FOOTNOTES

[1] Instruments surviving from 18th-century America are almost exclusively of European origin, products of the numerous and famous shops which sprang up, particularly in England and France, to meet the demand occasioned by the popularity of the telescope among amateurs and dilettanti.

[2] U.S. National Museum catalog nos. 152078 and 152079.

[3] W. I. Milham, Early American Observatories, Williamstown, Mass., Williams College, 1938.

[4] Mechanics Magazine, 1830, vol. 13, pp. 114-115 and frontispiece.

[5] See p. 184 for a list of Holcomb’s instruments in the U.S. National Museum.

[6] H. C. King, The History of the Telescope, London, Charles Griffin, 1955, pp. 246-248. Milham op. cit. (footnote 3), p. 10.

[7] As reported in the Journal of the Franklin Institute for July 1834, new ser. vol 14 (whole no. 18), pp. 169-172; July 1835, new ser. vol. 16 (whole no. 20), pp. 11-13; and August 1836, new ser. vol. 18 (whole no. 22), p. 110. The first two of these are given in the appendix, pp. 181-184.

[8] Reported by “R. K. M.” in Sky and Telescope, March 1942, vol. 1, p. 21. The “Catalog of Objectives Made by Henry Fitz,” the time span of which is unspecified, lists 428 objectives up to 13 inches and only 6 mirrors. It is not clear, however, that these represent finished units.

[9] Langley’s work at the Allegheny Observatory, particularly his invention of the bolometer, brought him international reknown as a scientist. In January 1887 he was appointed assistant secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, and later in that year became its third Secretary, serving from 1887-1906.

[10] The giant mirrors of Herschel (1789) and Rosse (1842) were made of an alloy of 71% copper and 29% tin, and 68½% copper and 31½% tin, respectively. This alloy was known as “speculum metal.” The silvered glass mirror was pioneered by Steinhill and Foucault in 1856. In England Dr. A. A. Common made considerable use in the 1870’s of silvered glass mirrors made by George Calver. About 1892-97 Common himself made, but never finished, a 60-inch mirror. It was later refigured and is still in use.

On these matters see King, op. cit. (footnote 6).

[11] For a list of these, see appendix, p. 184.

[12] Words crossed out in manuscript. See figure 1.

[13] For a list of Fitz material in the U.S. National Museum, see appendix, p. 184.

[14] F. W. Preston, “The first big American telescope mirror, John Peate, his lens,” Bulletin of the American Ceramic Society, 1936, vol. 15, pp. 129-152. Hereafter cited as Preston.

[15] The circumstances of Peate’s life and ministerial career are from Preston, supplemented by Dr. Peate’s service record, provided by the Erie Conference of the Methodist Church. Dr. Preston’s prime sources are: J. N. Fradenburgh, History of the Erie Conference, Oil City, Pa., 1907, vol. 2, pp. 204-211; obituary notice by R. N. Stubbs in Minutes of the Erie Conference, pl. publ. 1903, p. 90. Other data were obtained by Preston through interviews and letters, all cited in detail in the article.

[16] From information provided by Robert Barr, acting secretary of Oberlin College, February 15, 1960. The college records show a John Peate from Buffalo enrolled in the preparatory department in 1842-43 and 1844-45. The Encyclopedia Americana (1924 ed., vol. 21, p. 460) states that Peate attended Oberlin about this time. The Doctorate was an honorary one conferred by Allegheny College.

[17] Fradenburgh, op. cit. (footnote 2), p. 204.

[18] Preston, p. 130, n. 10; p. 131, n. 19; p. 148.

[19] “On the Construction of a Silvered Glass Telescope, Fifteen and a Half Inches in Aperture, and its Use in Celestial Photography,” Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 14, art. 3, iv+55 pp., 1865 (reprinted in vol. 34 as art. 2, 1904).

[20] Preston, p. 148. From an article in the Greenville, Pa., Record Argus, December 17, 1903.

[21] Preston, p. 148. In 1960 it was further learned that an “American Temperance” college or university once existed at Harriman.

[22] Scientific American, October 24, 1891, vol. 65, p. 260.

[23] Communication from Thiel College, Preston, p. 131, n. 17.

[24] Popular Astronomy, July 1898, vol. 6, p. 310.

[25] Preston, p. 129, notes 2 & 3. Based on recollections of George Lambert (1895) and John Morrison (1903). That the decision to make the mirror 62 inches in diameter may have had another origin is suggested by the fact that Common, in England, had made two mirrors of 60 and 61 inches in 1886-91.

[26] Minutes of the Erie Conference, 1893, p. 29. Preston, p. 130, n. 4.

[27] Preston has reconstructed the story of the making of the 62-inch mirror from contemporary journals, which will be cited below, and from personal communications with some of the participants, notably George Howard and George Lambert. Detailed citation of these communications are given in Preston. He has also used a brief manuscript account by Peate himself (Preston, p. 142, n. 62).

[28] Communication with Frank A’Hearn and John Hodge. Preston, p. 135.

[29] Peate’s workshop and apparatus is described in detail by Preston, pp. 135-138.

[30] Preston, p. 139.

[31] Advance Argus, Greenville, Pa., May 9, 1895. Preston, p. 139.

[32] Clipping of uncertain date from the Pittsburgh Leader, quoting the National Glass Budget. Preston, p. 139 and n. 55.

[33] Preston, p. 140.

[34] Preston, p. 139.

[35] Preston, p. 140.

[36] Preston, p. 142.

[37] The Brashear Instrument Company, after the death of its founder John Brashear, became the J. W. Fecker Company, Inc. This concern is now a division of the American Optical Company.

[38] Preston, pp. 142-143.

[39] The mirror is no longer silvered. The silver surface was apparently removed during the inspection by the Bureau of Standards in the 1920’s.

[40] Preston, p. 144. Various notices were published in the American University Courier in 1898.

[41] Preston, pp. 145-146.

[42] Preston, p. 146.

Appendix
Reports of Committees of the Franklin Institute

Report on Amasa Holcomb’s Reflecting Telescope.

[From Journal of the Franklin Institute, July 1834, new ser. vol. 14 (whole no. 18), pp. 169-172.]

The Committee on Science and the Arts, constituted by the Franklin Institute of the State of Pennsylvania for the promotion of the Mechanic Arts, to whom was referred for examination a Reflecting Telescope, manufactured by Mr. Amasa Holcomb, of Southwick, Hampden county, Massachusetts,

REPORT:—

That the following is the description of the instrument as given by Mr. Holcomb.

“The telescope submitted to the examination of the Committee of the Franklin Institute is of the reflecting kind; has a focal length of six feet; the diameter of the speculum is three inches nine-tenths; the rays of light are reflected but once; the image formed in the focus of the speculum is viewed by a common astronomical eye piece, or by a single lens; it has also an eye piece for viewing land objects, which shows them erect. The telescope is of the same construction as those of Sir William Herschell, the observer having his back towards the object and looking directly towards the speculum. It has an advantage over those of the Gregorian and Newtonian forms, by showing the object brighter with the same aperture, there being no light lost by a second reflection. The diameter of the speculum is small in proportion to the length of the instrument; it will bear a diameter of eight inches, with much advantage for viewing very small stars, in consequence of the great increase of the light.

The magnifying powers that are used are, forty, ninety, and two hundred and fifty.”

Through the politeness of Prof. A. D. Bache, the committee were permitted to compare the performance of Mr. Holcomb’s reflector with that of a five feet achromatic, of four inches aperture, by Dolland, the property of the University of Pennsylvania. The instrument was also compared with a three and a half feet achromatic, by Dolland, and with a Gregorian of four inches aperture, the mirrors of which had been lately repolished in London. The short stay of Mr. Holcomb in Philadelphia, prevented the comparison of it with reflectors in the possession of other members of the committee.

On the evening of the 14th of April, the committee met by adjournment in the open lot south of the Pennsylvania Hospital, the use of which was politely permitted to the committee by the managers of that institution.

The following were the results of the comparisons:—

The moon, nearly full, was at a height to be conveniently viewed with the lower powers of the instruments: with a power of 350 in the five feet achromatic, the moon appeared bright and well defined,—with the same eye-piece, giving a power of 400, in the reflector by Mr. Holcomb, the moon was sufficiently bright, and equally well defined. The same, with the exception that the moon was more brilliant, and the field of view much greater, was remarked with the use of Mr. Holcomb’s highest magnifier, giving a power of two hundred and fifty.

As an illustration of their comparative performances, it was remarked that the waved appearance of the outer declivities of the craters of some of the apparently extinct lunar volcanoes, indicating the successive depositions of the lava, was more manifest with a power of four hundred in the reflector.

The immersions of 3 and 4 Geminorum of the sixth and seventh magnitude, were observed at the same instant of time in each.

The same occurred the evening before with a star of the eighth or ninth magnitude.

The immersions, however, of two very small stars, apparently of the tenth or eleventh magnitude, were observed with difficulty in the refractor, but could not be observed at all in the reflector.

The comparison of Polaris was best seen when the moon was up in the refractor, but in the absence of the moon it was readily seen in both.

Castor was easily divided with the lower powers of either, but in the case of this, as well as of other binary and double stars, the dark space between the stars was less disturbed by scattering rays in the reflector than in the refractor.

ε Bootes was seen double in each, but more distinctly in the reflector, μ Draconis, γ Leonis, and 4th and 5th ε Lyra, were seen distinctly double in both instruments; μ Draconis, from the equality of the disks and softness of light, presented the finest appearance.

γ Virginis, with a power of three hundred and fifty in either telescope, gave no certain indications of being double. Some of the members of the committee were of opinion that it was slightly elongated.

It was stated by the artist that his reflector would divide stars distant 3″ from each other.

Estimating the distance of the stars observed by the late observations of South, Struve, and Herschel, jr., the committee were of opinion that his instrument is adequate to the distinct division of double stars distant from each other 2″.5.

The motion of this instrument, plainly mounted, was steady, and with the finder, even without rack work, objects were easily made to range with the centre, or line of collimation of the instrument.

The position of the observers with the Herschelian telescope, was natural and easy in contemplating objects having seventy or eighty degrees of altitude, though quite constrained and inconvenient in using the achromatic.

The reflector gave a distinct view of land objects, even when within one-fourth of a mile.

Some light was lost by the position of the head, an inconvenience partially obviated by making the end nearest the object three inches greater in aperture.

The Gregorian, which probably was not a very fine instrument of its kind, bore no comparison in distinctness, or in quantity of light, with the Herschelian telescope.

From these trials, the committee are of opinion that Mr. Holcomb has been entirely successful in the difficult art of polishing specula with the true curve, which gives to the objects viewed all the distinctness of figure that is given them by the best refractors by Dolland.

In one respect, the largeness of the field of view, the reflectors by Mr. Holcomb have a decided advantage over achromatics and reflectors of different construction. The apparent diameter of the field of view in the Herschelian being nearly double that of either, with equal freedom from aberration. The quantity of light furnished by the refractor was greater with the same aperture, an important advantage in searching for, and observing very minute objects. This deficiency of light in the Herschelian for viewing faint objects near the moon, or satellites near their primaries, the committee are of opinion may be removed by enlarging the aperture of the Herschelian reflector to five or five and a half inches.

The simplicity of the method of preparing and mounting Mr. Holcomb’s telescopes is worthy of notice, since on this plan, the artist is enabled to furnish for an expense of one hundred dollars, with plain mounting, or of one hundred and fifty to two hundred dollars, with more expensive mounting, telescopes whose performance equals that of Gregorians and achromatics hitherto imported into the country at an expense of five hundred dollars.

By order of the committee.

William Hamilton, Actuary.

May 8th, 1834.

Report on Holcomb’s Reflecting Telescopes.

[From Journal of the Franklin Institute, July 1835, new ser. vol. 16 (whole no. 20), pp. 11-13]

The Committee on Science and the Arts, constituted by the Franklin Institute of the State of Pennsylvania for the promotion of the Mechanic Arts, to whom was referred for examination, two reflecting telescopes, made by Mr. Amasa Holcomb, of Southwick, Hampden county, Massachusetts,

REPORT:—

That the following description of these telescopes is given by Mr. Holcomb:

The two reflecting telescopes now submitted by the subscriber, are constructed on the plan of Sir William Herschel, having the front view. The largest has a focal length of 9½ feet; the diameter of the speculum is 8½ inches, and has five astronomical eye-pieces, and one terrestrial eye-piece, for showing objects erect; the lowest power is 57, the highest 900. The smallest has a focal length of 7 feet 9 inches; the diameter of the speculum is 6½ inches, and has one terrestrial, and four astronomical, eye-pieces; the lowest power is 60, the highest is 600. They are of the same kind as those that were submitted a year ago, except the manner of mounting, which is very different.

Amasa Holcomb.

On the evening of the 4th of May, the committee met, by appointment, in an open lot south of the Pennsylvania Hospital, for the purpose of testing the performance of the telescopes, which had previously been tried by some of the members of the committee, and by other gentlemen, on the evening of the 2d. The result of the examination was highly creditable to Mr. Holcomb, and cannot fail to gratify all who have at heart the advancement of astronomical science in this country.

The instruments, with powers varying from 50 to 600 in the smaller, and to 900 in the larger, gave satisfactory views of the moon with a sufficiency of light.

Mr. Holcomb’s ability to manufacture telescopes which should bear a comparison, on favourable terms, with the best four and five feet achromatics now in the country, having been established by the report of the committee in May, 1834, their attention was chiefly directed to ascertaining the degree of perfection to which he has attained in his art, by his persevering efforts during the past year. Accordingly, the remarks which follow are made with reference to the larger telescope, of about ten feet focal length, eight inches aperture, and with a positive eye-piece, giving a power of about 900, and the surface of the field of view nearly twice as great as that of a Gregorian, and one-third greater than that of an achromatic telescope, under similar circumstances.

The view of the moon with its rugged surface, its ridges of mountains, and the endless variety of indentations on its surface, was interesting beyond description, and exceeded any thing of the kind the committee have ever witnessed.

Saturn’s ring, though not in a favourable position, was seen manifestly double, for the first time in this country, as far as the information of the committee extends.

The companion of Polaris appeared as a star of the fourth or fifth magnitude, to the unassisted eye.

The double stars, Castor, μ Draconis, 4 and 5 ε Lyræ, and 44 Bootes, were distinctly separated, and the dark space between them made evident. The last mentioned, consisting of two stars of the fifth magnitude, distant 3″ made a fine appearance; they were soft, and well defined, and there were no scattering rays of light, as was the case with Castor, in both instruments.

A class of closer doubles stars, of which 6 Coronæ, distant 1″.2., and ζ Bootes, distant 1″.4., may serve as examples, was acknowledged by the artist, last year, to be too difficult for his telescope. This has furnished a stimulus for his exertions, and the complete division of the latter, as witnessed by the committee on the present occasion, has been the reward of his disinterested labours. The discs of the two stars in ζ Bootes appeared to be tangent to each other. The committee have no evidence that the same has been effected by any other telescope in the country.

For the purpose of finding the limit to the power of Mr. Holcomb’s telescope, the committee called his attention to a class of still closer stars; among them were mentioned, ζ Cancri, μ2 Bootes, ῎ Coronæ, 36 Andromedæ, and ε Arietis, the last of which is only divisible by two telescopes now in use, viz.: the Dorpat telescope, and the twenty foot reflector of Sir John Herschel. These stars, distant from 0″.6. to 1″.0., are made to appear with their discs tangent to each other in those celebrated instruments, as appears by their notes appended to the observations contained in their printed catalogues. It is almost needless to add, that Mr. Holcomb acknowledged these stars to be too difficult for any telescopes he has yet made.

It may seem presumptuous to compare the small instrument of Holcomb with the chefs d’oeuvre of British and German genius; but, thanks to the admirable labours of the Herschels, of Struve, and of South, observers are enabled, through their printed catalogues, to compare together the optical capacities of their telescopes in distant regions. Accordingly it appears from an examination of these catalogues, and of Holcomb’s instruments, that what the best telescopes in Europe can do upon stars distant 0″.6., can be done upon stars distant 1″.4., by instruments which are the work of an unassisted, and almost neglected, American optician.

Judging from the progress made in his art, by Mr. Holcomb, during the past year, the committee look forward, with confident expectation, to the not far distant period, when, should his health be spared, the country will be in possession of a twenty feet reflector, of native workmanship, rivalling the best European instruments, and that, too, without the patronage of any corporate institution, should all of them be willing to waive the opportunity of sharing with him the merit of such an enterprise.

The committee have been led to enlarge upon this subject, from a knowledge that one of our national institutions has, within a few years, imported into the country, at an expense of $2,500, a telescope which, though excellent in its kind, is inferior to that exhibited by Mr. Holcomb, which was made and mounted to order for an individual in Georgia, at less than the eighth part of the above mentioned sum. It is not probable that a twenty foot instrument from Mr. Holcomb, would cost eight times as much as one of the length of ten feet.

The mode of mounting the instrument appears to be original, and nothing can exceed it in simplicity, or steadiness. Indeed, with a power of 900, no inconvenience was perceived from resting with one hand on the frame, and another on the tube, although the same could not be done with the mounting used by Mr. Holcomb last year, or with that of common achromatics with a power of 200, without serious inconvenience.

In conclusion, the committee beg leave to recommend Mr. Holcomb to the Board of Managers of the Franklin Institute, as a candidate for a premium and medal from the Scott’s legacy fund, for his new mode of mounting reflecting telescopes.