerous.
“Lord John Russell said, that the Government thought the services of
Sir C. T---- were deserving of reward.
“Mr. Goulburn.—According to all precedent, the House of Commons ought
to have fixed the amount of Sir C. T.’s remuneration.
“Lord John Russell.—Sir C. T---- stated in his evidence that he worked
three hours before breakfast; that he then went to the Treasury, where
he worked all day; and that the pressure upon him was such that he
wondered that he had been able to get through it alive.”—_Hansard_,
Vol. 101, p. 138, 1848. Supply, 14th Aug. 1848.
There appears to be some indistinctness as to the fund out of which this
2,500_l._ was taken. Compare Hansard with Questions 1693 and 1696 of the
Report on Miscellaneous Expenditure.
No mode of keeping accounts, however, will alter the fact; that if the
famine had not occurred, neither would the 2,500_l._ have been required;
consequently, that sum was part of the whole amount our humanity cost
us.
The liberality of the Minister to the Assistant Secretary of the
Treasury, may be explained by stating that he was the _brother-in-law_
of a Cabinet Minister.
There was another gentleman at least equal in talent to the Assistant
Secretary, whose services were gratuitous, who, at the risk of his
health, was actively engaged on the spot in superintending the
distribution of the relief. To him the Government thought it sufficient
to give the Companionship of the Bath, whilst the Assistant Secretary
was made a Commander of that Order.
CHAPTER XVII.
REWARDS OF MERIT.
The personal distinctions in the gift of the Government of this country
consist of the following five orders of knighthood:—
NAME. NO. OF MEMBERS.
GRAND KNIGHT COMP.
CROSS. COM.
The Garter 25
The Thistle 16
St. Patrick 16
The Bath Military 50 102 525
The Bath Civil 25 50 200
St. George and St. Michael 15 20 25
---------------------
147 172 750
Of these, the first three are restricted, with few and rare exceptions,
to persons of a certain rank—including earls, and those above them. The
number of these, with the addition of three sons for each duke, and of
the eldest sons of marquesses, amounts to about four hundred and fifty.
Amongst this favoured class fifty-seven ribbons may be conferred; so
that about one-eighth of the class enjoy the decoration.
These ribbons, although much sought after by the class amongst which
they are distributed, are more correctly appreciated by the public at
large.
With some illustrious and honourable exceptions, they are usually given
by those in power to their party supporters. They have also occasionally
been employed by the minister of the day, as inducements to persuade his
friends to postpone inconvenient questions, to the agitation of which
they had been publicly pledged.
An amusing and characteristic anecdote respecting one of these Orders,
the Garter, is related of a late Premier. At a time when several of
these “baubles” had fallen vacant, and been judiciously given away by
the discreet minister, a friend asked him, why he had not retained a
Garter for himself? to which he wittily replied, “Why, the fact is, I
don’t see the use of a man’s bribing himself.”
The order of St. Michael and St. George was instituted for the Ionian
Islands, and is usually given, after a certain time of service, to the
Lord High Commissioner, to the Commanders-in-Chief of the Mediterranean
fleet, and to other persons connected with the public service in those
quarters.
Thus England has, practically, only one order of merit; and, singularly
enough, with the exception of a few civil crosses of the first-class
almost invariably given for diplomatic service, until lately, that order
was not accessible to any other than military merit.
§ In countries, however, which we fondly flattered ourselves were less
advanced in civilization than our own, the vulgar notion of paying
homage to brute force has long been superseded by a more just
appreciation of the elements of military glory. Nations even the most
ambitious of this species of renown, have admitted that physical
prowess, that recklessness of personal danger, form but the smallest
amongst those qualities which contribute to military success.
It is now felt and admitted, that it is the civil capacity of the great
commander which prepares the way for his military triumphs; that his
knowledge of human nature enables him to select the fittest agents, and
to place them in the situations best adapted to their powers; that his
intimate acquaintance with all the accessaries which contribute to the
health and comfort of his troops, enables him to sustain their moral and
physical energy. It has been seen that he must have studied and properly
estimated the character of his foes as well as of his allies, and have
made himself acquainted with the personal character of the chiefs of
both; and still further, that he must have scrutinized the secret
motives which regulated their respective governments.
When directly engaged in the operations of contending armies occupying a
wide extent of country, he must be able, with rapid glance, to ascertain
the force it is possible to concentrate upon each of many points in any
given time, and the greater or less chance of failing in the attempt. He
must also be able to foresee, with something more than conjecture, what
amount of the enemy’s force can be brought to the same spot in the same
and in different times. With these elements he must undertake one of the
most difficult of mental tasks, that of classifying and grouping the
innumerable combinations to which either party may have recourse for
purposes of attack or defence. Out of the multitude of such
combinations, which might baffle by their simple enumeration the
strongest memory, throwing aside the less important, he must be able to
discover, to fix his attention, and to act upon the most favourable.
Finally, when the course thus selected having been pursued, and perhaps
partially carried out, is found to be entirely deranged by one of those
many chances inseparable from such operations, then, in the midst of
action, he must be able suddenly to organise a different system of
operations, new to all other minds, yet possibly although unconsciously,
anticipated by his own.
The genius that can meet and overcome such difficulties _must_ be
intellectual, and would, under different circumstances, have been
distinguished in many a different career.
Nor even would it be very surprising that such a commander, estimating
justly the extent of his own powers, and conscious of having planned the
best combinations of which his mind is capable, should, having issued
his orders, calmly lie down on the eve of the approaching conflict, and
find in sleep that bodily restoration so indispensable to the full
exercise of his faculties in the mighty struggle about to ensue.
§ It is not uninteresting to observe in society the opinions of its
different classes respecting honours conferred on science. Military and
naval men, especially the most eminent, feel that genius is limited by
no profession, and themselves sympathizing with it, would gladly hail as
brothers in the same distinction, the philosopher and the poet. With
lawyers the case is reversed; genius dwells not in their courts:
industry and acuteness, monopolised by one absorbing professional
subject, exclude larger views; and ribbons not being amongst the
honoraria of their own profession, they reprobate their application to
science. To this there are, however, some noble exceptions. Amongst the
brightest ornaments of their own profession, men are to be found of
larger experience and more extended views than it often produces, who
are themselves qualified to have become discoverers in other sciences.
It is much to be regretted when such powers are applied to the mere
administration, instead of to the reformation, of the laws of their
country.
It is difficult to pronounce on the opinion of the ministers of our
Church as a body: one portion of them, by far the least informed,
protests against anything which can advance the honour and the interests
of science, because, in their limited and mistaken view, science is
adverse to religion. This is not the place to argue that great question.
It is sufficient to remark, that the best-informed and most enlightened
men of all creeds and pursuits, agree that truth can never damage truth,
and that every truth is allied indissolubly by chains more or less
circuitous with all other truths; whilst error, at every step we make in
its diffusion, becomes not only wider apart and more discordant from all
truths, but has also the additional chance of destruction from all rival
errors.
All established religions are, and must be in practice, political
engines—they have all a strong tendency to self-aggrandisement. Our own
is by no means exempt from this very natural infirmity.
The Church has been reproached with endeavouring to appropriate to
itself all those professorships in our Universities which are connected
with science: it is however certain that the larger portion of these
ill-remunerated offices have been filled by clergymen.
But a much graver charge attaches itself, if not to our clergy,
certainly to those who have the distribution of ecclesiastical
patronage. The richest Church in the world maintains that its funds are
quite insufficient for the purposes of religion, and that our working
clergy are ill-paid, and church accommodation insufficient. It calls
therefore upon the nation to endow it with larger funds, and yet, while
reluctant to sacrifice its own superfluities, it approves of its rich
sinecures being given to reward,—not the professional service of its
indefatigable parochial clergy, but those of its members who, having
devoted the greater part of their time to scientific researches, have
political or private interest enough to obtain such advancement.
But this mode of rewarding merit is neither creditable to the Church nor
advantageous to science. It tempts into the Church talents which some of
its distinguished members maintain to be naturally of a disqualifying,
if not of an antagonistic nature to the pursuits of religion; whilst, on
the other hand, it makes a most unjust and arbitrary distinction amongst
men of science themselves. It precludes those who cannot conscientiously
subscribe to Articles, at once conflicting and incomprehensible, from
the acquisition of that preferment and that position in society, which
thus in many cases, must be conferred on less scrupulous, and certainly
less distinguished inquirers into the works of nature.
As the honorary distinctions of orders of knighthood are not usually
bestowed on the clerical profession, its members generally profess to
entertain a great contempt for them, and pronounce them unfit for the
recognition of scientific merit.
The want of an order for the reward of civil service, having been
publicly commented upon, the question was at last forced upon the
attention of the government. A plan was drawn up for the reformation of
the Order of the Bath, and amongst the qualifications for its civil
grades the word science was for the first time introduced. The draft,
however, remained in the office, and the intention, if such it were, of
the Tories was not followed out.
On the advent of the Whigs to office, they seized upon so plausible an
opportunity for gaining popularity, whilst in reality they were serving
their own purposes. They proceeded to reconstruct the Order of the Bath,
making two divisions, the Military and the Civil, each of which
consisted of three classes.
On the 25th May, 1847, there appeared in the Gazette letters patent
under the great seal reconstituting the Order of the Bath. It was
announced that it should consist of two divisions, the Military and the
Civil; each division comprising three classes. This memorable document
was accompanied by certain regulations as to the number of each class of
the knights, followed by a new set of thirty-seven statutes, which it
declares “_shall henceforth be inviolably observed and kept within_ _the
said Order_.” But throughout these “_inviolable_” statutes, _scientific_
merit is not even mentioned as a qualification.
In the Civil branch of the Order the qualification for the first class
is prescribed by the eighth statute, and the tenth and twelfth statutes
distinctly refer to the same. The only qualification to be found in the
statutes applicable to either of the three civil classes, is when,
referring to the first class of the order, it is stated that—
“No persons shall be nominated thereto, or to either of the other two
civil divisions of this Order, who shall not _by their personal services
to our crown_, or _by the performance of public duties_, have merited
our royal favour.”
The first of these two qualifications includes the services in the
household of the Sovereign. Now although it may be agreeable, and may
even be thought desirable, that the head of the State should have means
of occasionally conferring distinction upon those of its subjects in
personal attendance upon it, who have undertaken and accomplished duties
beyond the immediate sphere of those for which they are paid in money
and by position, yet such claims are personal, not national claims. The
lord-in-waiting who has been the agreeable cicerone of some foreign
prince, may well be contented with the diamond ring, the costly
_tabatière_, or the flattering miniature, eclipsed only by the
brilliants surrounding it, which recall to his memory those hours of
idleness. If the prince be also a sovereign, he may add to these
gratifications, that of conferring a ribbon as a further return for the
_empressement_ with which the polished official has fulfilled the duties
of his office. Under such circumstances he will easily acquire
permission to wear that distinction in his own country: a permission
which would be refused by government to the author of the most splendid
scientific discovery which might shed a lustre over the age in which he
lives.
If such decorations are desirable for such services, let them be
confined to one or to all of the four other orders: but let one national
order at least be consecrated to real merit.
The only other class who are qualified by the Statutes for the honours
of the Bath, are “those who by the performance of public duties have
merited our favour.” This may indeed include every person who holds
office, but it is clear that the intention was to exclude everybody not
already receiving pay from the public.
It has been suggested that a different conclusion may be inferred from
the tenth paragraph of the prefatory matter to these statutes, in which
the following words occur:—
“To the due distribution of rewards amongst such of our faithful
subjects as are now or shall hereafter become eminently distinguished by
their loyalty and merit in the military or civil service of us, our
heirs, and successors, or _shall otherwise have merited our favour_.”
These latter words are certainly placed with some skill, to furnish a
loophole for escape, if public opinion should scout the limited range to
which the gratitude of the country would thus be confined by a party,
who differ only from the Tories in affecting an admiration for knowledge
which they do not feel. It must, however, be observed that this is a
mere statement, and that no such words occur in any _statute_. Besides,
those who maintain that the party in power when these statutes were
issued, intended that science or any other kind of unpaid civil merit,
should be susceptible of reward by the Order of the Bath, except it also
received pay from the country, must at the same time admit that during
the four years in which that party has distributed those honours,
England has not furnished one single instance of any other than a paid
official having been thought sufficiently distinguished to deserve the
honour.
The public recollect with sufficient disgust the professions of both
parties respecting science and literature, when the “pension list” was
revised in 1838. The claims of science and of literature were then with
affected generosity put forward by party, while the true object was to
save for their own advantage as large a pension list as they could. That
object once attained, a different view of those claims was taken, as we
see by its results, of which a searching analysis must at no distant day
be made.
The statements uttered in both Houses even during the last session, by
members of the present administration, have been so _extraordinary_,
that the public are compelled to look beyond the plain English meaning
of words, and to withhold their confidence until they have examined them
with the scrutiny of a casuist. It is not therefore surprising that
those who interpret statutes issued by such parties, should suspect the
existence of latent meanings.
Dismissing this point, however, the obvious interpretation of the
_statutes_ of the Bath is that no one is qualified to become a member
who has not been actually in the _service_ of the country, that is, who
has not already been paid for his labours.
The real intention of the concoctors of this scheme is too evident to be
concealed. They hoped, by bestowing the Order in few and rare cases on
some public servants who had made exertions beyond those of their class,
or sacrifices beyond necessity, to get credit for a generosity to which
they are strangers, whilst the real object was to secure for their own
party and supporters the largest possible share of the patronage.
The advantages they promised themselves from the present arrangement
were these:—
1st. By confining the Order of the Bath to officials, they limited the
number of competitors.
2d. They thus limited it to a class which contained already a large
proportion of their own friends and of the friends of their opponents.
3d. This plan enabled them, by putting into office their own connexions,
persons perhaps of very ordinary abilities, ultimately to push them into
the upper departments, and then on pretence of extraordinary service to
give them these honours.
4th. It enabled them also to make way for such connexions, by tempting
those above them, whether friends or opponents, to retire on the receipt
of one or other of the decorations of the Bath.
It is not to be denied that such rewards, fairly and judiciously given
for _great_ and _extraordinary_ services, might furnish fit motives for
extraordinary exertions. But if honours are to be given to every chief
of an office or head of a department, after more or less service in
proportion to the extent of his political interest, or to every minister
we send abroad, without regard to the success of his mission; and if
promotion in the Order is to depend on the time during which they have
been members of it, then the Bath will no longer be the reward of great
exertions or of brilliant talent, but of seniority and routine. Its
crimson ribbon will thus cease to distinguish civil merit, and become
the appropriate reward of _red-tape_ mediocrity.
It has been suggested that a new order of knighthood should be created,
for the purpose of rewarding scientific and literary merit. This plan is
entirely inadmissible: there are already five Orders of English Knights,
and the new Order would, as the most recent creation, be inferior in
rank to those now existing. It would, therefore, necessarily fix science
at a low point in the social scale.
If it were adopted, the numerous members of the Order of the Bath would
then look down upon and disparage the new Order; whilst, on the other
hand, if great discoveries in science were admitted as claims to its
honours, every member of the Order of the Bath would be interested in
defending his scientific brethren.
§ Much discussion has lately arisen respecting the payment of persons in
the employment of government. The economists have lately had a committee
of the House of Commons, in which they have in some instances damaged a
good cause by want of information. Their enemies will doubtless take
advantage of their ignorance, and seem not unwilling to have allowed
them to fall into these mistakes.
Those who contend that persons in office are under-paid, generally
maintain the doctrine that the holder of every office ought to receive
enough to support him, without any assistance from private fortune, in
that position of society which others in the same or similar offices
occupy.
This may be true for some of the higher stations, where great talents
and industry are essential; but these offices are the exceptions. To
maintain this doctrine is to assert, that the government must pay such a
salary to every employé as to be able to choose out of the whole number
of persons existing in the country, those most capable of filling that
office. Now in every country where capital has at all accumulated, there
will always be a sufficient number of persons, having some amount of
private fortune, who will be able and willing to fill all the ordinary
offices requiring no very special talent, for a much smaller sum than
their average expenditure would require. This more limited class is yet
sufficiently large for the government to select from. The competition of
capital with labour leads to this result.
The inducements to office under government are many, in addition to that
of its salary.
1st. The salary itself generally increases with the time of service.
2d. There is usually a retiring pension after a certain time of service,
or in case of accidental incapacity.
3d. There is the chance of promotion by political interest, or perchance
from skill and industry displayed in office.
4th. Some incapable head of a department may want a clever fellow to do
the work for which he is himself either too idle or too ignorant.
5th. There is the chance of being promoted, in order to make a vacancy
for some one below who has more influence.
6th. Then there are the great prizes,—few indeed, but very great when
occurring to those without the accidents of birth or interest. It is
possible that a clerk commencing at a salary of 80_l._ may ultimately
attain a seat in the cabinet, and then the peerage is open to him.
Admitting that there are several cases in which offices are considerably
underpaid, no answer has yet been given to the great argument arising
from supply and demand. It is an admitted fact, that for every office
under government, and for every grade in the army and navy, the number
of fitting candidates on each vacancy is very large, and the political
and family interest set at work to acquire it, is very great. This can
arise only from those offices being overpaid, not by the actual money
payment, but by combining that form of remuneration with position in
society, and other advantages to which they lead. If this be the case,
it is quite unnecessary to add any new inducement—such as the decoration
of the Bath—to those so circumstanced, unless it be indeed for very
extraordinary services.
Another indication of over-payment is to be found in the fact, that in
several professions such offices are matter of sale and purchase. They
are so avowedly both in the Church and in the Army.
The Whigs, afraid of intellect when combined with independence, have,
during their temporary and tolerated possession of office, confined the
new honours the country has to bestow, to those persons only who can be
influenced by the hope of promotion,—namely, to those already occupying
office. If a distinction is to be made amongst scientific men, let us
inquire whether those who fill the few public situations reserved for
science and paid by the country, ought to be eligible rather than those
whose equally successful contributions to science have been given
without any such advantage.
To enable any individual in the present day to enlarge the bounds of
science by original discovery, he must be content to sacrifice his whole
time and energies to that object. It is true that a considerable or even
a great knowledge of certain sciences, and possibly the power of making
some additions to them, may co-exist in a few instances with the
qualifications necessary for other employments. Such attainments are
highly creditable to those officials who so employ their leisure without
neglecting their official duties. But the more successful their
scientific discoveries, the greater must be the regret that the whole
power of such intelligence cannot be directed to one subject.
The various sciences have, it is true, such relations to each other,
that few can be cultivated to any great advantage without some
acquaintance with those sciences intimately connected with the favourite
pursuit. But if it is admitted that all inquiries into Nature and her
laws, are directly beneficial to the arts and commerce of the country,
it is, in a national point of view, eminently impolitic not to secure
for science that division of labour which so remarkably contributes to
the progress of all other subjects.
In addition to the unbounded occupation of time and thought, necessary
for the most effective employment of mind in the path of original
discovery, there are far other requisites. In some sciences, many
laborious transcriptions, in others still more laborious arithmetical
computations, are required; in others, abstruse and complicated although
known and regulated algebraical processes, must be gone through; in
others, drawings of the most complicated description must be executed
with almost overwhelming labour; in others, extensive experiments must
be made. Again, in some, where mechanical means must be contrived for
new and intellectual processes, it may be necessary even to invent and
make new tools for the purpose of bringing mechanical art itself up to
that degree of perfection which science demands. Although the contriving
and directing mind engaged in researches that require such aids, ought
undoubtedly to be united with a physical structure capable itself of
accomplishing each and all that such pursuits require, yet it is often
impossible that one human frame, however hardy, can sustain that labour:
time itself would be wanting, limited as it ever must be by the duration
of one human life.
Yet if the powers of that mind and that frame have been rightly
cultivated, and if the want of pecuniary means do not prevent their
exercise, it is quite possible, by proper aid, to concentrate in one
life the accumulated labour of many. Assistants of various degrees of
manual and mental skill may be employed, the economical organization of
their labour may be arranged. The most perfect effect of such an
establishment can only be attained when the presiding head is never
employed except on work for which money could procure no substitute, and
when each assistant is devoted to work of the highest kind which he can
successfully execute.
He who directs a scientific establishment for the Government, has all
these means provided for him, and is himself paid, though not always
liberally, for his own labours. _He_ is to be deemed _qualified_ for the
order of the Bath.
_He_ who sacrifices profession and that position to which its most
successful members usually attain, who spends a fortune in purchasing
that assistance which alone can render his power effective, and has
spent his life in cultivating highly that power for the advancement of
science, is deemed by his country, however great his success,
_disqualified_ for the Order of the Bath.
But it is not the sound and wholesome part of the country—it is not the
people of England who have arrived at this conclusion;—it is the
insolence of power,—it is the meanness of party,—it is the selfishness
of a clique.
The spirit which dictated a limitation equally opposed to every generous
feeling and to every statesman-like view, is consistent only with such
influences. When the ministry founded that new source of patronage, it
sought to acquire for itself a kind of popularity amongst its adherents.
Had it admitted intellectual merit, it would have obtained popularity
for the Crown from an enlightened nation. But the interests of party are
transitory,—those of the sovereign permanent: it is the interest of
party to be ever jealous of the personal popularity of the Crown.
In thus excluding from its honours one class of the intelligence of the
country, did it never occur to the short-sighted minister who planned
this arrangement, that some portion of the talents thus insulted, might
be driven to other inquiries which it would neither be easy to answer
nor even expedient to discuss?
A party which first refuses to science the means of acquiring
competence,—then excludes it from personal honours because it has
already been denied official position,—and which refuses it hereditary
rank, because it has not devoted itself to the acquisition of wealth,
will naturally cause questions to be raised as to the expediency of
different forms of government.
Of what class, it will naturally be asked, are the persons who have made
such laws?
Is the possession of hereditary rank at all necessary for the government
of the country?
At a distant period, and under a less complicated form of society, the
obvious disadvantages of appointing a legislator for life from the
accident of his birth, instead of the fitness of his talents, might have
been tolerated under the influence of force. It has since been
consecrated by established usage, and some of its evils mitigated by the
continual infusion of fresh blood into decaying stocks. But at the
present day, and amidst the multiplied relations of highly civilized
life, the question whether an upper chamber ought to be hereditary, or
appointed only for life, is one upon which nations as well as
philosophers, avowedly disagree.
In a very few years this great question will come to be more thoroughly
investigated, and those who now advocate the continuance of existing
institutions, will then have enough on their hands, without rashly
forcing, by injustice and insult, both talent and interest into the
ranks of their opponents.
At present it is sufficient to call attention to a statement often made,
that a chamber of Peers for life is incompatible with the existence of a
limited monarchy. This, like many other party dogmas, is a mere
gratuitous assertion, put forward to alarm the timid who have
experienced the advantages and are anxious for the continuance of that
form of government.
Various opinions have been advanced, and are current in society,
concerning the proper reward for those _whose science adds to the
boundaries of human knowledge_, and certain principles are held by the
occupiers of high political office, to which it may be well to advert.
Some of these persons have themselves acquired a smattering of one
science, political economy, and thus they reason:—They are informed that
it is a highly agreeable occupation to make discoveries, and although it
is known that it costs years of labour and study to acquire that power,
yet it is found that many persons are willing to indulge in this luxury,
and are generally disposed to publish the results of their discoveries.
Since, therefore, the public can get the benefit of the knowledge for
nothing, it would be very extravagant in the stewards of the public to
pay anything for it.
But it seems not to have been observed by these reasoners, that although
all discoveries are of value to the country, yet the time at which they
become practically useful occurs at very different, and often at distant
periods. It might also be suggested to them, that the discoverers of the
great principles of nature are very rarely the persons most capable of
applying them to practice. It is also clear that the acquisition of
money was not one of their objects in devoting themselves to such
unprofitable pursuits.
Under such circumstances, if the Government neither encourage science by
pecuniary nor by honorary reward, it is most probable that the
discoveries which are made, will occur in its more recondite recesses;
and as the only recompense obtained is the intellectual pleasure felt in
the pursuit, the greater part of the discoveries made will be of the
most abstract kind.
This tendency is still further increased by the fact that the far larger
number of those who cultivate science, are precluded from competition by
the expense necessary for the pursuit of many of its more practical
branches. The most highly intellectual and exciting,—all the departments
of the pure mathematics, for example, attract by the comparative economy
of the expenditure they demand.
And yet it may happen that immense sums might have been saved to the
nation, if the efforts of competent men had been applied to reform the
domestic economy or rather the domestic extravagance of many of our
public establishments, instead of expending them more agreeably though
less profitably, on the interpretation of an almost impossible cypher,
or the still more interesting discovery of relations amongst new orders
of imaginary quantities.
How often has the question been asked by persons seeking a profitable
investment of their capital, Will such a canal or railroad pay? This is
really an indefinite question, and admits of no one answer applicable to
all cases. It may, for example, in some particular instance, be
tolerably certain that at the end of the first four years, if the shares
are sold, and the account closed, there will be an entire loss of half
the principal, and all interest during that time. If the shares are not
sold until the end of eight years, they will produce a return of the
original capital, together with a profit of five per cent. If, however,
those shares were retained until the end of twelve years, they might,
when sold, produce a return of the original capital, together with a
profit of ten per cent. during the whole time.
Now, it is obvious that the answer to the question, “Will that canal or
railway pay?” must depend on the capital possessed by the purchaser and
on the period of time during which he can afford to abstain from its
use. The purchaser who could not abstain from the use of the interest of
his money for four years might be ruined, whilst he who could abstain
for twelve, might be greatly enriched. But a wealthy country is
generally better able to abstain than any commercial firm, and the
investment in discoveries becoming productive at a distant time, will be
of far more advantage to a nation than to individuals.
A certain number of persons maintain the opinion, that if men of science
became rich they would become idle, and that it is expedient to starve
them into discovery. Such persons may perhaps have been misled by
arguing from a supposed analogy with some other profession. But the
pleasure of science arises from the exertion, not from the inactivity of
the mind.
Others, and a very large number, hold that science is of so sublime a
nature, that it ought to be above all sublunary rewards;—they maintain
that it is beneath its dignity to wish for the wealth or the honours
awarded to success in other pursuits;—that ribbons and titles are quite
unworthy of the ambition of those who are searching into the truths of
nature.
When men state a principle, the best test of their sincerity is to be
found in their application of it. We may ourselves utterly repudiate a
principle, and yet be unable to show that it is not sincerely believed
by those who assert its authority. Man cannot dive into the mind of his
fellow-man, and witness the internal conviction he asserts; but he can
always examine the _fairness_ with which he applies that principle.
Now, if the lofty dignity of science is such that it is, from its very
nature, incompatible with wealth—if decorations and titles are entirely
unworthy of its legitimate ambition,—then, as a necessary consequence,
all pursuits of a higher order are still more absolutely excluded from
such vanities.
Is it consistent, therefore, with these opinions, to maintain that the
Ministers of a Christian Church, who interpret to us the _word_ of God,
should receive payment for their labour, rank for their exertions, and,
in some instances, even the very ribbons[27] so contemned: whilst those
who make us intimately acquainted with the _works_ of the Almighty, who
discover to us the laws which he has impressed on matter, and thus add
to the physical comfort, the intellectual pleasure, and the religious
feeling of mankind, should be compelled to exercise those rare
endowments, only by the sacrifice of fortune and the renunciation of all
those enjoyments, rewards, and honours, which the ministers even of the
purest creed receive without reproach?
But these are the opinions of the shallow and the thoughtless. The
pursuits of mind may modify, they can never obliterate the instincts,
the feelings, or the passions of man.
The consciousness of power, and the conviction of its successful
exertion, exist undiminished by the neglect or the ingratitude of the
country he inhabits. The certainty that a future age will repair the
injustice of the present, and the knowledge that the more distant the
day of reparation, the more he has outstripped the efforts of his
cotemporaries, may well sustain him against the sneers of the ignorant,
or the jealousy of rivals.
It is possible that in some rare instance such a man may feel personally
little ambition to attain what all others covet; still, however, he may
be bound by other ties which link him inseparably to the present.
He may look with fond and affectionate gratitude on her whose maternal
care watched over the dangers of his childhood; who trained his infant
mind, and with her own mild power, checking the rash vigour of his
youthful days, remained ever the faithful and respected counsellor of
his riper age. To gladden the declining years of her who with more than
prophetic inspiration, foresaw as woman only can, the distant fame of
her beloved offspring, he may well be forgiven the desire for some
outward mark of his country’s approbation.
If such a relative were wanting, there might yet survive another parent
whose less enthusiastic temperament had ever repressed those fond
anticipations of maternal affection, but who now in the ripeness of his
honoured age, might be compelled, with faltering accents, to admit that
the voice of the country confirmed the predictions of the mother.
Perhaps another and yet dearer friend might exist, the partner of his
daily cares, the witness of his unceasing toil; whose youthful mind,
cultivated by his skill, rewards with enduring affection those efforts
which called into existence her own latent and unsuspected powers. When
driven by exhausted means and injured health almost to despair of the
achievement of his life’s great object—when the brain itself reels
beneath the weight its own ambition has imposed, and the world’s neglect
aggravates the throbbings of an overtasked frame, an angel spirit sits
beside his couch ministering with gentlest skill to every wish, watching
with anxious thought till renovated nature shall admit of bolder
counsels, then points the way to hope, herself the guardian of his
deathless fame.
The fool may sneer, the worldly-wise may smile, the heartless laugh,—the
saint may moralize, the bigot preach: there dwells not within the deep
recesses of the human heart one sentiment more powerful, more exalted,
or more pure than these.
That man is not a statesman, who is unaware of the strength of these
powerful excitements to human action. Cold and incapable of such
sentiments himself,—no grasp of intellect enables him to infer their
existence, and thus to supply the deficiencies of his own, by an insight
into the hearts of others.
That man is a fool, not a statesman, who knowing their strength,
hesitates to avail himself of it for the benefit of his country and of
mankind.
But if there should arise a man conscious of their power, who yet should
dare to use it for the purposes of party, that man will combine in his
character the not incongruous mixture of statesman and of knave. A
statesman he may be, if he can penetrate into the character of men, and
can divine the action of human motives upon the masses, as well as on
the individuals of his race. With such knowledge, and with the talent
that its possession implies, he cannot be a fool; except indeed, in as
far as he is entitled to credit for that limited amount of folly which
is inseparably attached to him in his other character of knave. It is
_possible_ that he may be successful in his day; it is _certain_ that he
will ultimately be found out and disgraced in the eyes of posterity. His
name may remain a beacon for a time, until some greater or more recent
knave supersedes his example, and thus consigns him to oblivion.
It is not then the gaudy ribbon, the brilliant star, the titled name,
that have intrinsic charms for him who dedicates his genius to the
search for truth. How large a portion of his real greatness, even of his
most splendid discoveries, would he not willingly sacrifice to confer on
those he loves that exquisite happiness, which arises only when hidden
but long-cherished convictions, entertained diffidently from the
consciousness of partial affection, receive at length their final
confirmation by that decision which national acknowledgment can alone
command!
[27] The following dignitaries of the Church wear decorations of
Orders of Knighthood.
Archbishop of Armagh. Bishop of Oxford.
Archbishop of Dublin. Dean of Westminster.
Dean of St. Patrick.
The vestments of the Bishop of Oxford throw into the shade those even
of Roman Catholic prelates.
“The said prelate shall have and wear for his habit, a mantle of
crimson velvet, lined with white taffeta, richly guarded with the
Sovereign’s badges and cognizances, and upon his right shoulder an
escutcheon of the arms of the Order, within a garter, and the lace of
his mantle shall be of blue silk, interwoven with gold.”—_History of
British Orders of Knighthood, by Sir Harris Nicolas_, p. 430.
Appendix.
---------------
THE
ELEVENTH CHAPTER
OF THE
HISTORY OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY.
BY
C. R. WELD, ESQ.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY.
---------------
REPRINTED WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE PROPRIETOR.
EXTRACT FROM WELD’S
HISTORY OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY.
---------------
CHAPTER XI.
The Society receive a Letter from the Treasury respecting Mr.
Babbage’s Calculating Machine—Letter from Mr. Babbage to Sir H.
Davy—A Committee appointed to consider Mr. Babbage’s Plan—They
Report in favour of it—Mr. Babbage has an interview with the
Chancellor of the Exchequer—Government advance
1,500_l_.—Difference-Engine commenced—Mr. Babbage gives all his
labour gratuitously—Advice of the Society again requested—Mr.
Babbage’s Statement—Committee appointed to inspect the Engine—Their
Report—Heavy Expenses not met by the Treasury—Meeting of Mr.
Babbage’s personal friends—Their Report—Duke of Wellington inspects
the Works—His Grace recommends the Treasury to make further
Payments—Letter from Mr. Babbage to the Treasury—Communication from
the Treasury to the Council—Referred to a Committee—Report of
Committee—They recommend the Works to be removed to the vicinity of
Mr. Babbage’s Residence—Government act on the
Recommendation—Fire-proof Buildings erected—Misunderstanding with
Mr. Clement—Works stopped—Mr. Babbage discovers new principles
which supersede those connected with the Difference-Engine—He
requests an interview with Lord Melbourne—Letter to M. Quetelet
explaining the principles of Analytical-Engine—Mr. Babbage visits
Turin—M. Menabrea’s account of the Engine—Translated with Notes by
Lady Lovelace—Mr. Babbage applies to Government for their
Determination—Letter from the Chancellor of the Exchequer—Mr.
Babbage’s Answer—Government resolve not to proceed with the
Engine—Mr. Babbage has an interview with Sir R.
Peel—Difference-Engine placed in the Museum of King’s
College—Present State of the Analytical-Engine.
---------------
1820-25.
On the 1st April, 1823, a letter was received from the Treasury,
requesting the Council to take into consideration a plan which had been
submitted to Government by Mr. Babbage, for “applying machinery to the
purposes of calculating and printing mathematical tables;” and the Lords
of the Treasury further desired “to be favoured with the opinion of the
Royal Society on the merits and utility of this invention[28].”
This is the earliest allusion to the celebrated Calculating Engine of
Mr. Babbage, in the records of the Society[29]. But the invention had
been brought before them in the previous year by a letter from Mr.
Babbage to Sir H. Davy, dated July 3, 1822, in which he gives some
account of a small model of his engine for calculating differences,
which “produced figures at the rate of 44 a minute, and performed with
rapidity and precision all those calculations for which it was
designed[30].” He then proceeds to enumerate various tables which the
machine was adapted to calculate, and concludes: “I am aware that these
statements may perhaps be viewed as something more than Utopian, and
that the philosophers of Laputa may be called up to dispute my claim to
originality. Should such be the case, I hope the resemblance will be
found to adhere to the nature of the subject, rather than to the manner
in which it has been treated. Conscious from my own experience of the
difficulty of convincing those who are but little skilled in
mathematical knowledge, of the possibility of making a machine which
shall perform calculations, I was naturally anxious, in introducing it
to the public, to appeal to the testimony of one so distinguished in the
records of British science[31]. Induced by a conviction of the great
utility of such engines, to withdraw for some time my attention from a
subject on which it has been engaged during several years, and which
possesses charms of a higher order, I have now arrived at a point where
success is no longer doubtful. It must, however, be attained at a very
considerable expense, which would not probably be replaced by the works
it might produce for a long period of time, and which is an undertaking
I should feel unwilling to commence, as altogether foreign to my habits
and pursuits.”
The Council appointed a Committee to take Mr. Babbage’s plan into
consideration, which was composed of the following gentlemen: Sir H.
Davy, Mr. Brande, Mr. Combe, Mr. Baily, Mr. (now Sir Mark Isambard)
Brunel, Major (now General) Colby, Mr. Davies Gilbert, Mr. (now Sir
John) Herschel, Captain Kater, Mr. Pond (Astronomer-Royal), Dr.
Wollaston, and Dr. Young. On the 1st May, 1823, the Committee reported:
“That it appears that Mr. Babbage has displayed great talents and
ingenuity in the construction of his machine for computation, which the
Committee think fully adequate to the attainment of the objects proposed
by the inventor, and that they consider Mr. Babbage as highly deserving
of public encouragement in the prosecution of his arduous
undertaking[32].”
This Report was transmitted to the Lords of the Treasury, by whom it
was, with Mr. Babbage’s letter to Sir H. Davy, printed and laid before
Parliament[33].
In July, 1823, Mr. Babbage had an interview with the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, Mr. Robinson (now Earl of Ripon), to ascertain if it were the
wish of Government that he should construct a large engine of the kind,
which would also print the results it calculated. Unfortunately, no
Minute of that conversation was made at the time, nor was any
sufficiently distinct understanding arrived at, as it afterwards
appeared that a contrary impression was left on the mind of either
party[34]. Mr. Babbage’s conviction was, that whatever might be the
labour and difficulty of the undertaking, the engine itself would, of
course, become the property of the Government, which had paid for its
construction.
Soon after this interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a letter
was sent from the Treasury to the Royal Society, informing them that the
Lords of the Treasury “had directed the issue of 1,500_l._ to Mr.
Babbage, to enable him to bring his invention to perfection, in the
manner recommended.”
These words “_in the manner recommended_,” can refer only to the
previous recommendation by the Royal Society; but it does not appear
from their Report, that any plan, terms, or conditions had been pointed
out.
Towards the end of July, 1823, Mr. Babbage took measures for the
construction of the present Difference-Engine[35], and it was regularly
proceeded with for four years.
And here it is right to state, that Mr. Babbage gave his mental labour
gratuitously, and that from first to last he has not derived any
emolument whatever from Government[36]. Sectional, and other drawings,
of the most delicate nature had to be made; tools to be formed expressly
to meet mechanical difficulties; and workmen to be educated in the
practical knowledge necessary in the construction of the machine. The
mechanical department was placed under the management of Mr. Clement, a
draughtsman of great ability, and a practical mechanic of the highest
order[37]. Money was advanced from time to time by the Treasury, the
accounts furnished by the engineer undergoing the examination of
auditors[38], and passing through the hands of Mr. Babbage. Thus years
elapsed, and public attention became at length directed to the fact,
that a large sum had been expended upon the construction of the engine,
which was not completed. Again the advice of the Royal Society was
solicited.
In December, 1828, Government begged the Council “to institute such
enquiries as would enable them to report upon the state to which it (the
machine) had then arrived; and also whether the progress made in its
construction confirmed them in the opinion which they had formerly
expressed, that it would ultimately prove adequate to the important
object which it was intended to attain.”
Accompanying this communication was a statement from Mr. Babbage of the
condition of the engine, in which he says:—
“The machine has required a longer time and greater expense than was
anticipated, and Mr. Babbage has already expended about 6,000_l._ on
this object. The work is now in a state of considerable forwardness,
numerous and large drawings of it have been made, and much of the
mechanism has been executed, and many workmen are occupied daily in
its completion.”
A Committee was appointed by the Council, consisting of Mr. Gilbert
(President), Dr. Roget, Captain Sabine, Sir John Herschel, Mr. Baily,
Mr. Brunel, Captain Kater, Mr. Donkin, Mr. Penn, Mr. Rennie, Mr. Barton,
and Mr. Warburton.[39]
They minutely inspected the drawings, tools, and the parts of the engine
then executed, and drew up a report, “declining to consider the
principle on which the practicability of the machinery depends, and of
the public utility of the object which it proposes to attain; because
they considered the former fully admitted, and the latter obvious to all
who consider the immense advantage of accurate numerical tables in all
matters of calculation, which it is professedly the object of the engine
to calculate and print with perfect accuracy.”
They further stated, that “the progress made was as great as could be
expected, considering the numerous difficulties to be overcome; and
lastly, that they had no hesitation in giving it as their opinion, that
the engine was likely to fulfil the expectations entertained of it by
its inventor.”
The Council adopted the Report, expressing their trust, that while Mr.
Babbage’s mind was intently occupied on an undertaking likely to do so
much honour to his country, he might be relieved as much as possible
from all other sources of anxiety.
It is clear that the Council of the Royal Society regarded Mr. Babbage’s
engine, as it then existed, in a favourable light, and were sanguine
respecting its satisfactory completion.
Government acted on the foregoing Report; funds were advanced, the
machinery was declared national property, and the works were continued.
But there was evidently a misgiving on the part of the Lords of the
Treasury, for the official payments soon failed to meet the heavy and
increasing expenses incurred by Mr. Babbage.
Under these circumstances, by the advice of Mr. Wolryche Whitmore (Mr.
Babbage’s brother-in-law), a meeting of Mr. Babbage’s personal friends
was held on the 12th of May, 1829. It consisted of:—
The Duke of Somerset, F.R.S.,
Lord Ashley, M.P.,
Sir John Franklin, Capt. R.N., F.R.S.,
Mr. Wolryche Whitmore, M.P.,
Dr. Fitton, F.R.S.,
Mr. Francis Baily, F.R.S.,
Sir John Herschel, F.R.S.
They drew up the annexed Report:—
“_May 12, 1829._
“The attention of the undersigned personal friends of Mr. Babbage
having been called by him to the actual state of his Machine for
Calculating and Printing Mathematical Tables; and to his relation to
the Government on the one hand, and to the Engineers and workmen
employed by him in its execution on the other, declare themselves
satisfied, from his statements and from the documents they have
perused, of the following facts.
“That Mr. Babbage was originally induced to take up the work on its
present extensive scale, by an understanding on his part, that it was
the wish of Government he should do so, and by an advance of 1,500_l._
in the outset, with a full impression on his mind that such further
advances would be made as the progress of the work should require, and
as should secure him from ultimate loss.
“That the public and scientific importance of the Engine has been
acknowledged, in a Report of a Committee of the Royal Society, made at
the time of its first receiving the sanction of His Majesty’s
Government, and that its actual state of progress is such, as in the
opinion of the most eminent Engineers and other Members of the Royal
Society, as detailed in a further Report of a Committee of that body,
to warrant their impression of the moral certainty of its success,
should funds not be wanting for its completion.
“That it appears, that Mr. Babbage’s actual expenditure has amounted
to nearly 7,000_l._ and that the whole sum advanced to him by the
Government is 3,000_l._
“That Mr. Babbage has devoted, from the commencement of his arduous
undertaking, the most assiduous and anxious attention to the work in
hand, to the injury of his health, and the neglect and refusal of
other profitable occupations.
“That a very huge expense still remains to be incurred, to the
probable amount of at least 4,000_l._, as far as he can foresee,
before the Engine can be completed; but that Mr. Babbage’s private
fortune is not such as, in their opinion, to justify the sacrifices he
must make in completing it without further and effectual assistance
from Government; taking into consideration not only his own interest,
but that of his family dependent on him.
“Under these circumstances, it is their opinion that a full and speedy
representation of the case ought to be made to Government, and that in
the most direct manner by a personal application to his Grace the Duke
of Wellington.
“And that in case of such application proving unsuccessful in
procuring effectual and adequate assistance, they must regard Mr.
Babbage as no longer called on—considering the pecuniary and personal
sacrifices he will then have made; considering the entire and _bonâ
fide_ expenditure of all that he will have received from the public
purse on the object of its destination, and considering the moral
certainty to which it is at length by his exertions reduced—as no
longer called on to go on with an undertaking which may prove the
destruction of his health, and the great injury, if not the ruin of
his fortune.
“That it is their opinion that Mr. W. Whitmore and Mr. Herschel should
request an interview with the Duke of Wellington for the purpose of
making this representation.
(Signed,) SOMERSET.
ASHLEY.
JOHN FRANKLIN.
W. W. WHITMORE.
WM. HENRY FITTON.
FRANCIS BAILY.
J. F. W. HERSCHEL.”
In consequence of what passed at this interview, which took place as
suggested, the Duke of Wellington, accompanied by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer (Mr. Goulburn) and Lord Ashley, inspected the _model_ of the
engine, the drawings, and parts in progress. The Duke recommended that a
grant of 3,000_l._ should be made towards the completion of the machine,
which was duly paid by the Treasury.
In the mean time, difficulties of another kind arose. The engineer, who
had constructed the Engine under Mr. Babbage’s directions, had delivered
his bills in such a state, that it was impossible to judge how far the
charges were just and reasonable; and although Mr. Babbage had paid
several thousand pounds, there yet remained a considerable balance,
which could not be liquidated until the accounts had been examined, and
the charges approved by professional engineers.
With a view of drawing attention to these charges, Mr. Babbage addressed
the following letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer:—
“_Dorset Street, 21 December, 1830._
“MY LORD,
“I beg to call your Lordship’s attention to the enclosed
account[40] of the expenses of the Machine for calculating and
printing mathematical tables, by which it appears that a sum of
592_l._ 4_s._ 8_d._ remained due to myself upon the last account, and
that a further sum of nearly 600_l._ has since become due to Mr.
Clement.
“It is for the payment of this latter sum that I wish to call your
Lordship’s attention. Mr. Maudslay, one of the engineers appointed by
the Government to examine the bills of Mr. Clement, having been unable
from illness to attend, his report has been delayed, and Mr. Clement
informs me that should the money remain unpaid much longer, he shall
be obliged, from want of funds, to discharge some of the workmen; an
event which I need not inform your Lordship would be very prejudicial
to the progress of the machine.
“Another point which I wish to submit to your attention, when your
Lordship shall have had leisure to examine personally the present
state of the works, is, that since it is absolutely necessary to find
additional room for the erection of the machine, it becomes a matter
of serious consideration whether it would not contribute to the
speedier completion of the machine, and also to economy in
expenditure, to remove the works to the neighbourhood of my own
residence.
“I have, &c.
“C. BABBAGE.”
The receipt of this letter caused the Treasury to make the following
communication to the Secretary of the Royal Society:—
“_Treasury, 24 December, 1830._
“SIR,
“The Lords Commissioners of H. M. Treasury, having had under
their consideration a letter from Mr. Babbage, containing an account
of the expense which has been incurred in the construction of the
Machine for calculating and printing mathematical tables, amounting to
the sum of 7,192_l._ 4_s._ 8_d._, and requesting an advance of 600_l._
to defray a part of that expense; I am commanded by their Lordships to
refer you to the Report of the Council of the Royal Society dated 16th
February, 1829, which entirely satisfied their Lordships of the
propriety of supporting Mr. Babbage in the construction of this
machine, and to state that advances to the amount of 6,000_l._ have
been made on this account, and that directions have been given for a
further advance of 600_l._
“I am also to acquaint you, that the Machine is the property of
Government, and consequently my Lords propose to defray the further
expense necessary for its completion. I am further to request you will
move the Council of the Royal Society to cause the machine to be
inspected, and to favour my Lords with their opinion whether the work
is proceeding in a satisfactory manner, and without unnecessary
expense, and what further sum may probably be necessary for completing
it.
“I am, &c.
“J. STEWART.”
“_The Secretary, Royal Society._”
The consideration of this letter was referred to the same Committee
which had previously been appointed for a similar purpose, with the
addition of Sir John Lubbock and Mr. Troughton.
Again the Committee met[41] Mr. Babbage, at No. 21, Prospect Place,
Lambeth (where the construction of the engine was carried on), and
minutely inspected the machinery and drawings.
Their Report embodied the whole facts of the case:—the workmanship of
the various parts of the machine was declared to have been executed with
the greatest possible degree of perfection, and the pains taken to
verify the charges on the part of the Government altogether
satisfactory. It was recommended that the vacancy occasioned by the
decease of Mr. Maudslay, who had been appointed to inspect the accounts,
should be filled up by another engineer, conversant with the execution
of machinery, and the value thereof. With respect to the suggested
removal of the workshops nearer to Mr. Babbage’s residence, the
Committee gave their entire concurrence, on the ground that greater
expedition would thereby be attained in carrying on the work, and that
it was highly essential to secure all the machinery and drawings in
fire-proof premises, without delay. A plot of ground held on lease by
Mr. Babbage, adjacent to his garden at the back of his house in Dorset
Street, was recommended as a desirable site for the contemplated
erections, of which the plans and estimates had been submitted to the
Committee. The framers of the Report stated in conclusion that:—
“Such an arrangement would be eminently conducive to the speedy and
economical completion of the Machine, as well as to the effectual
working and employment of the same, after it shall have been
completed.
“That as to the sum which may be necessary for completing the Engine,
they attach hereto the estimate of Mr. Brunel.”[42]
The Report, with Mr. Brunel’s estimate, were sent to the Treasury on the
13th April, 1831: and having been approved by a Committee of practical
engineers appointed by Government, the latter acted on the
recommendations which it contained. The piece of ground adjoining Mr.
Babbage’s garden was taken, and a fire-proof building erected, designed
to contain the plans and drawings, and also the engine when completed.
But new and unforeseen difficulties arose. When about 17,000_l._ had
been expended, further progress was arrested on account of a
misunderstanding with Mr. Clement, who made the most extravagant demands
as compensation for carrying on the construction of the engine in the
new buildings. These demands could not be satisfied with proper regard
to the justice due to Government. Mr. Clement accordingly withdrew from
the undertaking, and carried with him all the valuable tools that had
been used in the work; a proceeding the more unfortunate, as many of
them had been invented expressly to meet the unusual forms and
combinations arising out of the novel construction.[43]
An offer was made to surrender the tools, for a given sum, which was
declined, and the works came to a stand-still. But other circumstances
interposed to prevent the completion of the original design.
During the suspension of the works, Mr. Babbage had been deprived of the
use of his own drawings. Having in the meanwhile naturally speculated
upon the general principles on which machinery for calculation might be
constructed, _a principle of an entirely new kind_ occurred to him, the
power of which over the most complicated arithmetical operations seemed
nearly unbounded. This was the executing of analytical operations by
means of an analytical-engine. On re-examining his drawings, when
returned to him by the engineer, the new principle appeared to be
limited only by the extent of the mechanism it might require. The
invention of simpler mechanical means for performing the elementary
operations of the engine, now derived a far greater importance than it
had hitherto possessed; and should such simplifications be discovered,
it seemed difficult to anticipate, or even to over-estimate, the vast
results which might be attained.
These new views acquired additional importance from their bearings upon
the engine already partly executed for the Government; for, if such
simplifications should be discovered, it might happen that the
Analytical-Engine would execute with greater rapidity the calculations
for which the Difference-Engine was intended; or that the
Difference-Engine would itself be superseded by a far simpler mode of
construction.
Though these views might perhaps at that period have appeared visionary,
they have subsequently been completely realized. To have allowed the
construction of the Difference-Engine to be resumed, while these new
conceptions were withheld from the Government, would have been improper;
yet the state of uncertainty in which those views were then necessarily
involved, rendered any written communication respecting their probable
bearing on that engine, a task of very great difficulty. It therefore
appeared to Mr. Babbage, that the most straightforward course was to ask
for an interview with the head of the Government, and to communicate to
him the exact state of the case.
On the 26th September, 1834, Mr. Babbage requested an audience of Lord
Melbourne, for the purpose of placing these views before him; his
Lordship acceded to the request, but from some cause the interview was
postponed; and soon after, the ministry went out of office, without the
desired conference having taken place.
The duration of the Duke of Wellington’s administration was short; and
no decision on the subject of the _Difference_-Engine was obtained.
In May, 1835, Mr. Babbage announced in a letter[44] to M. Quetelet,
which was laid before the Academy of Sciences at Brussels, that he had
“for six months been engaged in making the drawings of a new calculating
engine of _far greater power than the first_.” “I am myself astonished,”
says Mr. Babbage, “at the power I have been enabled to give to this
machine; a year ago I should not have believed this result possible.
This machine is intended to contain a hundred variables, or numbers
susceptible of changing, and each of these numbers may consist of
twenty-five figures. The greatest difficulties of the invention have
already been surmounted, and the plans will be finished in a few
months.”
Subsequently to the date of this letter, Mr. Babbage visited Turin,
where he explained to Baron Plana, M. Menabrea, and several other
distinguished philosophers of that city, the mathematical principles of
his Analytical-Engine, and also the drawings and engravings of the more
curious mechanical contrivances, by which those principles were to be
carried into effect. M. Menabrea, with Mr. Babbage’s consent, published
the information which he had received in the 41st volume of the
_Bibliothèque Universelle de Génève_. The article is remarkable as
giving the first account of the Analytical-Engine.[45] An English
translation, with copious original notes, made by a lady of
distinguished rank and talent,[46] was published in the third volume of
Taylor’s _Scientific Memoirs_.
But it did not contain all the information respecting the
Difference-Engine that was desirable, and Mr. Babbage was consequently
led to communicate a short article upon this subject to the
_Philosophical Magazine_, which is inserted in the 23rd volume[47]. The
more comprehensive statements and official documents which Mr. Babbage
has placed at my disposal renders it unnecessary to do more than allude
to that article.
For nine years, that is, from the year 1833, when the construction of
the Difference-Engine was suspended, until 1842, no decision respecting
the machine was arrived at, although Mr. Babbage made several
applications to Government on the subject.
On the 21st October, 1838, he wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
stating that the question he wished to have settled was:—“Whether the
Government required him to superintend the completion of the
Difference-Engine, which had been suspended during the last five years,
according to the original plan and principle, or whether they intended
to discontinue it altogether.” This letter produced no result. Time wore
on, and Sir Robert Peel became Prime Minister. This was in 1841. Up to
the termination of the Parliamentary Session in 1842, Mr. Babbage had
received no other communication on the subject than a note from Sir
George Clerk (Secretary to the Treasury), written in January of that
year, stating that he feared the pressing official duties of Sir Robert
Peel would prevent him turning his attention to the matter for some
days.
Having availed himself of several private channels for recalling the
question to Sir Robert Peel’s attention without effect, Mr. Babbage, on
the 8th of October, 1842, again wrote to him, requesting an early
decision.
At last Mr. Babbage received the following letter:—
“_Downing Street, Nov. 3, 1842._
“MY DEAR SIR,
“The Solicitor-General has informed me that you are most
anxious to have an early and decided answer as to the determination of
the Government with respect to the completion of your Calculating
Engine. I accordingly took the earliest opportunity of communicating
with Sir R. Peel on the subject.
“We both regret the necessity of abandoning the completion of a
Machine on which so much scientific ingenuity and labour have been
bestowed. But on the other hand, the expense which would be necessary
in order to render it either satisfactory to yourself, or generally
useful, appears on the lowest calculation so far to exceed what we
should be justified in incurring, that we consider ourselves as having
no other alternative.
“We trust that by withdrawing all claim on the part of the Government
to the Machine as at present constructed, and by placing it at your
entire disposal, we may, to a degree, assist your future exertions in
the cause of science.
“I am, &c.
“HENRY GOULBURN.
“_Charles Babbage, Esq._”
“P.S. Sir R. Peel begs me to add, that as I have undertaken to express
to you our joint opinion on this matter, he trusts you will excuse his
not separately replying to the letter, which you addressed to him on
the subject a short time since.”
To this letter Mr. Babbage replied as follows:—
“_Dorset Street, Nov. 6, 1842._
“MY DEAR SIR,
“I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the
3rd of Nov., containing your own and Sir Robert Peel’s decision
respecting the Engine for calculating and printing mathematical tables
by means of Differences, the construction of which has been suspended
about eight years.
“You inform me that both regret the necessity of abandoning the
completion of the Engine, but that not feeling justified in incurring
the large expense which it may probably require, you have no other
alternative.
“You also offer, on the part of Government, to withdraw all claim in
the Machine as at present constructed, and to place it at my entire
disposal, with the view of assisting my future exertions in the cause
of science.
“The drawings and the parts of the Machine already executed are, as
you are aware, the absolute property of Government, and I have no
claim whatever to them.
“Whilst I thank you for the feeling which that offer manifests, I
must, under all the circumstances, decline accepting it.
“I am, &c.
“C. BABBAGE.”
Mr. Babbage had an interview with Sir R. Peel subsequently to the date
of the foregoing letter: the result was, however, entirely
unsatisfactory; and thus, with the communication from the then
Chancellor of the Exchequer, terminated an engagement which had existed
upwards of twenty years, during which period it is due to Mr. Babbage to
state, that he refused more than one highly desirable and profitable
situation,[48] in order that he might give his whole time and thoughts
to the fulfilment of the contract, which he considered himself to have
entered into with the Government.
With respect to the Difference-Engine little remains to be added. In
1843, an application was made to Government, by the Trustees of King’s
College, London, to allow the Engine, as it existed, to be removed to
the museum of that institution. The request was complied with; and the
Engine, enclosed within a glass case, now stands nearly in the centre of
the Museum. It is capable of calculating to five figures, and two orders
of differences, and performs the work with absolute precision; but no
portion whatever of printing machinery, which was one of the great
objects in the construction of the Engine, exists. All the drawings of
the machinery and other contrivances are also in King’s College.
Before closing this Chapter, it will not be out of place to put upon
record the state of the Analytical-Engine at this period (1848).
Mechanical Notations have been made, both of the actions of detached
parts, and of the general action of the whole, which cover about four or
five hundred large folio sheets of paper.
The original rough sketches are contained in about five volumes. There
are upwards of one hundred large drawings. No part of the construction
of the Analytical-Engine has yet been commenced. A long series of
experiments have, however, been made upon the art of shaping metals; and
the tools to be employed for that purpose have been discussed, and many
drawings of them prepared. The great object of these inquiries and
experiments is, on the one hand, by simplifying the construction as much
as possible, and on the other, by contriving new and cheaper means of
execution, ultimately to reduce the expense within those limits which a
private individual may command.
[28] In the following account of the Difference and Analytical
Engines, besides the MS. documents in the Archives of the Royal
Society, I have derived very valuable information from an unpublished
statement drawn up by Mr. Babbage, which he has been so kind as to
place in my hands. The original documents which are in Mr. Babbage’s
possession, and which are referred to, I have myself examined.
[29] The idea of a Calculating Engine is not new. The celebrated
Pascal constructed a machine for executing the ordinary operations of
arithmetic, a description of which will be found in the _Encycl.
Méthod._, and in the Works of Pascal, Tom. IV. p. 7, Paris, 1819. In
his _Pensées_ he says, alluding to this Engine: “_La machine
arithmétique fait des effets qui approchent plus de la pensée que tout
ce que font les animaux; mais elle ne fait rien qui puisse faire dire
qu’elle a de la volonté comme les animaux._” Subsequently, Leibnitz
invented a machine by which, says Mr. De Morgan, “arithmetic
computations could be made.” Polenus, a learned and ingenious Italian,
invented a machine by which multiplication was performed—and
mechanical contrivances for performing particular arithmetical
processes were made about a century ago, but they were merely
modifications of Pascal’s. These Engines were very different to Mr.
Babbage’s Difference-Engine.
[30] This letter was printed and published in July, 1822.
[31] Sir H. Davy had witnessed and expressed his admiration of the
performances of the Engine.
[32] I am informed upon good authority, that Dr. Young differed in
opinion from his colleagues. Without doubting that an engine could be
made, he conceived that it would be far more useful to invest the
probable cost of constructing such a calculating machine as was
proposed, in the funds, and apply the dividends to paying calculators.
[33] Parliamentary Paper, No. 370, 1823.
[34] Mr. Babbage very justly observes, that had the mutual relations
of the two parties, and the details of the plans then adopted, been
clearly defined, there is little doubt but that the Difference-Engine
would long since have existed.
[35] It will be desirable to distinguish between,
1. The small _Model_ of the Original or Difference-Engine.
2. The Difference-Engine itself, belonging to the Government, a
part only of which has been put together.
3. The designs for another Engine called the Analytical-Engine.
[36] Sir R. Peel distinctly admitted this in the House of Commons in
March, 1843.
[37] A curious anecdote is related illustrative of the great
perfection to which Mr. Clement was in the habit of bringing
machinery. He received an order from America to construct a large
screw in the _best possible manner_, and he accordingly made one with
the greatest mathematical accuracy. But his bill amounted to some
hundreds of pounds, which completely staggered the American, who never
calculated upon paying more than 20_l._ at the utmost for the screw.
The matter was referred to arbitrators, who gave an opinion in favour
of Mr. Clement.
[38] They were Messrs. Brunel, Donkin, and Field.
[39] Colonel Sabine informs me, that Dr. Whewell was afterwards added
to the Committee.
[40]
£ s. d.
Expense to end of 1824 600 0 0
Expense to end of 1827 521 16 9
Mr. Clement’s Bills to June, 1827 4,775 15 3
Ditto, 9th May, 1829 730 12 8
-------------
6,628 4 8
Deduct old tools sold 36 0 0
-------------
6,592 4 8
Mr. Clement’s Bill to December, 1830, about 600 0 0
-------------
7,192 4 8
-------------
[41] I have a letter of Sir J. Herschel’s before me, expressing his
regret at being unable to attend on this occasion, but that his faith
in the engine and its inventor remained unshaken.
[42] Mr. Brunel’s estimate appears in the following letter to Mr.
Warburton:—
“_Feb. 28, 1831._
“DEAR SIR,
“Having taken in consideration the erection of the
proposed shops, the removal of the machinery, the accommodation for
it, and also for the maker; having also taken into consideration the
further completion of the drawings, and the ultimate accomplishment
of the Engine until it is capable of producing plates for printing;
though I feel confident that the sum of 8,000_l._ will be ample to
realize the objects that are contemplated, I should nevertheless
recommend that the Government be advised to provide for the sum of
12,000_l._ by way of estimate, and that the yearly sum required,
exclusive of the sum requisite for the buildings and removal (say
2,000_l._), will not exceed from 2,000_l._ to 2,500_l._
“I am, &c.
“M. I. BRUNEL.”
“_Henry Warburton, Esq._”
[43] This Mr. Clement had a legal right to do. Startling as it may
appear to the unprofessional reader, it is nevertheless the fact, that
engineers and mechanics possess the right of property to all tools
that they have constructed, although the cost of construction has been
defrayed by their employers.
[44] Mr. Babbage informs me, that this letter was intended only as a
private communication.
[45] In the _Ninth Bridgewater Treatise_, Mr. Babbage has employed
various arguments deduced from the Analytical-Engine, which afford
some idea of its powers. See second edition. In 1838, several copies
of plans of this new engine, engraved on wood, were circulated amongst
Mr. Babbage’s friends at the Meeting of the British Association at
Newcastle.
In 1840, Mr. Babbage had one of his general plans of the
Analytical-Engine lithographed at Paris.
[46] I am authorized by Lord Lovelace to say, that the translator is
Lady Lovelace.
[47] “The Difference-Engine could only tabulate, and was incapable by
its nature of developing; the Analytical-Engine was intended to either
tabulate or develop. The Difference-Engine is the embodying of one
particular and very limited set of operations, the Analytical-Engine,
the embodying of the science of operations. The distinctive
characteristic of the Analytical-Engine, is the introduction into it
of the principle which Jacquard devised for regulating by means of
punched cards the most complicated patterns in the fabrication of
brocaded stuffs. Nothing of the sort exists in the Difference-Engine.
We may say most aptly, that the Analytical-Engine weaves _Algebraical
patterns_, just as the Jacquard loom weaves flowers and leaves!”—Note
to translation of Menabrea’s Memoir. The 59th volume of the _Edinburgh
Review_ contains an able and elaborate article upon the
Difference-Engine, written by Dr. Lardner.
[48] Mr. Babbage has shown me letters by which it appears that he
declined offices of great emolument, the acceptance of which would
have interfered with his labours upon the Difference-Engine.
The annexed Review of the Eleventh Chapter of MR. WELD’S HISTORY OF THE
ROYAL SOCIETY, by Professor DE MORGAN, has been reprinted with his
permission, and that of the Editor, _verbatim_, from the Athenæum of
October 14th, 1848.
Three Notes at the foot of the pages have been added for the purpose of
explanation.
These are followed by the remarks upon them, reprinted from the
“_Athenæum_” of 16th December, 1848.
PROFESSOR DE MORGAN’S REVIEW _of_ WELD’S
HISTORY _of the_ ROYAL SOCIETY.
---------------
THE ATHENÆUM.
_LONDON, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1848._
---------------
MR. BABBAGE’S CALCULATING MACHINE.
In our review of Mr. Weld’s “History of the Royal Society,” [_ante_, p.
621,] we noted that one chapter was devoted to the history of the
celebrated undertaking above named. This chapter is taken from materials
furnished by Mr. Babbage himself, all the documents having undergone the
inspection of Mr. Weld. Of recent publications on the subject it may be
well to note—1. A short account of the transactions with the Government,
communicated by Mr. Babbage to the _Philosophical Magazine_ for
September, 1843. 2. A sketch of the _Analytical Engine_ (on which Mr.
Babbage is now at work, that commenced by the Government being the
_Difference Engine_) written in Italian by Menabrea, and translated,
with notes (and a list of all previous publications), by the Countess of
Lovelace (August 1843). The statements put forward by Mr. Babbage have
thus been in substance before the public for five years, without
contradiction: for though the account (No. 1) was not signed, it was
stated to be _from authority_, allowed to pass as such by the Editors of
the magazine, and generally understood to emanate from Mr. Babbage. We
are then bound to take this first statement as admitted by Government,
more especially after the publication by Mr. Weld, avowedly made from
the documents furnished by Mr. Babbage himself: and assuredly we
understand Mr. Weld as conceiving himself to be distinctly informed by
Mr. Babbage, that _all_ documents of any importance had been
communicated.
The heads of the public history of the _Difference Engine_ are as
follows:—In April, 1823, the Government requested the opinion of the
Royal Society on Mr. Babbage’s plan for “applying machinery to the
purposes of calculating and printing mathematical tables.” The Royal
Society reported favourably, that the machine was “fully adequate to the
objects proposed,”—and this report was laid before Parliament. In July,
Mr. Babbage had an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Earl
of Ripon) to ascertain if Government would wish him to construct for
_printing_ as well as _calculating_. There is no minute of this
conversation, and the parties have different memories upon it. But soon
after, the Treasury informs the Royal Society that 1,500_l._ was to be
issued to Mr. Babbage “to enable him to bring his invention to
perfection, in the manner recommended.” Mr. Weld remarks that no plan
had been pointed out; but it must be noticed that the original
application was for an opinion upon _calculating and printing_, that the
opinion spoke of the _full adequacy_ of the plan for _the objects
proposed_, and that the final determination of the Government was to
proceed _as recommended_. Unless there were a previous understanding
that all documents should either speak with the verbal completeness of
an indictment or be wholly void, it is clear that the Government
determined to assist Mr. Babbage in realizing the full invention, and
told him so.[49]
The work went on for four years, under advances of money from time to
time: the funds were applied by Mr. Babbage, and the accounts were
audited by Messrs. Brunel, Donkin, and Field. We suppose that Government
did not exceed the proposed advance of 1,500_l._; but this is not
expressly stated. In December, 1828, Government applied again to the
Royal Society to report upon the state, progress, and prospects of the
machine. Mr. Babbage at the same time stated that he had expended
6,000_l._—meaning, we suppose, 4,500_l._ over and above the Government
advance. A Committee, consisting of Messrs. Gilbert, Roget, Sabine,
Herschel, Baily, Brunel (the elder), Kater, Donkin, Penn, Rennie,
Barton, Warburton, declined to report on practicability or utility,
considering both as fully established, and reported that, the
difficulties considered, the progress was as great as could be expected,
and that the engine was likely to fulfil the expectations of its
inventor. On this report the Government made further advances, and the
machine was declared national property. But the official payments soon
failed: and Mr. Babbage called a meeting of private friends, in May
1829, who, on the representation that he had then advanced 4,000_l._
himself, in addition to the Government advance of 3,000_l._, advised him
strongly not to proceed without adequate help from the Government. On
this representation, the Duke of Wellington, Mr. Goulburn, and Lord
Ashley inspected what there was to show, and the Treasury advanced
3,000_l._ more. In December 1830, nearly 600_l._ was still due to Mr.
Babbage, “upon the last account,” and that sum to the superintendent,
Mr. Clement. The Treasury gave directions for the advance of 600_l._ to
pay Mr. Clement, and desired a fresh inspection and opinion from the
Royal Society. The Committee above named (with the addition of Sir J.
Lubbock and Mr. Troughton) reported (April 1831) as favourably as before
on every point, and recommended attention to Mr. Babbage’s suggestion
that the workshops should be removed to the neighbourhood of his
residence. With regard to probable expense, they subjoined Mr. Brunel’s
estimate that 8,000_l._ additional would be sufficient; but recommending
that the Government be advised to provide for 12,000_l._ by way of
estimate. A piece of ground adjoining Mr. Babbage’s garden was taken,
and a fire-proof building was erected. When about 17,000_l._ had been
expended altogether, further progress was arrested by the extravagant
demands made by Mr. Clement, as compensation for carrying on the
construction in the new buildings. These were out of the question: and
Mr. Clement withdrew, taking with him all the tools which had been used,
many of which had been invented for the occasion. For it is the law that
engineers and mechanics possess the right of property in all tools they
have constructed, even though the cost of construction may have been
defrayed by their employers. A special agreement ought, the reader will
say, to have been made as to these tools; but whether the neglect is to
be charged on Mr. Babbage, or on the Government, those must say who feel
able. As it very seldom happens that the employer furnishes tools, it is
easy to see how the necessity for a special agreement may have escaped
the notice of all parties.
So far all is intelligible enough, and no blame attaches to either side,
at least that we can venture to impute. But now the question divides in
a curious way. While the works were suspended, Mr. Babbage reconsidered
the whole question, and invented what he calls the _Analytical
Engine_,—which we will take, on his word and Menabrea’s publication,
derived from his communications, to be immensely superior to the
_Difference Engine_. To resume the latter, while Government was
unacquainted with these new and more simple conceptions, would have been
improper; to write on unfinished speculations would have been difficult.
Mr. Babbage therefore (September 1834) requested a personal interview
with Lord Melbourne; which was agreed to,—but before it took place the
ministry was dissolved. From this time until 1842 Mr. Babbage made
applications to the various administrations, which remained unanswered;
until at last, in November, 1842, a letter from Mr. Goulburn, in answer
to a new application, informed Mr. Babbage that the Government intended
to discontinue the project on the ground of expense.
In the meanwhile Mr. Babbage incurred severe censure in scientific
circles, as being himself the cause of the delay. It was asserted that
he had compromised the Royal Society, which had so strongly recommended
his project to the Government. It was pretty generally believed that the
delay arose from his determination that the Government should take up
the new engine and abandon the old one.
But, until the statement made by him shall be proved either false or
defective, it must stand that the Government never returned any answer
to the question—Shall the new engine be constructed, or shall the old
one be proceeded with? We are of opinion that they ought to have
required him to proceed with the old one. They ought to have said—The
public can only judge by results: how well satisfied soever men of
science may be that the new machine is immeasurably superior to the old
one, society at large will never comprehend the abandonment of a scheme
on which so much has been expended; they will say—What if, in
constructing No. 2, No. 3 should be discovered, as much superior to No.
2 as No. 2 is to No. 1! And if Mr. Babbage had declined to proceed with
his first project, when thus urged, it is our opinion that he would have
richly deserved a very harsh censure. And of this we are sure, that if
Government had allowed him to finish the first machine, and he had done
so with success, the House of Commons would willingly have granted money
for the second,—aye, and for the third and fourth, if he had invented
them. But the Government itself prevented the matter from coming to any
such issue. It is possible that Sir R. Peel and Mr. Goulburn allowed Mr.
Babbage’s well-known wish[50] to abandon the first plan in favour of the
new one to influence their decision. It may be that they were startled
at finding that 17,000_l._ expended upon one project was only the
precursor of another. If so, we think they put themselves in the wrong
by not fastening on Mr. Babbage the alternative of either proceeding
with the existing construction, or taking the entire responsibility of
refusal upon himself. As the matter now stands, and unless Mr. Babbage
can be refuted, the answer to the question why he did not proceed is,
that during the eight years in which he had to bear the blame of the
delay he could not procure even the attention of the Government, much
less any decision on the course to be taken.
It is generally understood that Mr. Babbage is determined to proceed
with the _Analytical Engine_, gradually, and at his own expense; and
that the drawings are in a state of great forwardness. According to Mr.
Babbage himself, many experiments have been made with the object “on the
one hand, by simplifying the construction as much as possible, and on
the other, by contriving new and cheaper means of execution, ultimately
to reduce the expense within those limits which a private individual may
command.”
In looking at all the circumstances of this statement, we regret its
divided responsibility. Mr. Weld has seen Mr. Babbage’s documents.
Should he have made an insufficient selection, who is to blame? Mr. Weld
says, “I have derived very valuable information from an unpublished
statement drawn up by Mr. Babbage, which he has been so kind as to place
in my hands. The original documents, which are in Mr. Babbage’s
possession, and which are referred to, I have myself examined.” From all
this we should conclude that if Mr. Weld had omitted anything material,
or fallen into any misconception, Mr. Babbage would before this have set
it right. But it would be more satisfactory if we had Mr. Babbage’s own
acceptance of the statement thus made, as being that on which he is
content to rest his case; at least until some specific counter-statement
should demand more detail of explanation. Continued silence will be
tantamount to such acceptance.
There is also one piece of information which must be drawn out before
the case can be finally adjudicated. We stand thus:—Scientific rumour
states that Mr. Babbage compelled the Government to give him up by
demanding permission to abandon the _Difference Engine_ and substitute
the _Analytical Engine_. To this, in the formal point of view, Mr.
Babbage has fully answered, by showing that the Government never
communicated to him that it was their pleasure he should proceed on the
plan originally contemplated. The question now remains—Did Mr. Babbage,
or did he not, in the several unanswered applications which he made to
the Ministry, press the claims of the new machine and the abandonment of
the old? If so, did he do it in such a manner as to give to understand,
or make apparent, that he would not consent to recommence operations at
the point of relinquishment? The “several applications” which were made
from 1833 to 1838 are not particularized, much less described as to
contents. But, in October 1838, Mr. Babbage wrote to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, stating, to use Mr. Weld’s words, that “the question he
wished to have settled” was, whether the Government required him to
superintend the completion of the _Difference Engine_ according to the
original plan and principle, or whether they intended to discontinue it
altogether. Now the words _quoted_ are very like the idiom a person
would employ who had in his mind that up to that time some other
question had been among those proposed for discussion. And it is worthy
of note that all the communications are undescribed until we come to the
one of October 1838; which shows that then at least, whether before or
not, Mr. Babbage had put the question on the right issue. Of what tenor,
then, were the undescribed applications?[51] If of the same as that of
October 1838, Mr. Babbage stands quite clear; but if they were such as
fairly to give rise to the rumour above mentioned, then it must be said,
that though _he_ had every disposition to get wrong, Government always
prevented him by blocking his path with an error of its own. But in any
case it is to be remembered, that for the last four years of unanswered
application Mr. Babbage stood upon the right ground; and also that the
rumoured _refusal_ to proceed never was made.
The public, we think, has a right to explanation from the Government,
and to further explanation from Mr. Babbage. Sir R. Peel turned it off
with a joke in the House of Commons. He recommended that the machine
should be set to calculate the time at which it would be of use. He
ought rather to have advised that it should be set to compute the number
of applications which might remain unanswered before a Minister, if the
subject were not one which might affect his parliamentary power. If it
had done this, it would have shown that its usefulness had commenced.
[49] By the words “_no plan_,” the reviewer here evidently refers to
the _mechanical and mathematical plan_, on the fitness of which the
Royal Society had already, as he observes, made a report. Mr. Weld, on
the other hand, refers to the _mutual relations_ of the two parties,
Mr. Babbage and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, relative to the
expenses and even to the ownership of the _Difference-Engine_, as
appears by the footnote (34) at page 256.
C. B.
[50] It is scarcely possible that this _supposed_ wish could have
influenced Sir Robert Peel, because he had before him a written
disavowal of it from Mr. Babbage himself.
C. B.
[51] The two following will sufficiently explain them:—On the 23d
December, 1834, Mr. Babbage addressed a statement to the Duke of
Wellington, pointing out the only plans which, in his opinion, could
be pursued for terminating the questions relative to the _Difference
Engine_, namely:
_First_, the Government might desire Mr. Babbage to continue the
construction of the Engine in the hands of the person who has hitherto
been employed in making it.
_Secondly_, the Government might wish to know whether any other person
could be substituted for the engineer at present employed to continue
the construction; a course which was possible.
_Thirdly_, the Government might (although he did not presume that they
would) substitute some person to superintend the completion of the
Engine instead of Mr. Babbage himself.
_Fourthly_, the Government might be disposed to give up the
undertaking entirely.
A letter to Sir R. Peel from Mr. Babbage, dated 7th April, 1835, and
enclosing the above plans, concludes thus:—
“The delays and difficulties of years will, I hope, excuse my
expressing a wish that I may at length be relieved from them by an
early decision of the Government on the question.”
C. B.
_From the_ ATHENÆUM _of_ SATURDAY, DEC. _16th, 1848_.
---------------
Mr. Babbage has reprinted, for private circulation, Mr. Weld’s chapter
on his _Calculating Machine_, and has appended to it our review[52] of
that chapter [see _ante_, p. 1029] with three short foot-notes. The
first of these is on a point immaterial to the issue; the second and
third contain distinct statements of fact from Mr. Babbage, in reference
to our comments upon his proceedings and those of the Government. Our
readers will remember that from September 1834 to November 1842, Mr.
Babbage could not procure the attention of the Government to the state
of the engine, on which 17,000_l._ had been spent; and that, about the
beginning of that period, Mr. Babbage had invented the new engine, which
he called the _Analytical Engine_. And further, they will remember that
all notion of the possibility of blame having been justly incurred by
Mr. Babbage rested, in our comment, upon the hypothesis that he had put
his wish to abandon the _Difference Engine_ and substitute the
_Analytical Engine_ before the Government in such a form as to give them
a right to suppose that he was unwilling to proceed with the former. On
our remark that it is possible that Sir R. Peel and Mr. Goulburn allowed
his well-known wish to influence their decision, Mr. Babbage
observes:—“It is scarcely possible that this _supposed_ wish could have
influenced Sir Robert Peel, because he had before him a written
disavowal of it from Mr. Babbage himself.”
Again, of the first half of the period of unanswered application Mr.
Weld gives no account, as to the tenor of the applications therein made
to the Government: though he shows by documents that during the second
half Mr. Babbage, to repeat our own phrase, “stood upon the right
ground.” And thereupon we expressed our opinion that the public had a
right to explanation from the Government, and to further explanation
from Mr. Babbage. This further explanation Mr. Babbage now gives, in the
following words; among which we insert some bracketed comments:—
“The two following [applications made to the Government] will
sufficiently explain them [the undescribed applications of the first
half of the period of unanswered application]:—On the 23rd December,
1834, Mr. Babbage addressed a statement to the Duke of Wellington,
pointing out the only [the reader will remark this word _only_] plans
which in his opinion could be pursued for terminating the questions
relative to the _Difference Engine_, namely—_First_, the Government
might desire Mr. Babbage to continue the construction of the engine in
the hands of the person who has hitherto been employed in making it.
_Secondly_, the Government might wish to know whether any other person
could be substituted for the engineer at present employed to continue
the construction—a course which was possible. _Thirdly_, the Government
might (although he did not presume that they would) substitute some
person to superintend the completion of the engine instead of Mr.
Babbage himself. _Fourthly_, the Government might be disposed to give up
the undertaking entirely.” A letter to Sir Robert Peel from Mr. Babbage,
dated the 7th of April, 1835, and enclosing the above plans, concludes
thus: “The delays and difficulties of years will, I hope, excuse my
expressing a wish that I may at length be relieved from them by an early
decision of the Government on the question.”
From the above it appears that at the end of 1834, Mr. Babbage—though
then so full of the _new_ engine, that in September he had asked an
audience of Lord Melbourne, to communicate the exact state of the case,
and to request, of course, his consideration of the question whether the
new engine should or should not take the place of the old one—began his
applications to the Government with distinct reference to the _old_
engine, and to the question of its completion or abandonment. Certainly
the first of the two applications was not well timed, for it was made
when the Duke of Wellington held all the seals, and a Government courier
was hunting Sir Robert Peel all over Italy, to tell him to come home
quick and be Prime Minister. But it was repeated to Sir Robert Peel in
the April following, when the latter was also in official possession of
the previous letter.
Mr. Babbage having thus filled up the only _lacuna_ which the public
press has brought to his notice, we can but repeat that those who would
impute to him the blame of the failure of Government to complete his
Calculating Machine must begin by proving his statement to be false or
defective. In 1835 he complains _to_ the Government of “delays and
difficulties,” which he implies to be mainly caused _by_ the Government,
and he gets no answer whatever to repeated applications, until 1843.
Those who have propagated the rumours that his conduct was the cause of
the delay, and that he compromised his friends in the Royal Society, who
had aided in bringing him under the notice of the Government, are bound
to abstain in future, or to show cause.
We end by a quotation from Mr. Weld, which we abstained from giving so
long as we supposed that the discontinuance of the Calculating Machine
might be, in any degree, Mr. Babbage’s fault. “Mr. Babbage has shown me
letters, by which it appears that he declined offices of great
emolument, the acceptance of which would have interfered with his
labours upon the _Difference Engine_.”
[52] We said in that review that Menabrea’s Memoir was in Italian:—we
should have said French.
THE END.
Transcriber’s Notes.
New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the
public domain.
Italic text is denoted by underscores _thus_, small capitals have been
changed to all capitals.
Some words are inconsistently hyphenated such as “light-house”,
“lighthouse” and “astronomer-royal”, “astronomer royal”. These have
been left as originally printed.
The footnotes have been renumbered throughout the book and moved to
the ends of the chapters.
The Appendix consists of extracts from other publications. The
footnotes have been renumbered but there remain references to page
numbers in the original publications.
Some small changes have been made as follows:
A closing quotation mark at the end of the first sentence of footnote
47 has been removed since all of this text is taken from the note
cited.
In order to obtain the correct alignment of text:
On page 126 the dashes serving to indicate repeated text have been
replaced by duplicated text.
In the table in footnote 40 the ditto marks have been replaced by
duplicated text.
In the table on page 220 “The Bath” has been repeated instead of being
bracketed to “Military” and “Civil”.Project Gutenberg
The exposition of 1851 : $b or, Views of the industry, the science, and the government, of England
Babbage, Charles
Chimera62
Academic