The high-pressure steam was also given to the defeated Watt 63-inch double engine; yet this newest of the three engines was the first to be condemned, and her place was taken in 1816 by an engine of 76 inches in diameter, which Trevithick promised should, with his high steam and new expansive gear, do the work of the Watt 63-inch and the old 45-inch put together; which was more than fulfilled by its doing forty millions, and, as Lean says, "was the first instance of such duty having been performed by an engine of that simple construction."
In 1819 the new 76-inch engine which had been erected by the mine engineers, Jeffrie[100] and Gribble, who had long been employed by Trevithick in Dolcoath, was the best in the county, doing forty-eight millions, nearly three times the duty as given by Mr. Gilbert for the Watt engine in 1798. In 1827 Trevithick's pupil, Captain Samuel Grose, erected his Wheal Towan engine, which performed a duty of eighty-seven millions, some of the working drawings of which were made by the writer. In 1835 the principle laid down by Trevithick had become so general in the county as to cause a saving to the Cornish mines, in coal alone, of 80,000l. yearly. In addition to this, the increased power of the engine lessened the first cost by at least one-half.
The national importance of such weighty facts calls for further corroborative proof, for we can scarcely believe that two atmospheric low-pressure steam-engines, made before the time of Watt, could be altered so as to perform more work, and at a less cost than the Watt engine, by an ingenious supply of higher steam pressure from Trevithick's boilers, together with the Watt air-pump and condenser. The following words from Watt are descriptive of his practice, though contrary to his patent claim:—
"At a very early period, while experimenting at Kinneil, he had formed the idea of working steam expansively, and altered his model from time to time with that object. Boulton had taken up and continued the experiments at Soho, believing the principle to be sound, and that great economy would attend its adoption.
"The early engines were accordingly made so that the steam might be cut off before the piston had made its full stroke, and expand within the cylinder, the heat outside it being maintained by the expedient of the steam-case. But it was shortly found that this method of working was beyond the capacity of the average enginemen of that day, and it was consequently given up for a time.
"'We used to send out,' said Watt to Robert Hart, 'a cylinder of double the size wanted, and cut off the steam at half-stroke.'
"This was a great saving of steam, so long as the valves remained as at first; but when our men left her to the charge of the person who was to keep her, he began to make, or try to make, improvements, often by giving more steam. The engine did more work while the steam lasted, but the boiler could not keep up the demand. Then complaints came of want of steam, and we had to send a man down to see what was wrong.
"This was so expensive, that we resolved to give up the expansion of the steam until we could get men that could work it, as a few tons of coal per year was less expensive than having the work stopped. In some of the mines a few hours' stoppage was a serious matter, as it would cost the proprietor as much as 70l. per hour."[101]
Pole expresses the same view, intimating that Watt only used steam of 1 or 2 lbs. pressure to the inch.
"In Watt's engine, as is well known, the pressure of steam in the boiler very little exceeded the pressure of the atmosphere. He recommended that when the engine was underloaded, this excess should be equal to about 1 inch of mercury; and when full loaded, ought not to exceed 2 inches; adding, 'It is never advisable to work with a strong steam when it can be avoided, as it increases the leakages of the boiler and joints of the steam-case, and answers no good end.'[102]