Nicholas J. Roosevelt, who afterward became Fulton’s and Livingston’s representative in Ohio River navigation, also had a “try” at inventing a boat; so had William Henry of Pennsylvania and Edward West; both left records of their attempts.
There were others, too, a long list of worthies, who labored well, but neither well enough nor long enough to convince doubting humanity that they had “found a way upon the waters.” Chief among them should forever stand the name of John Fitch, who had so sure yet faint a grasp upon the new science. In 1786, he built a boat thirty-four feet long, and launched it upon the Delaware River where it proved its worth. He organized a stock company to finance and direct the enterprise. The boat ran for a short time between Philadelphia and Bordentown, but the machinery was cumbersome, the service scanty, and the company lost money. In the autumn the boat was set aside and never used again. After a visit to France, where Fitch obtained a patent but failed to secure funds for a new boat, he returned to America as a deck-hand after his fruitless task. A few years later he died, a disappointed and discouraged man. To his mechanical genius there was linked an erratic character and an unsettled disposition. Had he been able to set aside the belittling influences of his life, there is no doubt that he would have been a great man.
As in “Prize Contests” of the present day, honorable mention is made of those whose work was excellent although it failed to win the highest award; so may we unhesitatingly yield honorable mention to John Fitch for his years of study. He did build a boat; he did make it run; but he failed to establish steam navigation as a practical system of transportation and a commercial success.
In addition to these Americans there were men of science in other lands who busied themselves with the same problem. Earl Stanhope of England, whose attempt has been noted; Patrick Miller of Scotland; the Messrs. Hunter and Dickinson; William Symington, who tried a tug on the Forth and Clyde Canal; M. des Blanc, of France, who essayed to build a boat for the Rhone; all are recorded in history as having made honest attempts to prove that the power of steam could be applied to boats. But how? That was the question. And it should be noted that Robert Fulton did not accept the theory of any previous experimenter, nor did he merely happen upon his successful plan. He worked long and patiently, with varying degrees of success, until he discovered the proper tables of proportion,—the size and shape of the boat and its paddles, the weight and power of the engine, the strength of tide and currents, and all the many contributing forces which united to form the practical and successful boat he finally produced.
Several interesting descriptions of Fulton’s experiments are in existence: one, dated Paris, Jan. 9th, 1803, is entitled “Experiments on the Model of a Boat to be Moved by a Steam Engine.” It describes six different methods by which he propelled a model of a boat three feet long and eight inches wide. From the knowledge he gained in these experiments, he compiled a “table of comparisons” showing the different distances covered by the use of varying sized paddles. He concluded: “Propelling a boat through water is the act of separating two bodies,—the boat from its oars or paddles, or whatever else is applied,—and this is governed by laws reducible to simple calculation.”
It was this science of calculation which gave Fulton the mastery of the situation, and his title, Inventor of Steam Navigation. He did not build a boat by guess-work, but built many boats by actual calculation of their power and speed; these he introduced upon several waterways and established each as a commercial success. Other men had produced the “flower of invention.” Fulton produced the more perfect flower and matured it to actual fruitage.