A Historical Account of Useful Inventions and Scientific Discoveries / Being a manual of instruction and entertainment.

by George Grant

ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.

This is the most surprising invention of modern times, and of the greatest importance to a commercial people; by means of it intelligence is conveyed from one end of the kingdom to another, in the twinkling of an eye. A company was fully organised for the carrying out this invention, which commenced its operations in 1848, and established a system of no ordinary complication and extent. Their wires stretch from Glasgow on the north, to Dorchester, on the south, from the east coast, at Yarmouth, to the west, at Liverpool. These have brought upwards of one hundred and fifty towns into instant communication with each other. The wires set up for the use of the public alone are upwards of nine thousand eight hundred miles in length, and extend over a distance of two thousand and sixty miles, and, exclusive of those running underground, and through tunnels or rivers, are stretched on no fewer than sixty-one thousand eight hundred posts, varying from sixteen to thirty feet in height, and of an average square of eight inches, with an expensive apparatus of insulators and winders attached to each. As the most trifling derangement of the wires or apparatus will stop the communication, it is obvious that the utmost care and watchfulness is requisite to prevent and detect accidents. Accordingly, the whole distance is divided into districts, each district having a superintendent, and under him several inspectors, and a staff of workmen, batterymen, and mechanics, more or less numerous, according to the extent over which he presides.—When we consider these things, in conjunction with the central staff of engineers, secretaries, &c., at the head-establishment in London, a maximum charge of one penny per mile cannot be considered an exorbitant demand for the accommodation afforded to the public in keeping open so many receiving stations, and the maintenance of the expensive establishments. The telegraphic system is designed for important and urgent messages, and it may be safely averred that not one despatch in a hundred has been as yet forwarded by it, which has not been by many times worth more than the sum paid by the sender. A commercial house in Liverpool will scarcely grudge 8s. 6d. for a communication by which a necessary payment may be made, an important order given, or a profitable operation facilitated in London; and the message from Glasgow, which traverses a distance of five hundred and twenty miles in an instant, to summon a son from the metropolis, it may be, to the bedside of a dying parent, cannot be judged exorbitant at a charge of 14s., considerably less than one halfpenny per mile.

Messrs. Wilmer and Smith, of Liverpool, publishers of the “European Times,” have arranged the most admirable code of signals in the world; and by the use of forty-eight letters are capable of transmitting intelligence equal to half a column of an ordinary newspaper. The telegraphic company disapprove of this species of short-hand, and, therefore, charge for the forty-eight letters 13s. This Messrs. Wilmer and Smith consider excessive, as they have forwarded similar messages by telegraph, four thousand miles in America, for 8s., and from Philadelphia to New York for 1s. These gentlemen, therefore, consider they have cause to find fault with the company in reference to charges for communications in cipher.

---

STEAM-ENGINES.

The Steam-Engine is one of the most important of human discoveries, and is certainly one of those which afford the greatest portion of ease and advantage to the human species, as well in the operation of its cause, as in its ultimate effects. The most powerful of machines had its origin from the single idea of one individual of our own nation. It has been, from time to time, improved by different individuals, also natives of Britain, the precise period of which improvements can be traced, and their effects fortunately ascertained.

Although we should observe, that the first principle of this mechanical power was discovered by some of the ancient nations, many ages before that which gave the origin to the present practised invention, but from the state of information, it is conceived, to answer no purpose of utility. It may be said to have occurred in a small machine which the ancients called an Æolipila (the bull of Æolus) consisting of a hollow ball of metal, with a slender neck, or pipe, also of metal, having a small orifice entering into the ball, by means of a screw; this pipe being taken out, the ball being filled with water, and the pipe again screwed in, the ball is heated—there issues from the orifice, when sufficiently hot, a vapour, with great violence and noise; care was required that this should not be by accident stopped, if it were, the machine would infallibly burst, and perhaps, to the danger of the lives of all in its vicinity, so immense is its power.

Another way of introducing the water was first to heat the ball when empty, and then suddenly to immerse it in water. Descartes, in particular, has used this instrument to account for the natural generation of winds. Chauvin thinks it might be employed instead of bellows, to blow a fire. It would admirably serve to fumigate a room, being filled with perfume instead of common water. It is said to have been applied to clear chimneys of their soot, a practice still alleged to be common in Italy. Dr. Plott, in his “History of Staffordshire,” records this singular custom, where the Æolipila is used to blow the fire. “The lord of the mannor of Essington is bound by his tenure to drive a goose, every New Year’s day, three times round the hall of the Lord of Hilton, while Jack of Hilton, a brazen Æolipila, blows the fire.” The last circumstance we shall mention of this instrument, has relation to an antique one, discovered whilst digging the Basingstoke canal, representing a grotesque metallic figure, in which the blast proceeded from the mouth. This figure is now in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries of London. In this instrument, the uncommon elastic force of steam was recognised before the suggestion of the Marquis of Worcester, which follows:

“In 1655, or subsequent thereto, the Marquis of Worcester published the earliest account of the application of this power for the purposes of utility, and suggested it as applicable to raising water. ‘Sixty-eight. An admirable and most forcible way to drive up water by fire; not by drawing or sucking it upwards, for that would be what the philosopher calleth it, intra spherum actroctatis, which is, but at such a distance. But this way has no bounder, if the vessel be strong enough; for I have taken a whole piece of cannon, whereof the end was burst, stopping and screwing up the broken end, as also the touch-hole; and making a constant fire under it, within twenty-four hours it burst and made a great crack: so that having a way to make my vessels, so that they are strengthened by the force within them, and the one to fill after the other, I have seen the water run like a constant fountain stream, forty feet high; one vessel of cold water being consumed, another begins to force and refill with cold water, and so successively; the fire being tended and kept constant, which the self-same person may likewise abundantly perform, in the interim between the necessity of turning the cocks.’”

The marquis’s ingenuity did not, it appears, meet with that attention which it deserved, from those to whom his communication was addressed. In the article of steam it has been since very much improved, and is acted upon for the most useful of purposes; also his ideas for short-hand telegraphs, floating baths, escutcheons for locks, moulds for candles, and a mode to disengage horses from a carriage, after they have taken fright; which, with several others, proclaim the originality and ingenuity of the mind of this nobleman—an honour which very few of the British nobility aspire to.

Since his time, another design upon the same principle has been projected by Captain Thomas Savery, a commissioner of sick and wounded, who in the year 1691 obtained a patent for “a new invention for raising water, and occasioning motion to all sorts of mill-work, by the impellant force of fire.” This patent bears date the 25th of July, sixteenth of William III., A. D. 1698. The patent states that the invention will be of great use for drawing of mines, serving towns with water, and working all sorts of mills. “Mr. Savery, June 14th, 1699, entertained the Royal Society with showing a model of his engine for raising water by help of fire, which he set to work before them; the experiment succeeded according to expectation.”

The above memoir is accompanied with a copperplate figure, with references by way of description; from whence it appears, that the engine then shown by Captain Savery was for raising water, not only by the expansive force of steam, like the Marquis of Worcester’s, but also by the condensation of steam, the water being raised by the pressure of a rarified atmosphere to a given height, by the expansive force of steam, in the same manner as the Marquis proposed. This action was performed alternately in two receivers, so that while the vacuum formed in one was drawing up water from the well, the pressure of steam in the other was forcing up water into the reservoir; but both receivers being supplied by one suction-pipe and one forcing-pipe, the engine could be made to keep a continual stream, so as to suffer very little interruption. This engine of Captain Savery’s displays much ingenuity, and is almost as perfect in its contrivance as the same engine has been made since his time. We regret, that without a figure we cannot supply a perfect description of it.

However, it appears that it was necessary to have two boilers, or vessels of copper, one large and the other smaller: those boilers have a gauge-pipe inserted into the smaller boiler, within about eight inches of its bottom, and about the centre of the side of the larger boiler; the small boiler must be quite full of water, and the larger one only about two-thirds full. The fire is then to be lighted beneath the larger boiler, to make the water boil, by which means the steam being confined, will be greatly compressed, and will, therefore, on opening a way for it to issue out (which is done by pushing the handle of a regulator from the operator), rush with great violence through a steam-pipe into a receiver, driving out all the air before it, sending it up into a force-pipe through a clack, as may be perceived from its noise; when the air is expelled, the receiver will be very much heated by the steam. When it is thoroughly emptied of atmospheric air, and grown very hot, which may be both seen and felt, then the handle of the regulator is to be drawn towards the operator, by which means the first steam-pipe will be stopped, so that no more steam can rise into the first receiver, by which means a second receiver will be filled in like manner. Whilst this is doing, some cold water must be poured on the first receiver, by which means the steam in it will be cooled, and thereby condensed into smaller room: consequently the pressure in the valve, or cock, at the bottom of the receiver—there being nothing to counterbalance the atmospheric pressure at the surface of the receiver in the inner part of the sucking-pipe, it will be pressed up into the receiver, driving up before it the valve at the bottom, which afterwards falling again, prevents the descent of the water that way. Then the first receiver being, at the same time, emptied of its air, push the handle of the regulator, and the steam which rises from the boiler will act upon the surface of the water contained in the first receiver, where the force or pressure on it still increasing its elasticity, till it exceeds the weight of a column of water in another receiving-pipe, then it will necessarily drive up through the passage into the force-pipe, and eventually discharge itself at the top of the machinery.

After the same manner, though alternately, is the first receiver filled and emptied of water, and by this means a regular stream kept continually running out of the top of a force-pipe, and so the water is raised very often from the bottom of a mine, to the place where it is meant to be discharged.

It should be added, that after the machine begins to work, and the water has risen into and filled the force-pipe, it fills also a little cistern, and by that means fills another pipe, called the condensing-pipe, which may be turned either way, over any of the receivers, when either is thoroughly heated by, the steam, to condense it within, thereby producing a vacuum, which absorbs the water out of the well into the receiver, on the principle of a syphon. Also a little above the cistern goes another pipe to convey the water from the force-pipe into the lesser boiler, for the purpose of replenishing the great boiler, when the water in it begins to be almost consumed. Whenever there is occasion for this, the cock is to be turned which communicates between the force-pipe and the lesser boiler, to close it effectually; at the same time having put a little fire beneath the small boiler, which will grow hot; its own steam, which has no vent to escape, pressing on its surface, will force the water up another pipe, through an aperture in the great boiler, and so long will it run, till the surface of the water gets so low as to be beneath the bottom of the pipe of communication—then the steam and water running together, will cause the valve (called a clack) to strike, which will intimate to the operator that it has discharged itself into the greater boiler, and carried in as much water as is then necessary; after which, by turning a cock, as much fresh water is let in as may be necessary; and then, by turning another cock, new fresh water is let out of a recipient into the less boiler as before; and thus the engine is supplied without fear of decay, or any delay in the operations; and proper attention in the workmen is only necessary to prevent disorder in a machine so expensive and complicated.

Also, to know when the great boiler wants replenishing, turn the gauge-cock; if water comes out, it does not need a supply; but if steam alone, then the want of water is certain. The like with the cock with which the lesser boiler is prepared for the same purpose, when the same state will be marked by like results. In working this engine, very little skill, and less labour is required: Attention is the chief requisite; it is only to be injured by want of due care, extreme stupidity, or wilful neglect.

The engine described above, does not differ essentially from that first designed by the inventor, Captain Savery; the chief alteration which now occurs, is only in some few slight particulars. For example, the original engine had only one boiler, and there was no ready means for supplying it with water, to remedy the waste occasioned by evaporation of steam, without stopping the action of the engine, whenever the boiler was emptied to such a degree as to risk burning the vessel. After it was replenished the machine had to remain idle till the steam was raised, thus causing an immense loss of time; which is remedied by the application of a second boiler.

The description of the engine formerly mentioned is transcribed from Mr. Savery’s publication, “The Miner’s Friend,” and which had a subsidiary boiler, with water of a boiling heat, always ready to supply the large boiler; and the power of steam raised in it is employed to force the water into the larger boiler, to replace the waste occasioned by evaporation from that boiler; by this means the transposition of the feeding water is not only speedily performed, but being itself of a boiling heat, it is instantly ready to produce steam for carrying on the work. There is also one more grand improvement in the modern machine: the first engine was worked by four separate cocks, which the operator was compelled to turn separately at every change of stroke; if he turned them wrong, he was not only liable to damage the engine, but he prevented its effect, and, at the same time, lost a part of the operation: whereas, in the improved engine, the communications are made by a double sliding valve, or, as it has since been termed, regulator; that is, a brass plate, shaped like a fan, and moving on a centre within the boiler, so as to slide horizontally in contact with the under surface of the cover of the boiler, to which it is accurately fitted by grinding, and thus, at pleasure, opens or shuts the orifices, or entries, to the steam pipes of the two receivers alternately. This regulator acts with less friction than a cock of equal bore, and, by the motion of a single handle backwards, at once opens the proper steam pipe from one receiver, and closes that which belongs to the other receiver. Captain Savery, in his publication before noticed, describes the uses to which this machine may be applied, besides those before described, viz.—1, to serve water for turning all sorts of mills; 2, for supplying palaces, noblemen and gentlemen’s houses with water, and affording the means for extinguishing fires therein, by the water so raised; 3, the supplying cities and towns with water; 4, draining fens and marshes; 5, for ships; 6, for draining mines of water; and 7, for preventing damps in mines.

Dr. Desaguliers, we conceive, ungenerously attacked Captain Savery’s reputation, by alleging that this was not an original invention, and that he was indebted for the first idea to the previously mentioned plan of the Marquis of Worcester. Dr. Rees, with a generous liberality worthy his great critical discrimination, scientific skill, and general erudition, has, we think, ably defended the captain’s character, by proving his ideas to have originated with himself; we have only an opportunity to notice the most prominent features in this justification, where Dr. Rees thus expresses himself. “We know that the Marquis of Worcester gave no hint concerning the contractibility or condensation of steam, upon which all the merit of the modern engine depends. The Marquis of Worcester’s engine was actuated wholly by the elastic power of steam, which he either found out, or proved by the bursting of cannon in part filled with water; and not the least hint that steam so expanded, is capable of being so far contracted in an instant, as to leave the space it occupied in a vessel, and occasion, in a great measure, a vacuum.”

Subsequent to the Marquis of Worcester’s, and Captain Savery’s original ideas, and also, subsequent to the perfection the captain had brought his machine to, M. Amonton, a native of France, invented a machine which he called a fire-wheel; but it does not appear that it was ever brought to that perfection to be conducive to real utility, although it was certainly very ingenious.

Also, M. Papin, a native of Germany, made some pretensions to what he alleged was an invention of his own, only it happened to appear, unfortunately for his claim, that he was in London, and present at the time when Captain Savery exhibited the model of his steam-engine to the Royal Society. He made some unsuccessful experiments, by order of his patron, the Landgrave of Hesse, which sufficiently proved that, if he was the inventor, he did not understand the nature of his own machine.

Not long after Savery had invented his engine, Thomas Newcomen, an ironmonger, and John Calley, a glazier, began to direct their attention to the employment of steam as a mechanic power. Their first engine was constructed about the year 1711. This machine still acted on the principle of condensing the steam by means of cold water, and the pressure of the atmosphere on the piston. It was found of great value in pumping water from deep mines; but the mode of its construction, the great waste of fuel, the continued cooling and heating of the cylinder, and the limited capacities of the atmosphere in impelling the piston downward, all tended to circumscribe its utility.

The steam-engine was in this state, when it happily attracted the attention of Mr. Watt, to whom the merit and honour is due, of having first rendered this invention available as a mechanical agent. We cannot illustrate the improvements of this ingenious individual better than by giving a short biographical sketch of him to whom the world is so much indebted.

James Watt was born at Greenock, an extensive seaport in the west of Scotland, on the 19th of January, 1736. His father was a merchant, and also one of the magistrates of that town. He received the rudiments of his education in his native place; but his health being then extremely delicate, as it continued to be to the end of his life, his attendance at school was not always very regular. He amply made up, however, for what he lost in this way, by the diligence with which he pursued his studies at home, where, without any assistance, he succeeded, at a very early age, in making considerable proficiency in various branches of knowledge. Even at this time it is said his favourite study was mechanical science, to a love of which he was probably in some degree led by the example of his grandfather and his uncle, both of whom had been teachers of mathematics, and had left a considerable reputation for learning and ability in that department. Young Watt, however, was not indebted to any instruction of theirs for his own acquirements in science, the former having died two years before, and the latter one year after he was born. At the age of eighteen he was sent to London, to be apprenticed to a maker of mathematical instruments; but in little more than a year the state of his health forced him to return to Scotland; and he never received any further instruction in his profession. A year or two after this, however, a visit which he paid to some relations in Glasgow, suggested to him the plan of attempting to establish himself in that city, in the line for which he had been educated. In 1757, he accordingly removed thither, and was immediately appointed mathematical instrument maker to the College. In this situation he remained for some years, during which, notwithstanding almost constant ill health, he continued both to prosecute his profession, and to labour in the general cultivation of his mind, with extraordinary ardour and perseverance. Here also he enjoyed the intimacy and friendship of several distinguished persons, who were then members of the University, especially of the celebrated Dr. Black, the discoverer of the principle of latent heat, and Dr. Robison, so well known by his treatises on mechanical science, who was then a student, and about the same age as himself. Honourable, however as his present appointment was, and important as were many of the advantages to which it introduced him, he probably did not find it a very lucrative one; and therefore, in 1763, when about to marry, he removed from his apartments in the University, to a house in the city, and entered upon the profession of a general engineer.

For this his genius and scientific attainments most admirably qualified him. Accordingly he soon acquired a high reputation, and was extensively employed in making surveys and estimates for canals, harbours, bridges, and other public works. His advice and assistance were sought for in almost all the important improvements of this description, which were now undertaken or proposed in his native country. But another pursuit, in which he had been for some time privately engaged, was destined ere long to withdraw him from this line of exertion, and to occupy his whole mind with an object still more worthy of its extraordinary powers.

While yet residing in the College, his attention had been directed to the employment of steam as a mechanical agent, by some speculations of his friend Mr. Robison, with regard to the practicability of applying it to the movement of wheel-carriages; and he had also himself made some experiments with Papin’s digester, with the view of ascertaining its expansive force. He had not prosecuted the inquiry, however, so far as to have arrived at any determinate result, when the winter of 1763–4, a small model of Newcomen’s engine was sent him by the Professor of Natural Philosophy, to be repaired, and fitted for exhibition in the class. The examination of this model set Watt upon thinking anew, and with more interest than ever, on the powers of steam. Struck with the radical imperfections of the atmospheric engine, he began to turn in his mind the possibility of employing steam in mechanics, in some new manner which should enable it to work with much more powerful effect. This idea having got possession of him, he engaged in an extensive course of experiments, for the purpose of ascertaining as many facts as possible with regard to the properties of steam; and the pains he took in this investigation were rewarded with several valuable discoveries. The rapidity with which water evaporates he found, for instance, depended simply upon the quantity of heat which was made to enter it; and this again, on the extent of the surface exposed to the fire. He also ascertained the quantity of coals necessary for the evaporation of any given quantity of water, the heat at which water boils, under various pressures, and many other particulars of a similar kind, which had never before been accurately determined.

Thus prepared by a complete knowledge of the properties of the agent with which he had to work, he next took into consideration, with a view to their amendment, what he deemed the two great defects of Newcomen’s engine. The first of these was the necessity arising from the method employed to concentrate the steam, of cooling the cylinder, before every stroke of the piston, by the water injected into it. On this account, a much more powerful application of heat than would otherwise have been requisite was demanded for the purpose of again heating that vessel when it was to be refilled with steam. In fact, Watt ascertained that there was thus occasioned, in the feeding of the machine, a waste of not less than three-fourths of the whole fuel employed. If the cylinder, instead of being thus cooled for every stroke of the piston, could be permanently hot, a fourth part of the heat which had hitherto been applied would be found sufficient to produce steam enough to fill it. How then was this desideratum to be obtained? Savery, the first who really constructed a working engine, and whose arrangements, as we have already remarked, all showed a very superior ingenuity, employed the method of throwing cold water over the outside of the vessel containing the steam—a perfectly manageable process, but at the same time a very wasteful one; inasmuch as every time it was repeated, it cooled not only the steam, but the vessel also, which, therefore, had again to be heated, by a large expenditure of fuel, before the steam could be produced. Newcomen’s method of injecting the water into the cylinder was a considerable improvement on this; but it was still objectionable on the same ground, though not to the same degree; it still cooled not only the steam, on which it was desired to produce that effect, but also the cylinder itself, which, as the vessel in which more steam was to be immediately manufactured, it was so important to keep hot. It was also a very serious objection to this last mentioned plan, that the injected water, itself, from the heat of the place into which it was thrown, was very apt to be partly converted into steam; and the more cold water was used, the more considerable did this creation of new steam become. In fact, in the last of Newcomen’s engines, the rarefaction of the vacuum was so greatly improved from this cause, that the resistance experienced by the piston in its descent was found to amount to about a fourth part of the whole atmospheric pressure by which it was carried down, or, in other words, the working power of the machine was thereby diminished one-fourth.

After reflecting for some time upon all this, it at last occurred to Watt to consider whether it might not be possible, instead of continuing to condense the steam in the cylinder, to contrive that method of drawing it off, to undergo that operation in some other vessel. This fortunate idea having presented itself to his mind, it was not long before his ingenuity suggested to him the means of realising it. In the course of one or two days, according to his own account, he had all the necessary apparatus arranged in his mind. The plan which he devised was, indeed, an extremely simple one, and on that account the more beautiful. He proposed to establish a communication by an open pipe, between the cylinder and another vessel, the consequence of which evidently would be, that when the steam was admitted into the former, it would flow into the other to fill it also. If, then, the portion in this latter vessel only should be subjected to a condensing process, by being brought into contact with cold water, or any other convenient means, what would follow? Why, a vacuum would be produced here—into that, as a vent, more steam would immediately rush from the cylinder—that likewise would be condensed—and so the process would go on till all the steam had left the cylinder, and a perfect vacuum had been effected in that vessel, without so much as a drop of cold water having touched or entered it. The separate vessel alone, or the condenser, as Watt called it, would be cooled by the water used to condense the steam—and that, instead of being an evil, manifestly tended to promote and quicken the condensation. When Watt reduced his views to the test of experiment, he found the result to answer his most sanguine expectations. The cylinder, although emptied of its steam for every stroke of the piston as before, was now constantly kept at the same temperature with the steam (or 212 deg. Fahrenheit); and the consequence was, that one-fourth of the fuel formerly required, sufficed to feed the engine. But besides this most important saving in the expense of maintaining the engine, its power was greatly increased by the most perfect vacuum produced in the new construction, in which the condensing water, being no longer admitted within the cylinder, could not, as before, create new steam there while displacing the old.

Such, then, was the remedy by which the genius of this great inventor effectually cured the first and most serious defect of the old apparatus. In carrying his ideas into execution, he encountered, as was to be expected, many difficulties, arising principally from the impossibility of realising theoretical perfection of structure with such materials as human art is obliged to work with; but his ingenuity and perseverance overcame every obstacle. One of the things which cost him the greatest trouble was, how to fit the piston so exactly to the cylinder, as, without affecting the freedom of its motion, to prevent the passage of the air between the two. In the old engine this end had been obtained by covering the piston with a small quantity of water, the dripping down of which into the space below, where it merely mixed with the stream introduced to effect the condensation, was of little or no consequence. But in the new construction, the superiority of which consisted in keeping this receptacle for the steam always both hot and dry, such an effusion of moisture, although in very small quantities, would have occasioned material inconvenience. The air alone, besides, which in the old engine followed the piston in its descent, acted with considerable effect in cooling the lower part of the cylinder. His attempts to overcome this difficulty, while they succeeded in that object, conducted Watt also to another improvement, which effected the complete removal of what we have called the second radical imperfection of Newcomen’s engine, namely, its non-employment for a moving power, of the expansive force of steam. The effectual way it occurred to him of preventing any air from escaping into the part of the cylinder below the piston, would be to dispense with the use of that element above the piston, and to substitute there likewise the same contrivance as below, of alternate steam and a vacuum. This was, of course, to be accomplished by merely opening communications from the upper part of the cylinder to the boiler on the one hand, and the condenser on the other, and forming it at the same time into an air-tight chamber, by means of a cover, with only a hole in it to admit the rod or shank of the piston, which might, besides, without impeding its freedom of action, be padded with hemp, the more completely to exclude the air. It was so contrived accordingly, by a proper arrangement of the cocks and the machinery connected with them; that, while there was a vacuum in one end of the cylinder, there should be an admission of steam into the other; and the steam so admitted now served, not only by its susceptibility of sudden condensation to create the vacuum, but also, by its expansive force, to impel the piston.

These were the great improvements which Watt introduced in what may be called the principle of the steam-engine, or, in other words, in the manner of using and applying the steam. They constitute, therefore, the grounds of his claim to be regarded as the true author of the conquest that has been obtained by man over this powerful element. But original and comprehensive as were the views out of which these fundamental inventions arose, the exquisite and inexhaustible ingenuity which the engine, as finally perfected by him, displays in every part of its subordinate mechanism, is calculated to strike us perhaps with scarcely less admiration. It forms undoubtedly the best exemplification that has ever been afforded of the number and diversity of services which a piece of machinery may be made to render to itself, by means solely of the various application of its first moving power, when that has once been called into action. Of these contrivances, however, we can only notice one or two, by way of specimen. Perhaps the most singular is that called the governor. This consists of an upright spindle, which is kept constantly turning, by being connected with a certain part of the machinery, and from which two balls are suspended, in opposite directions, by rods, attached by joints, somewhat in the manner of the legs of a pair of tongs. As long as the motion of the engine is uniform, that of the spindle is so likewise, and the balls continue steadily revolving at the same distance from each other. But as soon as any alteration in the action of the piston takes place, the balls, if it has become more rapid, fly further apart under the influence of the increased centrifugal force which actuates them; or approach nearer to each other in the opposite circumstances. This alone would have served to indicate the state of matters to the eye; but Watt was not to be so satisfied. He connected the rods with a valve in the tube by which the steam is admitted to the cylinder from the boiler, in such a way, that as they retreat from each other, they gradually narrow the opening which is so guarded, or enlarge it as they tend to collapse; thus diminishing the supply of steam when the engine is going too fast, and when it is not going fast enough, enabling it to regain its proper speed by allowing it an increase of aliment.

Again the constant supply of a sufficiency of water to the boiler is secured by an equally simple provision, namely, by a float resting on the surface of the water which, as soon as it is carried down by the consumption of the water to a certain point opens a valve and admits more. And so on through all the different parts of the apparatus, the various wonders of which cannot be better summed up than in the forcible and graphic language of a recent writer:—“In the present perfect state of the engine it appears a thing almost endowed with intelligence. It regulates, with perfect accuracy and uniformity, the number of its strokes in a given time, counting, or recording them moreover, to tell how much work it has done, as a clock records the beats of its pendulum; it regulates the quantity of steam admitted to work; the briskness of the fire; the supply of water to the boiler; the supply of coals to the fire; it opens and shuts its valves with absolute precision as to time and manner; it oils its joints; it takes out any air which may accidentally enter into parts which should be vacuous; and when any thing goes wrong, which it cannot of itself rectify, it warns its attendants by ringing a bell; yet, with all these talents and qualities, and even when exerting the power of six hundred horses, it is obedient to the hand of a child; its aliment is coal, wood, charcoal, or other combustible—it consumes none when idle—it never tires, and wants no sleep; it is not subject to malady when originally well made, and only refuses to work when worn out with age; it is equally active in all climates, and will do work of any kind; it is a water-pumper, a miner, a sailor, a cotton-spinner, a weaver, a blacksmith, a miller, &c., &c.; and a small engine, in the character of a steam pony, may be seen dragging after it on a rail-road a hundred tons of merchandise, or a regiment of soldiers, with greater speed than that of the fleetest coaches. It is the king of machines, and a permanent realisation of the Genii of Eastern fable, whose supernatural powers were occasionally at the command of man.”

In addition to those difficulties which his unrivalled mechanical ingenuity enabled him to surmount, Watt, notwithstanding the merit of his inventions, had to contend for some time with others of a different nature, in his attempts to reduce them to practice. He had no pecuniary resources of his own, and was at first without any friend willing to run the risk of the outlay necessary for an experiment on a sufficiently large scale. At last he applied to Dr. Roebuck, an ingenious and spirited speculator, who had just established the Carron iron-works, not far from Glasgow, and held also at the same time a lease of the extensive coal-works at Kinneal, the property of the Duke of Hamilton. Dr. Roebuck agreed to advance the requisite funds, on having two-thirds of the profits made over to him; and upon this Mr. Watt took out his first patent in the beginning of the year 1769. An engine with a cylinder of eighteen inches diameter was soon after erected at Kinneal; and although, as a first experiment, it was necessarily, in some respects, of defective construction, its working completely demonstrated the value of Watt’s improvements. But Dr. Roebuck, whose undertakings were very numerous and various, in no long time after forming this connexion, found himself involved in such pecuniary difficulties, as to put it out of his power to make any further advances in prosecution of its object. On this Watt applied himself for some years almost entirely to the ordinary work of his profession as a civil engineer; but at last, about the year 1774, when all hopes of any farther assistance from Dr. Roebuck were at an end, he resolved to close with a proposal which had been made to him through his friend, Dr. Small, of Birmingham, that he should remove to that town, and enter into partnership with the eminent hardware manufacturer, Mr. Boulton, whose extensive establishments at Soho had already become famous over Europe, and procured for England an unrivalled reputation for the arts there carried on. Accordingly an arrangement having been made with Dr. Roebuck, by which his share of the patent was transferred to Mr. Boulton, the firm of Boulton and Watt commenced the business of making steam-engines, in the year 1775.

Mr. Watt now obtained from parliament an extension of his patent for twenty-five years, in consideration of the acknowledged national importance of his inventions. The first thing which he and his partner did was to erect an engine at Soho, which they invited all persons interested in such machines to inspect. They then proposed to erect similar machines wherever required, on the very liberal principle of receiving, as payment for each, only one-third of the saving in fuel which it should effect, as compared with one of the old construction.

But the draining of mines was only one of the many applications of the steam-power now at his command, which Watt contemplated, and in course of time accomplished. During the whole twenty-five years, indeed, over which his renewed patent extended, the perfecting of his invention was his chief occupation, and notwithstanding a delicate state of health, and the depressing affliction of severe headaches, to which he was extremely subject, he continued throughout this period to persevere with unwearied diligence in adding new improvements to the mechanism of the engine, and devising the means of applying it to new purposes of usefulness. He devoted, in particular, the exertions of many years, to the contriving of the best methods of making the action of the piston communicate a rotary motion in various circumstances, and between the years 1781 and 1785, he took out four different patents for inventions having this in his view.

It is gratifying to reflect, that even while he was yet alive, Watt received from the most illustrious contemporaries, the honours due to his genius. In 1785, he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society; the degree of Doctor of Laws was conferred upon him by the University of Glasgow, in 1806; and in 1808, he was elected a member of the French Institute. He died on the 25th of August, 1819, in the 84th year of his age.

The beneficial results arising from the ingenuity of Watt have been surprising. The steam-engine has already gone far to revolutionise the whole domain of human industry; and almost every year is adding to its power and its conquests. In our manufactures, our arts, our commerce, our social accommodations, it is constantly achieving what, little more than half a century ago, would have been accounted miraculous and impossible. “The trunk of an elephant,” it has been finely and truly said, “that can pick up a pin, or rend an oak, is as nothing to it. It can engrave a seal, and crush masses of obdurate metal like wax before it—draw out, without breaking, a thread as fine as gossamer, and lift a ship of war, like a bauble, in the air. It can embroider muslins, and forge anchors; cut steel into ribbands, and impel loaded vessels against the fury of the winds and waves.”

Another application of it is perhaps destined to be productive of still greater changes on the condition of society, than have resulted from many of its previous achievements,—we refer to railroads. The first great experiment was the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, which was opened, we believe, in 1831, and practically demonstrated, with what hitherto almost undreamt of rapidity travelling by land may be carried on through the aid of steam. Carriages, under the impetus communicated by this the most potent, and at the same time the most perfectly controllable of all our mechanical agencies, can be drawn forward at the flying speed of thirty and thirty-five miles an hour. When so much has been already done, it would be rash to conclude that even this is to be our ultimate limit of attainment. In navigation, the resistance of the water, which increases rapidly as the force opposed to it increases, very soon set bounds to the rate at which even the power of steam can impel a vessel forward. But on land, the thin medium of the air presents no such insurmountable obstacles to a force making its way through it; and a rapidity of movement may perhaps be eventually attained here, which is to us even as yet inconceivable. But even when the rate of land travelling already shown to be quite practicable shall have become universal, in what a new state of society shall we find ourselves! A nation will then, indeed, become a community; and all the benefits of the highest civilization will be diffused equally over the land, like the light of heaven. This invention, in short, when fully consummated, will confer upon man as much new power and enjoyment as if he were actually endowed with wings.

The commerce of the kingdom has also greatly benefited by the introduction of this valuable auxiliary, as will be seen from the following extract from the “Working Man’s Companion:”—

“The establishment of steam-boats between England and Ireland has greatly contributed to the prosperity of both countries. How have steam boats done this? They have greatly increased the trade of both countries. On the examination of Mr. Williams, before a Committee of the House of Commons, he stated that ‘before steam-boats were established, there was little trade in the smaller articles of farming production, such as poultry and eggs. The first trading steam-boat from Liverpool to Dublin, was set up in 1824; there are now (1832) forty such boats between England and Ireland. The sailing vessels were from one week to two or three weeks on the passage; the voyage from Liverpool to Dublin is now performed in fourteen hours. Reckoning ten mile, for an hour, Dublin and Liverpool are one hundred and forty miles apart; with the old vessels taking twelve days as the average time of the voyage, they were separated as completely as they would be by a distance of two thousand eight hundred and eighty miles. What is the consequence? Traders may now have, from any of the manufacturing towns in England, within two or three days, even the smallest quantity of any description of goods;’ and thus ‘one of the effects has been to give a productive employment of the capital of persons in secondary lines of business, that formerly could not have been brought into action.’” Mr. Williams adds, ‘I am a daily witness to the intercourse by means of the small traders themselves between England and Ireland. Those persons find their way into the interior of England, and purchase manufactured goods themselves. They are, of course, enabled to sell them upon much better terms in Ireland; and I anticipate that this will shortly lead to the creation of shops and other establishments in the interior of Ireland for the sale of a great variety of articles which are not now to be had there.’

“And how do the small dealers in English manufactured goods find purchasers in the rude districts of Ireland for our cloths and our hardware? Because the little farmers have sent us their butter and eggs and poultry, and have either taken our manufactures in exchange, or have taken back our money to purchase our manufactures, which is the same thing. Many millions of eggs, collected amongst the very poorest classes, by the industry of the women and children, are annually sent from Dublin to Liverpool. Mr. Williams has known fifty tons, or eight hundred and eighty thousand eggs, shipped in one day, as well as ten tons of poultry; and he says this is quite a new creation of property. It is a creation of property that has a direct tendency to act upon the condition of the poorest classes in Ireland; for the produce is laid out in providing clothes for the females and children of the families who engage in rearing poultry and collecting eggs. Thus the English manufacturer is bettered, for he has a new market for his manufactures, which he exchanges for cheap provisions; and the dealer in eggs and poultry has a new impulse to this branch of industry, because it enables him to give clothes to his wife and children. This exchange of benefits—this advancement in the condition of both parties—this creation of produce and of profitable labour—this increase of the number of labourers—could not have taken place without machinery. That machinery is the carriage which conveys the produce to the river, and the steam-boat which makes a port in another country much nearer for practical purposes, than the market town of a thinly peopled district. A new machinery is added; the steam-carriage running on the railroad, as one of the witnesses truly says, ‘is like carrying Liverpool forty miles into the interior, and thus extending the circle to which the supply will be applicable.’ The last invention perfects all the inventions which have preceded it. The village and the city are brought close together in effort, and yet retain all the advantages of their local situation; the port and the manufactory are divided only by two hours distance in time, while their distance in space affords room for all the various occupations which contribute to the perfection of either. The whole territory of Great Britain and Ireland is more compact, more closely united, more accessible than was a single county two centuries ago.”

The communication between England and Ireland has greatly increased since the above remarks were written, in 1832. There are now upwards of four hundred steam-boats sailing between Ireland and Great Britain, and of late years the largest export from that unfortunate country consists of her starving population, who, true enough, find their way into the interior of England, but not with the intention of purchasing manufactured goods, but of being employed in the manufacturing of them. We believe that our mechanical readers, at least, will agree with us, when we say that the benefit has not been reciprocal. England, for her share, has been burthened with a pauper population, and her sons deprived of their employment, by the immense immigration that has of late years taken place. Poor rates are multiplied to an extent hitherto unheard of, and our streets swarming with beggars—and those of the most importunate class. So much was this the case, that in 1847 and 1848, Liverpool was inundated with paupers from the sister country to such a degree, that her authorities were compelled to petition government to put an end to the nuisance, and to grant them assistance to prevent the death of so many thousands of their fellow-men from dying for want; the poor-rates were so increased that the ratepayers with justice complained. And we question much if ever the English manufactures have been so much benefited by the commerce as the foregoing quotation would lead us to believe. That we have been supplied with enormous quantities of provisions we cannot deny; but that the payment of these was taken back in our cloths and our hardware is very questionable. That the money was taken back there can be little doubt, not for the purpose, however, of buying clothes for the wives and children of those families whose industry had supplied us with eggs and poultry, but for supplying the insatiate wants of their profligate landlords, who were squandering the subsistence of the needy peasantry in another land. If any class of men have obtained benefit by means of this increased and speedy communication between the two countries, it assuredly is the absentee Irish landlord.

---

MILLS.

Corn Mills are of very ancient origin, and it may not be uninteresting to our readers to learn something of the customs of our forefathers with regard to them; to which we will subjoin such modern improvements as the more advanced state of the arts have enabled the moderns to achieve, and to excel the imperfect information of the ancients in mechanical sciences.

In support of the antiquity of grinding corn, we may go as for back as the days of the patriarch Abraham, who, we are informed in Genesis xviii. 6, “hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth.” To this we may add, that it appears in a subsequent text, Numbers xi. 8, that manna was ground like corn. The earliest instrument for this purpose seems to have been the mortar, which was retained long after the introduction of mills, properly so called: because they were most probably at first very imperfect. In process of time the mortar was made ridged, and the pestle notched at the bottom, by which means the grain was rather grated than pounded.

A passage in Pliny, which has not as yet had a satisfactory interpretation, renders this conjecture probable. In time a handle was added to the top of the pestle, that it might be more easily driven round in a circle, whence this machine at first was called mortarium, by this means assuming the name of a hand-mill. Such a mill was so called from rubbing backwards and forwards; and varied but little from those used by our colour-grinders, apothecaries, potters, and other artisans. From expressions in the sacred volume, we may rationally infer that it was customary to have a mill of this sort in every family. Moses having forbidden to take such instruments for a pledge; for that, says he, “No man shall take the nether or the upper millstone to pledge: for he taketh a man’s life.” It is observed by Michaelis, on this passage, that a man could not then grind, consequently could not bake the necessary daily bread for the family.

Grinding was then the employment of the women, particularly of female slaves, as at present in those countries which are uncivilised: the portion of strength required for the operation, therefore, could not have been great; but afterwards the mills were driven by bondsmen, whose necks were placed in a circular machine of wood, so that they could not put their hands to their mouths or eat of the meal. This must have been an interesting link between the hand and the horse-mill.

In course of time shafts were added to the mill, that it might be driven by cattle, which were then blindfolded. The first cattle mills were called molae jumentaria, which had, probably, only a heavy pestle like the hand-mill; but it is conjectured, that it must have been soon remarked, that the labour would be more easily accomplished, if, instead of the pestle a large heavy cylinder was employed. A competent judge has, however, believed that the first cattle mills had not a spout or trough as ours have; at least those hand-mills Tournefort saw at Nicaria, consisted only of two stones; but the meal issued through an opening in the upper one, and fell upon a board or table, on which the lower one rested.

The upper millstone they called meta, or turbo; and the lower one catillus: the name of the first also signified a cone with a blunt apex, whence it has been thought by some, that corn was first rubbed into meal, by rolling one stone upon another, as painters now grind colours with a muller. This is not improbable, as present practice among barbarous people fully proves. It is also apparent that the upper millstone was substituted for the pestle, which action may have lent it a name, when they called it meta.

Professor Beckmann has followed Gori in his description of an antique gem, engraved on red jasper, upon which appears “the naked figure of a man, who in his left hand holds a sheaf of corn, and in the right a machine that in all probability is a hand-mill. Gori considers the figure as a representation of the god Eunostus, who was the god of mills. The machine which Eunostus seems to exhibit, or to be surveying himself, is, as far as one can distinguish, (for the stone is scarcely half an inch in size), shaped like a chest, narrow at the top, and wide at the bottom. It stands upon a table, and in the bottom there is a perpendicular pipe, from which the meal, also represented by the artist, appears to be issuing. Above, the chest or body of the mill has either a top with an aperture, or perhaps a basket sunk into it, from which the corn falls into the mill. On one side, nearly about the middle of it, there projects a broken shank, which, without overstraining the imagination, may be considered as a handle, or that part of the mill which some call mobile. Though this figure is small, and though it gives very little idea of the internal construction, one may, however, conclude from it that the roller, whether it was of wood or of iron, smooth or notched, did not stand perpendicularly, like those of our coffee mills, but lay horizontally, which gives us reason to conjecture a construction more ingenious than that of the first invention. The axis of the handle had, perhaps, within the body of the mill, a crown wheel, that turned a spindle, to the lower end of the perpendicular axis of which the roller was fixed. Should this be admitted, it must be allowed also, that the hand-mills of the ancients had not so much a resemblance to the before-mentioned colour mills as to the philosophical mills of our chemists; and Langelott, consequently, will not be the real inventor of the latter. On the other side, opposite to where the handle is, there arise from the mill of Eunostus two shafts, which Gori considers as those of a besom and shovel, two instruments used in grinding; but as the interior part cannot be seen, it appears to me doubtful whether these may not be parts of the mill itself.”

In the commencement of the last century, the remains of a pair of Roman millstones were found at Adel, in Yorkshire. One of these stones, twenty inches in breadth, is thicker in the middle than at the edge, consequently one side is convex; the other was of the same size, but as thick at the sides as the other was in the centre; the traces of notching were discoverable.

Enough, may, perhaps, have been said concerning this original invention; therefore this article will not be encumbered with quotations of all those passages relative to mills, which are found in ancient authors, as they would afford but little additional information. Neither will mythological records be disturbed to inquire to which deity or hero the invention was originally attributed; or to ascertain the descent of Milantes, whom Stephanus distinguishes by that honour, or how those millstones were constructed which are alleged to have been built by Myletes, son of Lelex, King of Laconia; but we shall proceed to the invention of Water-Mills.

These appear to have been introduced about the period of Mithridates, contemporary with Cæsar and Cicero. Strabo, relating that there was a water-mill near the residence of the Pontian king, that honour has been ascribed to him; but so far is this remote from certainty, that nothing can be inferred from thence, other than that water-mills at that period were known in Asia. Pomponius Sabinus informs us, that the first water-mill seen at Rome was erected on the banks of the Tiber, a little before the time of Augustus; but of this there is no other proof than his simple assertion: he having taken the greater part of his remarks from the illustrations of Servius, he must have had a more perfect copy of that author than any now remaining, and from these his information might have come.

The most certain proof we have that Rome had water-mills in the time of Augustus, is, that Vitruvius has told us so; but those mills were not corn-mills, they were hydraulic engines, which he describes in his works. From whence we learn that the ancients had wheels for raising water, which were driven by being trod upon by men; the usual employment for criminals, as may be learnt from Artemidorus. Also from a pretty epigram of Antipater; “Cease your work, ye maids, ye who laboured in the mill; sleep now, and let the birds sing to the ruddy morning; for Ceres has commanded the water nymphs to perform your task; these, obedient to her call, throw themselves on the wheel, force round the axle-tree, and by these means the heavy mill.” Antipater lived at the period of Cicero. Palladius, also, with equal clearness, speaks of water-mills, which he advises to be built on estates where is running water, in order to grind corn without men or cattle.

It likewise appears that the water-wheels to which Heliogabalus directed some of his friends and parasites to be tied, cannot be considered to be mills for the purpose of grinding corn; for these, as well as the haustra of Lucretius were probably like those machines for raising water, which are spoken of by Vitruvius as hydraulic.

It is, however, on the authority of Pompinius Sabinus, before-cited, that both wind and water mills were known to have been in Italy, and even the latter in Rome, in the days of Augustus. However, about twenty-three years after the death of Augustus, when Caligula seized every horse from the mills, to convey effects he had in contemplation to take from Rome, the public were much distressed for bread; whence we must infer that water-mills must have been very rare. Even three hundred years after Augustus, cattle mills were so common in that city, that their number amounted to three hundred; mention of them, and of the hand-mills, often occurs for a long time after. It is not their use we inquire after, it is enough for us to know that they existed.

We now come to another period, when we are informed that public mills were first introduced, which occurs in the year 398, mention being made of them in that year, which also clearly shows that they were then newly-established; which establishment was found necessary to be protected by laws made in their favour. The orders for that purpose were renewed more than once, and made more secure by Zeno, towards the end of the fifth century. It may be properly remarked, that in the whole code of Justinian, the least mention of wooden pales or posts is not made, which occurs in all the new laws,—and which, it appears, when there were several mills on the same stream, occasioned so many disputes then, as well as in after times. The mills at Rome were erected on those canals which conveyed water to the city; and because these were employed in several arts, and for many purposes, it was ordered that, by dividing the water, the mills should always be kept going; but as they were driven by so small a quantity of water, they probably executed very little work; and for this reason, but probably on account of the great number of slaves, and the cheap rate at which they were maintained, these noble machines were not so much used, nor were so soon brought to perfection, as under other circumstances they might have been. It appears, however, that after the abolition of slavery, they were much improved, and more employed, and to this a particular incident seems, in some degree, to have contributed.

When Vitiges, King of the Goths, besieged Belisarius in Rome, in the year 536, and caused the fourteen large expensive aqueducts to be stopped, the city was reduced to great distress; not from want of water, in general, because it was secured against that inconvenience by the Tiber; but by the loss of that water which the baths required, and, above all, of that necessary to drive the mills, which were all situated on these canals. Horses and cattle, which might have been employed upon grinding, were not to be found; but Belisarius fell upon the ingenious contrivance of placing boats upon the Tiber, on which he erected mills that were driven by the current. This experiment was attended with complete success; and as many mills of this kind as were necessary were constructed. To destroy these, the besiegers threw into the stream logs of wood, dead bodies, &c., which floated down the river into the city; but the besieged, by making use of booms to stop them, were enabled to drag them out before they could do any mischief. This seems to have been the origin of floating-mills, no record of them appearing previously. By these means the use of water-mills became very much extended; for floating-mills can be constructed almost upon any stream, without forming an artificial fall; they may be stationed at the most convenient places, and they rise and fall of themselves with the water.—They are, however, attended with these inconveniences: they require to be strongly secured; they often block up the stream too much, and move slowly; and they often stop when the water is too high, or when it is frozen.

After this improvement, the use of water-mills was never laid aside or forgotten, but was soon made known all over Europe; and passages innumerable might be quoted, in every century, to prove their continued use. The Roman, Salic, and other laws, constantly provided for the security of these mills, and defined a punishment for such as destroyed the sluices, or stole the mill-irons. It is said, however, that there were water-mills in France and Germany a hundred years before these laws had existence.

At Venice, and other places, there were erected mills which regulated themselves by the motion of the waters, and which were regulated by the flowing and ebbing of the tide, and which every six hours changed the motion of the wheels. Of this species of mills, a new invention, or, perhaps, rather an improved one, was made in London, called a tide-mill, an engraving of which may be seen in “The Advancement of Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce,” London, 1772.

Zanetti is said to have shown, by some old charters, that such mills existed about the year 1044; but with still more certainty in 1078, 1079, and 1107.

It appears, however, that hand and cattle mills were in most places retained, after the use of proper watermills, particularly in convents. They were used, because the otherwise lazy monks found the exercise they afforded beneficial to their health. Likewise the legends of popish mythology are full of the miracles which have been wrought at these mills.

A modern author of credit impeaches the veracity of Pomponius Sabinus after he had previously quoted his authority, and likewise after he had said that he bore a good character, in a popular work, by charging him with improbability, nay, positive falsehood, and alleging that the Romans had no wind-mills. It should be noticed, without venturing to decide upon the point, that he has adduced no authority for such allegation, and that he only concludes so, by inference, as upon the authority of Vitruvius; that mechanist, he says, in enumerating all moving forces, does not mention wind-mills. But, for the sake of candour, was not the one as liable to err as the other? He also says, that neither Seneca nor St. Chrysostom mention wind-mills; and is unmercifully severe upon an old Bohemian annalist who speaks of wind-mills so early as 718. But he is all along bringing his forces to prove, that wind-mills had first existence in his own district, Germany; that they were then invented; and, perhaps, because he is of that country. It is somewhat remarkable that scarcely any invention of any consequence has occurred since that of printing, but the honour has been claimed by the natives of Germany.

Mabillon mentions a diploma of the year 1105, in which a convent in France is allowed to erect water and wind-mills, molendina ad ventum.

Bartolomeo Verde proposed to the Venetians in 1332, to build a wind-mill. When his plan had been examined, he had a piece of ground assigned him, which he was to retain if his undertaking succeeded within a specified time. In 1373, the city of Spires caused a wind-mill to be erected, and sent to the Netherlands for a person acquainted with the method of grinding by it. A wind-mill was also constructed at Frankfort, in 1442; but it does not appear to have been ascertained whether there were any there before.

About the twelfth century, in the pontificate of Gregory, when both wind and water-mills became more general, a dispute arose whether mills were titheable or not. The dispute existed for some time between the persons possessed of mills and the clergy; when neither would yield. At length, upon the matter being referred to the pope and sacred college, the question was, (as might have been expected when interested persons were made the arbitrators,) determined in favour of the claims of the church.

There was one inconvenience attending wind-mills, which might be obviated in other mills: the mill was useless unless the wind was in a particular direction. To remedy this, various modes were tried; at first, the mill was fixed on a floating body in the water, which might be turned to any wind. The next improvement consisted in turning the body of the mill to meet the direction of the wind; this was effected by two modes: first, the whole building is constructed in such a manner as to turn on a pivot below; this method is said to have been invented in Germany, and is called the German mode: second, the building is formed so as to turn on the roof, with the shafts supporting the sails only; this is called the Dutch mode, being invented by a Fleming about the middle of the sixteenth century. This is the mode principally adopted in England.

Although in the earliest ages of the world men might have been, perhaps, satisfied with having their corn reduced to a mealable form alone; yet after this had been with care effected, then they thought of improving upon this conveniency, and separating the farinaceous part from the bran and husks. This was certainly desirable; therefore they bolted it in a sieve with a long handle attached to it, with a hair, or fine lawn lining; this was common in this country till within the last sixty or eighty years; but by degrees, opportunities of improvement in the mechanism of mills suggested to some mechanic the idea of constructing what is now called bolting mills, applied to the mill for grinding, and wrought at the same time by appropriate machinery.

It appears that sieves of horse-hair were first used by the Gauls, then those of linen by the Spaniards. The mode of applying a sieve in the form of an extending bag to catch the meal as it fell from the stones, and of causing it to be turned and shaken, was first made known in the beginning of the sixteenth century.

The best bolting cloths are universally allowed to be manufactured in England; they are made of wool of the longest and the best kind, peculiarly prepared; being first well washed and spun to a fine and equal thread; which, before it be scoured, must be scalded in hot water to prevent its shrinking. The web must be then stiffened; it is in this we possess an advantage which others cannot attain. Our bolting cloth is stiffer, as well as much smoother, than any foreign manufacture. So jealous are our German neighbours of this, that they have established manufactories in several places at a great expense, and under very peculiar regulations, for its fabrication. After all, they are compelled to confess, that theirs will not wear above three weeks in a flour manufactory, whereas ours will continue well three months in equal exposure to friction and ordinary wear.

For some years past, the French have been extolled for a mode of grinding, called mouture economique; that were we not aware such had been practised in ancient Rome, it might be conceived to form an important epoch in the miller’s art. This process, however, is not new; it consists in first grinding the wheat not so fine as might be required for ordinary purposes; afterwards putting the meal several times through the mill, and sifting it with various sieves. It should seem this method was practised in ancient Rome; for Pliny, who took care to inform himself of most things, tells us, that in his time they had, at least, five different kinds of flour, all procured from the same corn. It appears, that the ancient Romans had advanced very far in this art, as well as in that of baking, &c., from what may be collected from its economical polity preserved by Pliny and others. Whence it may be fairly inferred, they knew how to prepare from corn more kinds of meal, and from meal more kinds of bread, than the moderns even now are acquainted with.

Pliny reckons that bread should be one-third heavier than the meal used for baking it: this proportion it appears, was known in Germany nearly a century and a half ago, and discovered from experiments on bread made at different times. German bakers, although they may have been occasionally mistaken, have always undoubtedly given more bread than meal. It appears that in latter periods, the art of grinding, as well as baking, has declined very much in Italy; and their bread, although produced from the finest grain in the world, is altogether bad when manufactured by Italians. On this account, bakers from Germany it seems, are generally employed in public baking-houses, as well at Rome as in Venice. Bakers of that people are generally settled at those places, where they have been in the habit of manufacturing that article for the principal inhabitants, for upwards of three hundred years.

From Beckmann’s History, it would appear that the mouture economique of the French has been known to the Germans for more than two hundred years. Many were the attempts, repeatedly enforced, to deter the experiments made, from time to time, by the French experimentalists, to perfect this article previous to its being accomplished. In this, the French suffered themselves to be taught by prejudice and directed by ignorance. Numerous and judicious were the experiments made by the scientific and philosophic of that people to produce the most in quantity and best in quality from a definite quantity of grain, at which the ignorant of their species suffered their prejudice to revolt, and the powerful readily come into the mode of thinking of the vulgar, to whom they lent their aid, to effect what Heaven in revelation had commanded, viz: “Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.” Mat. vii. 6.

It will, from the succeeding statement, that in using the language which has just appeared, circumstances sanctioned us. The clergy of the chapel royal, and parish church at Versailles, sent their wheat in the beginning of last century to be ground at an adjacent mill: according to custom, it was put through the mill only once, and the bran, which yet contained much flour, was sold for fattening cattle. This miller having, however, in process of time learnt the process of the mouture economique, purchased the bran from these ecclesiastics, and found that it yielded him as good flour as they had procured from the whole wheat. The miller, at length, is presumed, in a qualm of conscience, to have regretted cheating those holy men; he accordingly discovered to them the secret, and gave them afterwards fourteen bushels of flour from their wheat, instead of eight, which he had only furnished them before. This voluntary discovery of the miller was made in 1760; and it is probable the same discovery was made at the same time by others.

A baker, named Malisset, proposed to the lieutenant-general of the French police to teach a method by which people could grind their corn with more advantage; and experiments were accordingly made and succeeded. A mealman of Senlis, named Buquet, having the inspection of the mill belonging to the large hospital at Paris, made the same proposal: the result of his experiments, made under the direction of the magistrates, was printed. The investigation of this art was now taken up by men of learning and science, who gave it a suitable denomination; explained it, made experiments and calculations upon it, and at the same time recommended it so much, that the mouture economique engaged the attention of all magistrates throughout France. Its government sent Buquet to Lyons in 1764, to Bourdeaux in 1766, to Dijon in 1767, and to Mondidier in 1768. The benefit which France derived from that trouble, shows that it was not taken in vain. Previous to that period, a Paris setier yielded from eighty to ninety pounds of meal, and from one hundred and fifty to one hundred and sixty pounds of bran; but the same quantity now yields one hundred and eighty-five pounds, and according to the latest improvements, one hundred and ninety-five pounds of meal. In the time of St. Louis, from four to five setiers were reckoned necessary for the annual maintenance of a man; these were scarcely sufficient; as many were allowed to the patients in hospitals; and such were the calculations made in the sixteenth century. When the miller’s art was everywhere improved, the four setiers were reduced to three and a half, and from the latest improvements, they do not exceed two.

From mills which only force the farinaceous parts from the husk, thereby rounding the grain, the common denomination of barley mills comes, from such mills being used in the manufacture of pearl barley. In their construction, these mills differ but little from wheat-mills, and the machinery for the former is generally added to the latter. The grand specific distinction is, that the millstone is rough hewn round its circumference, and in the stead of a lower stone, there is generally a wooden case; the middle lined with a plate of iron, pierced like a grater with holes, the sharp edge of which turns upwards. The barley is thrown upon the stone, which, as it turns round, frees it from the husk, and rounds it; after which, it is put into sieves and sifted.

So long as the policy of governments was blind to the interests of men, and so long as the griping avarice of a few was permitted to lay the free-born of their species under the most severe contributions, so long were permitted to build mills only, who had obtained a regal license for that purpose. But, thank heaven! that ray of light it has lent generally to man, has, in some sort, illuminated even the minds of ministers and their tyrannical masters, to curtail that spirit which had cast the fetters of vassalage given by feudal tyranny to its upstart dependants. Men were left, at length, to improve their property according to their pleasure: since which period, more mills have been erected for the convenience of the species. This privilege, it appears, was not prohibited by the Roman laws; those irradiations of superior intellect well appreciated human rights. It was not till the darkness of the middle ages had obscured the mental hemisphere, that any person was presumed to possess a superiority over others, and to abridge the small portion of general happiness that the favoured of fortune might add to his satiety. During those days of universal darkness, numberless were the evils which men suffered, and among them the present object of our consideration was not the least; frequently having to travel for miles to a mill to procure the necessary manufacture of so essential an article to human life as bread.

Let us not be decoyed, however, by the resentment produced by the spirit of human oppression, beyond the bounds prescribed by reason, to inveigh against such ordinance when public and general utility ever was consulted; and certain public streams were by wise laws to be kept free from individual encroachments with impunity. It is not against the dictates of sober reason we declare hostility, but the gross abuse of power.

A time there was, when human baseness in princes and potentates, their vassals doubtless aping the manners of their masters, claimed as their right not only the common element of water, but also that of air! A curious incident related by Jargow, and detailed by Professor Beckmann, as follows, establishes the insolence of upstart men:—“In the end of the fourteenth century, the monks of the celebrated but long since destroyed monastery of Augustines, at Windshiem, in the province of Overyssel, were desirous of erecting a wind-mill not far from Zwoll; but a neighouring lord endeavoured to prevent them, declaring that the wind in that quarter belonged to him. The monks, unwilling to give up their point, had recourse to the Bishop of Utrecht, under whose jurisdiction the province had continued since the tenth century. The bishop, highly incensed against the pretender, who wished to usurp his authority, affirmed, that the wind of the whole province belonged only to him; and, in 1391, gave the convent express permission to build a wind-mill wherever they thought proper.”

Without the convenience of human ingenuity heaven had sent the blessing of life in vain; we have, under this impression, therefore, bestowed much time on this article, from a conviction of its vital importance to the necessities of human existence.

---

SAW-MILLS.

The invention of the plumb-line and saw, with other useful articles in mechanics, and handicrafts, are usually ascribed to that great—that universal genius—Dædalus: although others give the merit to one Talus, the nephew of Dædalus, and say, that the discovery was made under the following circumstances:—Talus, they tell us, having found the jaw-bone of a snake, cut a piece of wood in two with the teeth; thence, they say, he invented the saw; his maternal uncle and master, they add, was so jealous of this invention, that he murdered the young man; and the mode of the discovery of the murder is accounted for in this manner:—some persons saw Dædalus covering up the grave of his victim, and asked what he was doing? “Oh,” says he, “I am only burying a snake.” How much credit may be due to this relation, we do not take upon ourselves to determine. Pliny, as well as Seneca, were of the former opinion; whilst Diodorus Siculus, and others, hold the latter. The youth is named by some Perdix. However, it appears to rest between these two, no other claimant appearing. Ovid says, it was not the jaw of a snake, but the back-bone of a fish. The former, however, appears to be the most rational opinion as to its origin, as it is conjectured that the vertebræ would not be sufficiently strong, and the joints are too far apart, as well as too large.

The Grecian saw is said to have been much the same as that instrument which the moderns now use. This idea is corroborated by an ancient painting discovered in Herculaneum; likewise from an antique representation of this instrument, given by the celebrated Montfaucon.

The preceding observations, however, have relation to the subject of this article only, inasmuch as they are introductory to what follows.

The most beneficial and ingenious improvement that has been made in saws was the invention and introduction of machinery, called saw-mills, which, in woody countries, as well as for delicate and fine veneers, are of the greatest utility; in the former case, wood forms the chief article of commerce where labourers are scarce; in the latter, it may be cut nearly as thin as a sheet of paper. These saw-mills also finish flooring deals, grooved, dovetailed, and planed on both sides, at the rate of two deals, of twenty feet each, in a minute! They are commonly worked in this country by means of steam-engines; in woody countries they are generally erected on the banks of rivers, the water of which propels the machinery.

It is said they were invented in Germany, as far back as the fourth century, upon the smaller river Roer; for, although Ansonius speaks of water-mills, for cutting stone, he says nothing of mills to cut timber. The art of cutting marble with a saw is very ancient; Pliny thinks it was invented in Caria; at least, he knew of no place or building, incrusted with marble, older than the palace of King Mausolus, at Helicarnassus. Vitruvius also names the circumstances, although he uses different terms for expressions of the same sense. He commends the beauty of its marble, whilst Pliny speaks of its different kinds: the former viewed it as an architect, whilst the latter inspected it as a naturalist. It also does appear, from other writers, that the harder and precious kinds of stones were cut in the same manner; as Pliny speaks of a building adorned with agate, cornelian, lapis-lazuli, and amethysts. Yet there is no mention made of mills for cutting wood; or, admitting they had been invented, it is probable they shared the fate of many other useful inventions,—had been forgotten, or else some considerable modern improvement had been made in their construction.

Since the period of the first invention, they have been erected in various parts of Europe and America. There appears to have been one erected in the vicinity of Augsburg, as early as 1337; at Erlinger, in 1417.

Upon the discovery of the island of Madeira, in 1420, the Infanta Henry sent settlers there, and caused European fruits of every kind to be carried there; and amongst other productions, saw-mills and other machinery to cut the valuable timber found there into portable pieces, which were afterwards transported to Portugal. In 1724, the city of Breslau had a saw-mill which produced the yearly rent of three marks. In 1490, the magistrates of Erfurt purchased a forest, and built a mill of this description. In Norway, a country covered with wood, there was one built in 1530. This mode of manufacture was called the new art; and because the exportation of deals was by that means increased, a royal impost was introduced by Christian III. in 1545, called the deal-tythe. Soon after Henry Ranzau caused the first mill to be erected at Holstein. In the year 1555, the Bishop of Ely, being ambassador from the Princess Mary of England to the court of Rome, saw a saw-mill in the neighbourhood of Lyons: the writer of his travels thought it worthy of particular description:—“The saw-mill is driven by an upright wheel; and the water that makes it go is gathered whole into a narrow trough, which delivereth the same water to the wheels. This wheel hath a piece of timber put to the axle-tree end, like the handle of a brooch, and fastened to the end of the saw, which being turned with the force of the water, hoisteth up and down the saw, that it continually eateth in, and the handle of the same is kept in a rigall of wood from swerving. Also the timber lieth as it were upon a ladder, which is brought by little and little to the saw with another vice.” In the sixteenth century, there was a grand improvement made in this machine by having several saws affixed to one beam, by which timber could be cut into several planks or boards, and of any thickness, at the same time. There was one of these at Ratisbon, upon the Danube, in 1575.

In England saw-mills were at first received with as little encouragement as printing met with in Turkey, and from the same motive. When the attempt was made to introduce them it was said the sawyers would be deprived of bread. For this reason it was found necessary to abandon a saw-mill erected by a Dutchman, near London, in 1663. However, in the year 1700, a gentleman of the name of Houghton laid before the nation the advantages to be derived from them; but he expressed his apprehension that it might cause a commotion among the people. What he feared, actually came to pass; for, on the erection of one by a wealthy timber merchant, by the desire of the society for the promotion of arts, in 1767, to be propelled by the wind, under the direction of James Stansfield, who had learnt the method of constructing them in Holland and Norway, a foolish mob assembled and pulled it to pieces. Many years previous to this there had been a similar mill erected in Scotland. There is now hardly a town of any importance in the kingdom but what has one or more saw-mills in operation.

---

FORKS.

The fork is an article of every-day use amongst us, and on that account little thought of; still the short space we intend to occupy with this subject may, perhaps, convey a little information to many of our readers unknown to them before, or, at least, unthought of.

There is not the least room to suppose the ancients were at all acquainted with this little table utensil, now so necessary to our own comfort and convenience, to say nothing of our ideas of cleanliness. Pliny, who enumerated most things natural, physical, philosophical, and economical, makes no mention of them; nor does it occur in any other writer of antiquity; neither does Pollux speak of it in the very full catalogue which he has given of things necessary for a table.

Neither the Greeks or Romans had any name in the least applicable to its use, either direct or by inference, where it can be asserted that such an instrument was intended. The ancients had, it is true, in Greece, their creagra. In Rome, their furca, fuscina, furcilla, &c.: the Grecian instrument somewhat resembled a rake of an ordinary construction, and calculated for the purpose of taking meat out of a boiling pot, constructed in the shape of a hook, or rather the bent fingers of the hand.

With reference to the Roman names, the first two were undoubtedly applied to instruments which approached nearer to our furnace and hay forks.—The trident of Neptune is also called fuscina. The furcilla was large enough to be employed as a weapon of defence. The present Latin name for a fork, fusinula, is not to be found in any of the old Latin writers.

It is the opinion, we understand, of a learned Italian writer, that the ancient Romans used the instruments they called ligulæ, instead of forks. Now those instruments had some distant resemblance to our teaspoons. Hence we must conclude that they and our ancestors used no forks, because, had they had anything answering the purpose, even in effect, it must undoubtedly have had a name.

In the East, we understand it was, and still is, customary to dress their victuals until they become so tender as to be easily pulled in pieces. We are told by modern travellers, that if an animal be dressed before it has lost its natural warmth, it becomes tender and very savoury. This is the Oriental custom, and has been so from the most remote antiquity.

Fortunately, all articles of food were cut up in small pieces before they were served up at table; the necessity for which practice will appear, when we remember they usually took their meals in a recumbent posture upon beds. Originally, persons of rank kept an officer for the purpose of cutting the meat, who used a knife, the only one placed at table, which, in opulent families, had an ivory handle, and was ornamented with silver.

The bread was never cut at table; it needed it not, being usually baked thin, somewhat resembling the Passover cake of the Jews; this is not understood, however, to have been universal.

The Chinese use no forks; however, to supply them, they have small sticks of ivory, often of very fine workmanship, inlaid with silver and gold, which each guest employs to pick up the bits of meat, it being previously cut small. The invention of forks was not known till about two centuries ago in Europe, where people eat the same as they do now in Turkey.

In the New Testament we read of putting hands into the dish. Homer, as well as Ovid, mention the same custom.

In the quotation from the sacred writings, we observe that the guests had, it is presumed, no instrument to help themselves out of the common dish which contained the repast; for, upon the question being put of who was to betray the Saviour, the answer was given in the following quotation, “It is one of the twelve that dippeth with me in the dish.”

In the passage cited from Homer, the phrase, according to the Latin translation, implies the same sense. And had the Romans been apprised of the utility of this instrument, or in fact of any substitute, there could have been no occasion for the master of the amorous art to have given his instructions to his pupils in nearly similar terms which we now use to children.

Although Count Caylus and Grignon both assert that ancient forks have been found, we still want further testimony. The former says, one with two prongs was found among some rubbish in the Appian Way, which he alleges to be of beautiful workmanship, terminating in the handle with a carved stag’s foot. Notwithstanding the high reputation of that author, this assertion is not credited. The latter says, he found some in the ruins of a Roman town in Champagne; but he does not describe them, otherwise than to observe that one was of copper or brass, and the others of iron: and speaking of the latter, says, they appear to be table-forks, but are very coarsely made.

The truth seems to be that table-forks were first used in Italy, as appears from the book of Galeotus Martius, an Italian in the service of Matthias Corvinus, King of Hungary, who reigned from 1458 to 1490. Martius relates that at that period forks were not used at table in Hungary as in Italy; but that at meals each person laid hold of the meat with his fingers, and on that account they were much stained with saffron, usually put into sauces and soups. He praises the king for eating without a fork, conversing at the same time, and never dirtying his clothes.

In France, at the end of the sixteenth century, forks were quite unknown even at the court of the monarch. Neither at that period were they known in Sweden.

From the history of the travels of our countryman, Coryate, entitled “Crudities,” first published in 1611, and afterwards in 1776, the author says he first saw them in Italy, and he was also the first person who used them in England. As his account of them is curious, we may be excused giving an extract, slightly altering the orthography.

“Here I will mention a thing that might have been spoken of before in discourse of the first Italian town. I observed a custom in all those Italian cities and towns through which I passed, that is not used in any other country I saw in my travels; neither do I think that any other nation in Christendom doth use it, but only Italy. The Italian, and also most strangers that are commorant in Italy, do always at their meals, use a little fork when they cut their meat. For while with their knife, which they hold in one hand, they cut the meat out of the dish, they fasten the fork, which they hold in their other hand, upon the same dish; so that whatsoever he be that, sitting in the company of any others at meals, should unadvisedly touch the dish of meat with his fingers, from which all at the table do cut, he will give occasion of offence unto the company, as having transgressed the laws of good manners, insomuch that for his error he shall be at least brow-beaten if not reprehended in words. This form of feeding I understand is generally used in all places of Italy; their fork being for the most part made of iron or steel, and some of silver, but those are used only by gentlemen. The reason of this their curiosity is, because the Italian cannot by any means endure to have his dish touched with fingers—seeing all men’s fingers are not alike clean. Hereupon I myself thought good to imitate the Italian fashion by this forked cutting of meat, not only while I was in Italy, but also in Germany, and oftentime in England, since I came home, being once equipped for that frequent using of my fork by a certain learned gentleman, a familiar friend of mine, one Mr. Lawrence Whitaker, who in his merry humour doubted not to call one at table farsifer, only for using a fork at feeding, but for no other cause.”

In many parts of Spain, we understand that, at present, drinking-glasses, spoons, and forks are rarities. It is also said, that even in taverns in many countries, particularly in France, knives are not placed on the table, because it is expected that each person should have one of his own. This custom the modern French appear to have derived from their ancestors the ancient Gauls. But, as no person will eat any longer without forks, the landlords are obliged to furnish these, together with plates and spoons.

Among the Highlanders in Scotland, Dr. Johnson asserts, that knives have been introduced at table since the Revolution only. Before that period the men were accustomed to cut their meat with a knife they carry as a companion to their dirk. The men cut the meat into small morsels for the women, who used their fingers to put it into their mouths.

The use of forks at table was first considered as a superfluous luxury, and as such forbidden in convents, as appears from the records of the congregation of St. Maur.

---

MUSIC.

The science of music, or rather of harmony, is extremely ancient—insomuch that, with respect to the latter, it is said to be coeval with Nature herself. But as it has relation to the science now in use, this, like most other arts, whose origin is very remote, is involved in obscurity; and in proportion to the astonishment and wonder excited by its uncommon powers, in a commensurate ratio does mystery, fable, and obscurity envelope its original. However, always remembering that it was from harmony,—

—“from heavenly harmony, this universal frame began.”

Proceeding step by step, it had eventually attained in Greece a very early perfection. Collins, who is justly entitled to the distinguished station held by all pupils of nature and of the muses, who is peculiarly eminent for a just poetical spirit, thus speaks of the heavenly science in his Ode on the Passions—

“Arise, as in that elder time,
Warm, energetic, chaste, sublime;—
Thy wonders in that god-like age
Fill thy recording sisters’ page.—
’Tis said, and I believe the tale,
Thy humblest reed could more prevail,
Had more of strength, diviner rage
Than all that charms this laggard age,
Even all at once together found
Cecilia’s mingled world of sound.”

It will be remembered, however, that the poet calculated as much upon the infant simplicity of nature as upon the uncommon powers of harmony; this consideration will certainly reconcile the apparent extravagance of the thought.

So great were the early powers of verse and harmony, that at one period the votaries of the muses were regarded as persons divinely inspired; they were the priests of man, his legislators, and his prophets. Insomuch was the possessor of the art, and the art itself reverenced, that the responses of the most eminent oracles were received in measured verse. Witness the response of the Delphian oracle received by the Athenian deputation, when Greece inquired for her wisest men, as given by Xenophon:—

“Wise is Sophocles, more wise Euripides,
But the wisest of all men is Socrates.”

Music eventually claimed the most unlimited control over the affections of mankind, as could be proved by an infinity of instances; we shall mention one only from a well authenticated fact, and finely illustrated in that of Timotheus from “Alexander’s Feast,” by Dryden. We omit the hyperbolic representation of the raising of the walls of Thebes by the power of Amphion’s lute, and the apparently incredible relations of the harmony of the harp of Orpheus, which are all personifications of natural effects, and which we have neither room, time, nor opportunity to explain in this place.

If its origin was as previously suggested by Collins, there is occasion to believe the shepherd’s simple life afforded it first existence; in the native and wild notes of the pastoral reed, may be discovered the germ of a science as various as its effects are beautiful. We shall for the present presume the simple Pandean pipe was the first effort of the construction of musical instruments; its soft tone being analogous to the dulcet harmony of the voice. We are led to suppose this from the evidence of ancient statuary, where those pipes are frequently discovered; and this will, perhaps, deduce its origin from the invention of the shepherd god, or oldest Pan. Nevertheless, the lyre, or harp, is alleged from records the most ancient, having at first but three strings, analogous to the three seasons of the primeval year; the treble typical of spring, the tenor resembling summer, and the bass representing winter.

The invention of that instrument, and of music altogether, is claimed in the pagan world by Amphion, a successor of Cadmus, the first king of Thebes, in Bœtia, who is reported, by the music of his harp or lyre to have built the walls of the city; Cadmus having erected the citadel only.

Flutes were first invented by Hyognis, the Phrygian, about the year 1506 before Christ, and first played on the flute the harmony, called Phrygian, and other tunes of the mother of the gods, of Dionysius, of Pan, and of the divinities of the country and the heroes. Terpander also, who was the son of Derdineus, the Lesbian, directed the flute players to reform the tunes of the ancients, and changed the old music, about the year 645 before Christ, as we are informed by the Parian Chronicle. The same Terpander, likewise, added three more strings to the lyre.

When Timotheus, the Spartan musician, was banished his native country for having increased his strings to the number of ten, he sought refuge at the court of Macedon, and accompanied his patron, Alexander, into Persia, when that prince conquered Darius.

From the sacred records of Judea, we may also infer the invention of musical instruments at a date long prior to either of the periods above mentioned, when they inform us in Genesis iv. 21, that Adah, one of the wives of Lamech, had two sons, the name of one of whom was Jubal, who is said to have been “the father of all such who handle the harp and organ.” This infers the anterior invention of that instrument.

Music consists of effects produced by the operation of certain sounds proceeding from the dulcet voice, or musical instruments, regulated by certain time, and a succession of harmonious notes, natural, grave, or flat, i. e., half a note below its proper tone; and acute or sharp, i. e., half a note above its proper key; and of such modulation of various tones, and of different value, and also of manifold denominations: the natural tones consisting of eight notes, with the addition of octaves, in various keys, with flats and sharps introduced to afford variety from the skill of the master, at different periods, to produce the most agreeable diversity in his composition; and sometimes according to the subject or words to which his music is adapted. Those musical notes, though proceeding from so small a number of radicals, are analogous to the incalculable, the endless forms, which orthography and rhetoric can afford to a well-informed orator, or elegant author, to embellish any subject. Thus from the definite number of twenty-four notes, varied in different degrees, by sharps, flats, semi-tones, &c., are produced all that is so magical, enthusiastic, and transporting in the empire of omnipotent music. Like as the alphabetic characters may be varied into myriads of forms suitable to every multifarious species of conversation or composition; in a word, a few musical notes in the hands of a master may be made by his skill to produce, from agreeable interchanges of time, harmony, &c., every variety of musical sentiment which can affect the human soul. A stronger proof cannot be adduced than will be found in the before-cited ode of “Alexander’s Feast,” by the truly poetic Dryden. In all which harmony and melody form conspicuous characteristics.

And of harmony, according to the learned Mr. Mason. The sense in which the ancient Greeks viewed harmony is as follows:—“They by that term understood the succession of simple sounds according to their scale, with respect to acuteness or gravity.” Whilst it appears that by harmony, the moderns understand—“The succession of simple sounds, according to the laws of counterpoints.” From the same authority—“By melody, the ancients understood the succession of simple sounds, according to the laws of rhythm and metre, or in other words, according to time, measure, or cadence. Whereas, the moderns understand by the same term what the ancients meant by harmony, rhythm and metre being excluded.” “And the modern air is what the ancients understood by melody.” Hence, from the preceding definitions, it appears that what is now called harmony was unknown to the ancients; and they viewed that term as we now see simple melody, when we speak of it as a thing distinguished from simple modulated air, and that their term, melody, was applied to what we now call air or song.

Should this be true, the long-contested difficulty, and that train of endless disputes, which has existed among the learned and scientific world so long, will instantly vanish. Should we suppose an ancient flute-player used an improper tone or semi-tone, or had he transgressed the mode or key in which he was playing, he committed an error in harmony; yet his melody might have been perfect, with respect to the laws of rhythm or metre; we should say of a modern musician, under similar circumstances, that he played wrong notes, or was out of tune, yet kept his time. Whoever made such a distinction would be allowed to possess a good ear for music, though the moderns would be inclined to call it an ear for melody or intonation. By the rules of musical conversation, we should be justified when we call an instrument out of tune inharmonious, although the intervals were nearly right.

By harmonica, the Greeks implied nothing more than that proportion of sound to sound, which mathematicians call ratio, or which would be understood in general musical conversation, by an agreeable succession of musical notes;—as ancient harmony consisted of the succession of simple sounds, so does modern harmony consist of the succession of chords.

Whether the diatonic scale be the effect of nature, or produced by art, has occasioned disputation between many; but without losing time or space, we are, we think, authorised, from general opinion, to observe, that compositions formed on it, and on the plan recommended by a lute organist, would produce sensations odiously disgusting to any musical ear.

The diatonic is the most simple genera in music, consisting of tones and major semi-tones; in the scale of which genus the smallest interval is a conjoint degree, which changes its name and place, that is, passing from one to another; a prominent air in this species of modern music is “God save the Queen,” entirely diatonic, without modulation, by the intervention of a single flat or sharp.

It may not be unacceptable to our readers to add a few particulars of one of the greatest composers that ever existed; we allude to the eminently illustrious George Frederick Handel, a name dear to science, and entitled to the grateful veneration of every amateur in this divine art. He was born at Halle, in Upper Saxony, on the 24th of February 1684. Scarcely was he able to speak, before he articulated musical sounds. His father was a professor of the healing art as a surgeon and physician, then upwards of sixty, who intended his son for the study of the law. Grieved at the child’s predeliction, he banished all musical instruments from his house. But the spark which nature had kindled in his bosom was not to be extinguished by the mistaken views of a blind parent. The child by some means or other contrived to get a little claverchord into a garret, where, applying himself after the family had retired to rest, he discovered means to produce both melody and harmony. Before he was seven years of age, the Duke of Weissenfells by accident discovered his genius, and prevailed on his father to cherish his inclination. He was accordingly placed with Zachan, organist of the cathedral of Halle; when, from nine to twelve years of age, he composed a church service every week. Losing his father whilst he was in that city, he thought he could best support his mother by repairing to Hamburgh, where he soon attracted general notice. This wonder of the age was then only fourteen, when he composed “Almeria,” his first opera. Having quitted Hamburgh, he travelled for six years in Italy, where, at both Florence and Rome, he excited much attention: at both which places he produced new operatic performances. In that clime of the harmonious muse, he was introduced to, and cultivated the friendship of, Dominico, Scarlatti, Gaspurini, and Zotti, with other eminent scientific characters. He was particularly caressed and patronised by Cardinal Ottoboni, in whose circle he became acquainted with the elegant and natural Corelli. It was here he composed the sonata “Il trionfo del tempo,” the original score of which is now in the Royal Collection. After which he went to Naples, where he set “Acis et Galatea,” in Italian, to music. Returning to Germany, he was patronised by the Elector of Hanover, subsequently George the First. In 1710 he visited London, by permission of his patron, who had settled a pension of £200 per annum on him. In London he produced the opera of “Rinaldo,” universally admired—equal with all his other productions that had preceded. He was compelled to leave, however reluctantly, the British shore, consistent with his engagement to his patron the Elector. He departed, not without exciting general regret, two years after his first arrival in this country. He soon appeared here again, however, and his return was welcomed like the rising of the genial orb of day before the wrapt Ignicolist! But now seduced by the favour which awaited him, he forgot to return. On the death of Queen Anne, who had also settled an annual pension of £200 upon him—equal to what he received from the Elector, his former patron—when that prince ascended the throne, Handel was afraid to appear before his majesty, till, by an ingenious contrivance of Baron Kilmarfyge, he was restored to favour, Queen Anne’s bounty being doubled by the king; and the chief nobility accepted an academy of music under Handel’s direction, which flourished for ten years, till an unfortunate quarrel occurred between him and Senesino, which dissolved the institution, and brought on a contest ruinous to the fortune and the health of our musician.

He was particularly patronised by the Earl of Burlington, the Duke of Chandos, and most of the distinguished nobility of Great Britain.

Having restored his health at the baths of Aix-la-Chapelle, he for the future chose sacred subjects, which were performed at his theatre in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, Covent Garden, and Westminster Abbey. He died in April, 1759, aged seventy-five, and was buried in Westminster Abbey, where he was honoured with a public funeral, six peers supporting the pall; the very reverend and truly learned translator of “Longimus,” Dr. Pearce, the Dean, and then Bishop of Rochester, performed the funeral service with a full choir.

He had been a great benefactor to numerous public charities. The funds of the Foundling Hospital were improved through him with the amazing sum of £10,299. The organ in its chapel, and the MS. score of his “Messiah,” were a present and a donation to the foundation from him. He left an amiable private as well as a good public character behind him.

His character as a composer is too well appreciated by the British public to require any remarks from our feeble and inharmonious pen.

---

SEALING-WAX, SEALS, &c.

Besides metals, five other mediums are enumerated by ancient writers, wherewith letters and public acts were sealed, viz., terra sigillaris, cement, paste, common wax and sealing-wax. That the terra sigillaris was used by the Egyptians, we have the evidence of Herodotus, and which, by inference, is strengthened by that of Moses who speaks of seal-rings or signets, whence we may safely infer, that they had a medium of some sort, wherewith they sealed. This lacuna Herodotus supplies, affirming it in direct terms, and assigning a name to the substance they used for that purpose.

This circumstance was only rendered questionable by Pliny, who alleges the Egyptians did not use those things.

Herodotus thus expresses himself: “The Egyptian priest bound to the horns of cattle fit for sacrifice pieces of papyrus with sealing-earth, on which they made an impression with the seal; and such cattle could only be offered up as victims.”

Lucian speaks of a fortune-teller who ordered those who came to consult him, to write down on a bit of paper the questions they wished to ask, to fold it up, and seal it with clay, or any other substance of a like kind.

Such earth appears to have been employed in sealing, by the Byzantyne emperors; for we are told that, at the second Nicene Council, image worship was defended by one saying, “No one believed that those who received written orders from the Emperor, and venerated the seal, worshipped on that account the sealing-earth, the paper, or the lead.”

Cicero relates that Verres, having seen in the hands of his servants a letter written to his son from Agrimentum, and observing on it an impression in sealing-earth, he was so pleased with it that he caused the seal-ring with which it was made to be taken from the possessor.

Also, the same orator, in his defence of Flaccus, produced an attestation sent from Asia, and proved its authenticity by its being sealed with Asiatic sealing-earth; with which, he told the judges, all public and private letters in Asia were sealed: and he showed on the other hand, that the testimony brought by the accuser was false, because it was sealed with wax, and for that reason could not have come from Asia. The scholiast Servius relates, that a sybil received a promise from Apollo, that she should live as long as she did not see the earth of the island of the Erythræa, where she resided; that she therefore quitted the place, and retired to Cumae, where she became old and decrepid; but that having received a letter sealed with Erythræn earth, when she saw the seal, she instantly expired.

No one, however, will suppose that this earth was used without preparation, as was that to which is given the name of creta chalk; for, if it was of a natural kind, it must have been of that kind called potter’s clay, as that clay is susceptible of receiving an impression, and of retaining it subsequent to hardening by drying. It is believed that the Romans, under the indefinite term creta, often understood to be a kind of potter’s earth, which can be proved by many passages in their numerous writers. Columella speaks of a species of chalk of which wine-jars and dishes were made, of which kind it is conjectured Virgil speaks when he calls it adhesive. The ancient writers on agriculture give precisely the same name to marl, which was employed to manure land: now, both chalk and marl, in their natural state, are extremely inapplicable to the purpose for which we are led to believe the terra sigillaris was used; therefore, admitting the Roman creta was composed of them, those substances must naturally have undergone some laborious process, in order to render them proper for the purpose to which they were applied.

Notwithstanding none can feel a higher respect for Professor Beckmann, to whom we are indebted for many of the preceding observations, than we do, yet strongly as we are influenced with this impression, we cannot help observing, consistent with that duty we owe to the public, that we cannot divest ourselves of the opinion that he is only trifling with the public feeling, perhaps for the ostentatious display of his own learning: so many objections of so little weight are raised, that he really appears to write for the purpose of raising new objections to passages, which, in our comprehension, are extremely simple. We cannot help applying to him a passage which occurs in a song of the Swan of Twickenham, who sings:—

“Gnawed his pen, then dashed it on the ground,
Striking from thought to thought, a vast profound.
Plunged for the sense, but found no bottom there,
Yet wrote, and floundered on in mere despair.”

We would not be illiberal or capricious, nor do we presume to any extra portion of intelligence; yet, we think we can in a few words discuss the topic, and perhaps, satisfactorily, on which he has employed so many pages. Those terms which have troubled the professor with learned difficulties really appear to us susceptible of an easy interpretation, and applicable to both or either of the senses in which they are used, as are any words in the language of ancient Rome. Accordingly, we find the term creta implies either chalk, fuller’s clay, loam, white paint, or Asiatic earth, termed creta Asiatica; and, in brief it appears a mere generic name for any kind of earth, raised from below the surface of the soil: this is its true sense. But there cannot be a question, from what is known of the preparation of clay and earth for terra cotta and other plastic purposes, which undergo a variety of washings, kneadings, &c., that similar preparations were requisite, in order to bring it to so curious, so delicate a purpose as that to which the terra sagillaris was applied. And fosse, in the sense used by Varre, admits of nearly a similar description, it appearing as a pronomen for the same thing; and indicates either peat, marl, loam, chalk, or any earthy substance which may be raised from below the terrestrial surface.

We have evidence every day in our fruit shops, that in certain countries this kind of earth is yet employed for closing up jars of dried fruits brought from Oporto, Smyrna, and other countries; as these appear to be composed of white chalk of a texture somewhat similar to common mortar. The warmth of the atmosphere, where it is used, soon hardens and prevents the passage of air to the contents; the jars themselves being oftentimes only dried in the sun.

Thus it appears that prepared earths were first used for the purpose of sealing; their adhesive, or, as Virgil has it, their tenacious qualities, being wonderfully improved for manual labour. Next, paste was employed, prepared from dough.

To paste succeeded common wax, sometimes slightly tinctured with a green tint, the effect of endeavouring to give it a blue colour, as vegetable blues turn green by the process of heat employed in melting; whilst mineral or earthy blues all sink to the bottom, from superior gravity. This was the material employed in sealing public acts in England, as early as the fifteenth century. We have an anecdote of the Duke of Lancaster having no seal to ratify a deed between him and the Duke of Burgoyne, but from what appears in the attestation, which, with the instrument itself, according to the general custom of the day, runs in rhyme thus:

“I, John of Gaunt,
Doe gyve and do graunt,
To John of Burgoyne
And the heire of his loyne
Sutton and Putton
Untill the world’s rotten.”

The attestation runs thus:

“There being no seal within the roof,
In sooth, I seal it wyth my tooth.”

A good example is this of the simple brevity of the time, and a severe lecture upon the eternal repetitions of our modern lawyers, whereby the limitations and special uses of deeds are made, perhaps, not according to the necessities of the case, but are lengthened from selfish purposes.

The Great Charter, which gives an assurance of the rights of Englishmen, is sealed with white wax; as may be seen in the British Museum.

The first arms used as a seal in England, were those of the tyrannical subjugator of English rights, William, commonly called the Conqueror, and they were brought from Normandy.

Although Fenn, in his collection of original Letters of the last half of the fifteenth century, published in London, 1787, has given the size and shape of the seals, he does not apprise us of what substance they were composed. Respecting a letter of 1455, he says only, that “the seal is of red wax,” by which, it is presumed, he means common wax; and though, perhaps not equal in quality to such as is now used, yet it was made of nearly similar materials. Tavernier, in his Travels, says, that in Surat gum-lac is melted and formed into sticks, like sealing-wax. Wecker also gives directions to make an impression with calcined gypsum and a solution of gum or isinglass. Porta, likewise, knew that this might be done, and, perhaps, to greater perfection with amalgam of quicksilver.

Among the records of the Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel, are some letters of 1563, sealed with red and black wax. In the family of the Rhingrave, Philip Francis von Daun, the oldest letter sealed with wax, known in Germany, is found, of the date of August 3, 1554; it was written from London, by an agent of that family, of the name of Gerrard Herman. The colour of the wax is dark red, and very shining.

The oldest recipe known in Germany for making sealing-wax, was found by M. Von Murr, in a work by Samuel Zimmerman, citizen of Augsburg, published in 1759. The copy in the library of the university of Gottingen is signed by the author himself.—“To make hard sealing-wax, called Spanish wax, with which, if letters be sealed, they cannot be opened without breaking the seal; take beautiful clear resin, the whitest you can procure, and melt it over a slow coal fire. When it is properly melted, take it from the fire, and for every pound of resin, add two ounces of cinnabar, pounded very fine, stirring it about. Then let the whole cool, or pour it into cold water. Thus you will have beautiful red sealing-wax.

“If you are desirous of having black wax, add lamp-black to it. With smalt or azure, you may make blue: with white-lead, white; and with orpiment, yellow.

“If, instead of resin, you melt purified turpentine in a glass vessel, and give it any colour you choose, you will have a harder kind of sealing-wax, and not so brittle as the former.”

It may be remarked, that in these recipes for the fabrication of sealing-wax there is no mention of gum-lac, which is known at present as a chief ingredient in the composition of this article.

Zimmerman’s sealing-wax approaches very near to the quality of that known as maltha, whence we may conclude, that the manufacture of it did not originally come from the East Indies. The most ancient mention of sealing-wax occurs in a botanical work, treating of the history of aromatics and simples, by Garcia ab Horto, published at Antwerp in 1563, where the author, speaking of gum-lac says, that those sticks used for sealing letters are made of it; at which time sealing-wax was common among the Portuguese, and has since been manufactured chiefly in Holland.

M. Spiess, principal keeper of the Records at Plessenberg, says, respecting the antiquity of Wafers, in Germany, that the most ancient use of them he has known, occurs in a letter written by D. Krapf, at Spires, in 1624, to the government of Bayreuth.—The same authority informs us that some years after, the Brandenburg factor at Nuremberg sent such wafers to a bailiff, at Osternohe. During the whole of the seventeenth century, wafers were not used in the Chancery at Brandenburg, and only by private persons there.

Seals, it appears, from certain passages of Egyptian history, parallel with, and perhaps anterior to the Israelitish ingress, were formed or cut in emeralds, the native produce of that country. Other precious stones, metals, steel, lead, and a variety of materials, but chiefly of a hard and precious kind, have been always employed for that purpose.

---

BLACK-LEAD PENCILS.

The period when this semi-metallic substance was introduced, for the purpose for which it is now applied, cannot with certainty be ascertained, as no record is found of the transaction: by the common expedient of inference, however, we certainly may conclude, it was in very remote ages; for transcribers of MSS. upwards of one thousand years ago, used a substance somewhat resembling it in effect.

But, perhaps, the antiquity of the use of black-lead pencils cannot be so well determined from diplomatiques, as their frequency might be proved from mineralogical writers. The first mention of this discovery occurs in the works of Gesner, who, in his “Book of Fossils,” published in 1565, says that the British people had pencils for writing, with wooden-handles inclosing a piece of lead, which he believed to be an artificial composition; and it was called stimmi Anglicanum; which seems to import that it was a British production; and we should consider, from the name of British antimony being given to it, that it might have been Cumberland black-lead.

About thirty years afterwards, Cæsalpinus gave a more perfect account of it:—he says it was a lead-coloured, shining stone, as smooth as glass, and appeared as if rubbed over with oil; it gave to the fingers an ash-grey tint, with a plumbeous brightness; and, he adds, pointed pencils were made of it, for the use of painters and draughtsmen. A closer description of the substance than this cannot be discovered.

Somewhere about three years afterwards, a still more perfect description was furnished by Imperatis; who says, “It is much more convenient for drawing than pen and ink, because the marks made with it appear distinct upon a white ground, also, in consequence of its brightness, show themselves on black, and can be preserved or rubbed out at pleasure. This mineral is smooth, appears greasy to the touch, and has a leaden-colour, which it communicates with a metallic brightness. It can resist, for a long time, the strongest fire, and even from it requires more hardness; it has, in consequence, been thought to be a species of talc. This, in the arts to which it is applied, is a property which greatly enhanceth its value, being manufactured into crucibles, &c., with clay. These vessels are capable of enduring the strongest heat of a chemical furnace.”

Sometimes this lead is foliaceous, and may be crumbled into small pieces or scales; but frequently found denser and more strong. This latter is what writing pencils should be made of; but the former being more frequently found, and, also, coming from the refuse of the workmen, is too often mixed up with some glutinous substance, and there is every reason to suppose it to be enclosed in the groove in a plastic state; these pencils are commonly hawked about our streets by pedlars and Jews; of purchasing which people should be cautious, as they are, in general, utterly worthless.

Robinson, in his Essay towards a natural History of Westmoreland and Cumberland states, that, at first, the country people round Keswick marked their sheep with black-lead. Afterwards, they discovered the art of employing it in their earthenware, and also to preserve iron from rust. The same writer says, the Dutch use it in dyeing, to render black more durable; and that they buy it in large quantities for that purpose. But their application of it for dyeing, we should consider as highly questionable.

The mode of eradicating black-lead by means of an elastic gum, called caoutchouc, or, Indian-rubber, was, we have been informed, first discovered in England somewhere about sixty years ago.

---

COLOURED GLASS.

The manufacture of glass we find was quite common in Ethiopia, Syria, Assyria, and other Eastern countries, in the earliest ages of the world, as Diodorus Siculus informs us, who says, the Ethiopians enclosed in glass, the bodies of their parents and friends; we doubt, however, that on this point, the historian was deceived. But it really appears probable that soon after the art of making glass was discovered, the idea of communicating to it some colours would easily present itself. This probability appears increased, when it is recollected that much care is requisite to render glass perfectly colourless. As the various metallic particles with which stone and sand abound, (these being the chief ingredients of which glass is composed, and which gradually give tints in fusion,) will almost unavoidably communicate some hue or other, therefore the perfection of glass is to have it perfectly colourless.

But with respect to coloured glass; so frequently have people been imposed upon by having coloured glass sold to them for valuable stones, that some conscientious authors have very laudably and carefully abstained from lending the benefit of instruction in its manufacture, by publishing the method.

The Egyptian artists were so famous in the manufacture of glass, that the Romans were content to receive this article from the glass-houses in Alexandria, and did not interfere in endeavouring to procure the art themselves, until the latter part of the empire.

We read that an Egyptian priest made a present to the Emperor Adrian of several beautiful glass cups, which sparkled with many colours; and such value did that august personage place upon these toys, that he ordered them to be used only on high feasts and solemnities.

Strabo relates, that a glass manufacturer of Alexandria informed him that an earth was found in Egypt, without which the valuable coloured glass could not be made. It has been thought by some, the glass earth here meant was a mineral alkali which was readily found in Egypt, serving to make glass; but this author speaking expressly of coloured glass, it has been suggested as probable, the alkali above named could not have reference to what the artisan intended to imply, but that it must be referred to some metallic earth or manganese.

One Democritus is named by Seneca, as having discovered an art of making artificial emeralds; but it has been conjectured that what the philosopher meant was the art of communicating colour to natural rock crystal, or colouring glass already made, so as to resemble stones, which is a process performed by cementation. Directions have been furnished for this purpose by Porta, Neri, and others; but it is discovered that the articles so coloured are liable to such accidents in the process, that it is next to impossible to render things of any size tolerably perfect, so as to bear cutting afterwards.

In the Museum Victorium at Rome, there are shown a chrysolite and an emerald, both perfectly well executed, and thoroughly transparent, without a blemish.

We have not from the ancients an account of what process they employed; but it must be evident that nothing less than metallic calces could have been used; and for this evident reason, that any other substance could not have resisted the influence of the necessary heat. The last century has, however, produced certain artists in northern European nations, who have adopted a method of employing the precious metals, to communicate a tincture to glass in the process of making, where iron, &c. were originally only used; and their endeavours have been attended with singular success.

By means of an amalgam of gold, or a solution in aqua regia, and precipitated with a solution of tin, the metal then assuming the appearance of a rich purple coloured powder; so prepared, it is mixed with the best frit, and then called the precipitate or gold calx of Cassius, the inventor of gold purple, or mineral purple.

This precipitate communicates a rich ruby coloured purple, so perfect that it is impossible to discover the deception, without the substances be tried by the usual means—cut with a diamond or a prepared file.

We have had in England some very eminent artists in the practice of staining glass, and also for making artificial representations of various precious stones.

Although the professed object of alchemy has now met with that contempt it merited—because, notwithstanding the immense sums which have been expended, the time lost, and unprofitable labour employed in the unavailing search after what probably never will be found—yet the labour lost and money expended has not been totally useless, since it has served to open the seals which secured chemical science to the modern world; and which is the chief, if not the sole advantage it can claim over antiquity for superiority of information.

Painting on glass, but, perhaps, staining had been a more appropriate expression, or, properly speaking, in enamel, with the preparations for colouring in mosaic work, may, to a certain extent, be justly considered as branches of the art of colouring glass; in all which there is no colour more difficult to be attained than a beautiful red; it now is, and ever has been, most difficult, consequently the dearest colour. The presumed ignorance of ancient artists in preparing this colour has afforded some reason, it is said, to suppose the ancients knew of no other substance proper for that purpose but calx of iron, or manganese. To this we may reply, many specimens are found which show they were not so ignorant in that art, and that it is more than probable the same jealousy which is found to exist in modern days among artizans might prevent our sagacious predecessors from publishing the secrets of their respective professions to the world. We contend, that as the materials must then have had existence, which have been since so successfully employed, pray what was the reason the ancients should not avail themselves of their benefit? In all the higher speculations of science and arts, where the great and superior energies of genius were requisite, this perfection in the ancients far surpassed any exertions which have been since achieved by the moderns. To instance one artist and one art solely, we name the great Praxiteles, so famous in the art of statuary, whose works were a model of perfection.

---

ETCHING ON GLASS AND GLASS CUTTING.

Without entering into the history of the lapidary’s art, we only propose to speak of those things which ancient and modern authors have said upon the art of engraving on glass, observing, that it was an art anciently known to both the Greeks and Romans; although it appears extremely probable, that from their expressed ignorance of many of those properties which modern chemistry has discovered to belong to matter, they were ignorant of the art of etching on glass.

From antique specimens still preserved, a doubt cannot for a moment be suffered to exist on our minds, but that the art of engraving upon glass was familiar to the Greek artists, who formed upon glass both linear figures, and in relievo, by the same means as are now employed for nearly the same purpose, if we can place any confidence in an able and learned lapidary, Natter, who has established, that the ancients employed the same kind of instruments for this purpose, or nearly such as are now in use; abating, perhaps the use of diamonds, and the dust of that precious material, for which it is conceived they used emery powder, and the dust of glass.

From what is related by Pliny, it certainly appears that they used the lapidary’s wheel, an instrument moving in a horizontal direction over the work-table.

Some have thought that drinking cups and vessels may have been formed from the glass whilst in a state of fusion, by means of this wheel; to this they think those words of Martial refer, where he says, calices audaces, having reference to the boldness of the artisan’s touch; those vessels he was constructing often broke under the last touch he bestowed upon his transparent labours, although, perhaps, of costly value; these accidents must of necessity have rendered those articles extremely expensive.

There are not wanting many who affirm the art of glass-cutting, with the instruments necessary for that operation, to be of modern invention. Those assign it to the ingenuity of Caspar Lehmann, originally an engraver on iron and steel, and who, as Beckmann informs us, made an attempt, which succeeded, in cutting crystal, and afterwards glass in the same manner. This artist, we are told, was in the service of Rodolphus, the second emperor of that name, who, in the year 1609, besides giving him valuable presents, conferred on him the title of lapidary and glass-cutter to his court, and gave him a patent, allowing him the exclusive privilege of exercising this new art. He worked at Prague, where he had an assistant of the name of Zacharias Belzer; but George Schwanhard, one of his pupils, carried on the business to a much larger extent. The last named was a son of Hans Schwanhard, a joiner at Rothenburg, and was born in 1601; at the age of seventeen he went to Prague, to learn the art of cutting glass from Lehmann. His good behaviour won so much upon the affections of his master, that on his death in the year 1622, he left him his heir. Schwanhard succeeded in obtaining a continuation of the patent from the emperor, and removed to Nuremburg, where he wrought for many of the nobility of that district. This was, we believe, the occasion of that city claiming the honour of being the birth-place of this new art. In the year 1652, he worked at Prague, and also at Ratisbon, by command of the Emperor Ferdinand III.; and he died in 1676. He left two sons, who both followed the lucrative employment of their father. Afterwards Nuremburg produced many expert masters in the art, who, from the improvement in the tools, and also from discovering more economical modes of using them, were enabled to execute the orders of the public at a more moderate rate than had been previously charged for some articles. Those latter masters likewise brought this art to a much greater degree of perfection. Notwithstanding Zahn was of the same country, and must have been apprised of the facts previously stated, yet he mentions it as a very recent invention at Nuremberg, at the time he published his “Oculus Artificial.” He also furnishes a plate, giving at the same time a description of the various instruments employed. However, that this invention is not purely novel, may be perceived from those facts we have already submitted.

It should be stated that before this latter re-introduction, artists used, with a diamond, to cut figures upon glass in almost every form, as far as the representation by lines went. The history of diamonds has been presented to the public by Mr. Mawe, in his observations on the diamond districts of Brazil. It appears to be yet undetermined whether the ancients used that stone for the purpose of cutting others; upon this point Pliny appears to be satisfied that they did.

Solinus and Isidore both express themselves in a manner the reverse. But although this may leave us in some doubt, it appears pretty clear that they did not attempt to cut that valuable production with its own dust, or to give it different faces, or render it more brilliant by the same means. If this point was settled, there could be no great difficulty in affirming or negativing the fact of their engraving upon that stone. Thus doubts appear to increase on this head, for Mariette denies that they did; Natter appears uncertain; and Klotz asserts with confidence it was certain. His authority, to be sure, has been considered not to be of much weight.

The proper question, however, appears to be, whether the Greeks and Romans used diamonds for cutting and engraving other stones or glass. Natter, in his work already noticed, thinks they were employed on some antique engravings. His authority is deserving respect. But if they were employed on other stones, the authority which at present directs us, confidently alleges they did not employ them in cutting glass; but he points out the mode in which that article was wont to be divided, in the following terms: “They used for that purpose emery, sharp-pointed instruments of the hardest steel, and a red-hot iron, by which they directed the rents at their pleasure.”

The first mention which appears to occur of the use of the diamond for this purpose, is recorded of Francis I. of France, who, fond of the arts, sciences, and new inventions, wrote a couple of lines with a diamond, on a pane of glass in the Castle of Chambord, to let Anne de Pisseleu, Duchess of Estampes, know that he was jealous.

About 1652, festoons and other ornaments, cut with a diamond, were made on Venetian glasses; then considered the best. Schwanhard was a professed adept in that art; and since his time an artist of the name of John Rost, of Augsburg, cut some drinking glasses, which were purchased by the Emperor Charles VI., at an extravagant price.