It then proceeded to state that—
“The fact of a new superseding an old machine, in a very few years, is one of constant occurrence in our manufactories; and instances might be pointed out in which the advance of invention has been so rapid, and the demand for machinery so great, that half-finished machines have been thrown aside as useless before their completion.
“It is now nearly fourteen years since I undertook for the Government to superintend the making of the Difference Engine. During nearly four years its construction has been absolutely stopped, and, instead of being employed in overcoming the physical impediments, I have been harassed by what may be called the moral difficulties of the question. It is painful to reflect that, in the time so employed, the first Difference Engine might, under more favourable circumstances, have been completed.
“In making this Report, I wish distinctly to state, that I do not entertain the slightest doubt of the success of the Difference Engine; nor do I intend it as any application to finish the one or to construct the other; but I make it from a conviction that the information it contains ought to be communicated to those who must decide the question relative to the Difference Engine.”
The reference to the Royal Society, proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his letter of the 14th of January, 1836,[21] did not take place; and during more than a year and a half no further measures appear to have been adopted by the Government respecting the Engine.
It was obviously of the greatest importance to Mr. Babbage that a final decision should be made by the Government. When he undertook to superintend the construction of the Difference Engine for the Government, it was, of course, understood that he would not leave it unfinished. He had now been engaged fourteen years upon an object which he {91} had anticipated would not require more than two or three; and there seemed no limit to the time his engagement with the Government might thus be supposed to endure, unless some steps were taken to terminate it. Without such a decision Mr. Babbage felt that he should be impeded in any plans he might form, and liable to the most serious interruption, if he should venture to enter upon the execution of them. He therefore most earnestly pressed, both by his personal applications and by those of his friends, for the settlement of the question. Mr. Wolryche Whitmore, in particular, repeatedly urged upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer, personally, as well as by letter, the injustice of keeping Mr. Babbage so very long in a state of suspense.
Time, however, passed on, and during nearly two years the question remained in the same state. Mr. Babbage, wearied with this delay, determined upon making a last effort to obtain a decision. He wrote to the First Lord of the Treasury (Lord Melbourne) on the 26th of July, 1838, recalling to his Lordship’s attention the frequency of his applications on this subject, and urging the necessity of a final decision upon it. He observed, that if the question had become more difficult, because he had invented superior mechanism, which had superseded that which was already partly executed, this consequence had arisen from the very delay against which he had so repeatedly remonstrated. He then asked, for the last time, not for any favour, but for that which it was an injustice to withhold—a decision.
On the 16th of August Mr. Spring Rice (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) addressed a note to Mr. Babbage, in reference to his application to Lord Melbourne. After recapitulating his former statement of the subject, which had been shown to be founded on a misapprehension, viz., that Mr. Babbage {92} had made an application to the Government to construct for them the Analytical Engine, the Chancellor of the Exchequer inquired whether he was solicitous that steps should be taken for the completion of the old, or for the commencement of a new machine,—and what he considered would be the cost of the one proceeding, and of the other?