We thus see that the “Century” is but the epitome of a greater work, designed to have been published with suitable explanatory engravings, which the premature decease of the author alone frustrated. During two hundred years the subjects of the various inventions and improvements it calendars have been long superseded, so that there is not one, perhaps, that would in the least assist the modern engineer, however minutely it could be described. Yet the history of the Steam Engine, of Inventions, and of Inventors would be incomplete indeed without a Memoir of the Marquis of Worcester, and some account of his inimitable “Century of Inventions.”
Much might be written on the conflicting opinions expressed by historical, biographical, and scientific writers, regarding the intellectual capacity and ingenuity of the Marquis as well as of their adverse statements on various historical points. But instead of adopting such a thoroughly controversial strain, which after all would only lead to a very doubtful result, another and very different course has been adopted in the present work, by supplying facts in place of conjecture. The writer, who is strongly imbued with political, theological, or scientific views, cannot write otherwise than as directed by the natural effect of such influences. But as a rule the arena of scientific discussion is neutral ground; and the biographer and commentator, in the present instance, does not feel swayed by any party prejudice, and certainly not by any peculiar scientific views. It has been his wish to associate himself as much as possible with the Marquis and with his times, irrespective of modern taste, changed customs, and enlarged knowledge, as contrasted with a period about the middle of the seventeenth century. Here the critic rises in importance with the information he possesses of a bygone age. But it has been so uniformly the misfortune of the Marquis of Worcester to be examined solely through a modern medium, that it is almost surprising his antiquated costume, and style of writing, should have escaped the generally reckless course of censure bestowed on the precious relics that alone remain to attest his amazing genius.
Every work descriptive of the Steam-engine, gives some historical notice, awarding a certain amount of dubious merit to the Marquis of Worcester, among other early inventors, but it would be impossible to point to a single instance savouring of any national pride in the inquiry. It seems incredible, and might be believed to be so, had we not the fact before our eyes, that the true history of the origin of the Steam-engine is only now emerging into light in the form best calculated to place the fact beyond dispute.
Like all other great inventions, the improvements in the Steam-engine have been progressing from 1663 to the present day. Its history presents three eras:—1st, the period when the parent engine and its immediate successors were called “fire engines;”—2nd, from Newcomen’s time, when that stage of improvement was designated the “atmospheric-engine;” and, 3rdly, its last form, the true “steam-engine” of Watt. We cannot destroy one link in this mystic chain without serious hazard, without deranging the natural consanguinity of these children of the brain. But while we consider it unnecessary to deal singly with each work contributing an apocryphal history to the origin of the steam-engine, a solitary instance occurs, within the last five years, the publication of which demands special notice.
Nowhere should we less expect to find a want of sympathy with the amiable character and astonishing scientific abilities of the Marquis of Worcester than in the pages recording the life of James Watt; for there we might hope to be supplied, as from a fountain-head, with the pure stream of most authentic information; an elaborate, careful, and comprehensive digest of the best materials that learning and influence could accumulate; at once clearing up many doubts, and for ever dissipating the groundless surmises of a multitude of superficial writers. We should never expect a less careful procedure, or in its absence other than the most respectful allusion to the true inventor of the steam-engine—that engine from which Watt’s is lineally descended.
Had the Marquis of Worcester and his “Century,” together with his Engine, been unknown, and consequently also his untiring representation and advocacy of its wonderful properties, where would have been the justly-admired models of Savery, Newcomen, and Watt? The inveterate prejudice against the employment of any new engine with which the Marquis had to contend, was not wholly extinct even in the days of Watt’s early career; and it was the all-powerful influence of large capital alone that secured for him what Charles the Second blindly withheld from the great engineer’s noble predecessor.
We are far from advocating any undue devotion either to a theory or to a hero. But, certainly, if the rhetorical flourishes of M. Arago can justly be summoned to eulogize the hot-water fountain of De Caus, in preference to producing his own clear, simple description; then, assuredly, in common fairness Mr. Muirhead should have felt bound to a somewhat similar advocacy of the Marquis of Worcester’s invention. If M. Arago’s example is to be quoted, showing how much could be advanced in favour of De Caus’s little metal sphere, then surely Mr. Muirhead should have exerted himself to represent and distinguish the superior properties of the Marquis’s Water-commanding Engine, raising four vessels of water, forty feet high, through a tube a span wide.[H]
But Mr. Muirhead hazards no opinion decidedly favourable to either the Marquis or his inventions; while, on the contrary, his observations suggest unfounded difficulties, and raise unnecessary doubts, contributing to increase the existing confusion found in our current literature, in relation to the great inventor and his projects; an instance is even adduced of the pseudonymous writer, Robert Stuart, who, in his “Anecdotes,” and his “History,” flatly contradicts himself; and frequently what one compiler only conjectures, another takes up as a fact. But this vicious system of writing is not to be corrected by following in the same track and proposing new speculative views, offered too in a strain seriously derogating from the Marquis’s character for honour, integrity, consistency, and consummate ingenuity.
In quoting the “Century” Mr. Muirhead notices that it concludes with the promise of a more finished work, which only elicits the sinister remark: “that he either was unable, or never seriously intended to make such a further publication.” This is indeed unjust, and severe enough. And what he quotes from the “Century” about the Engine, is only to tell what “posterity supposes” about it; and to note that, in respect to it, “there has always prevailed a great diversity of opinion.” But here is no attempt made to trace and analyse that “diversity of opinion,” or to dissipate the cloud. The Marquis’s captivity in the Tower is mis-stated; and the luckless “pot-lid” story enlarged and improved upon, for it is concluded that hence—“so runs the story—arose the ‘Century of Inventions,’ with its steam-engine all ready—made and acting;—at least in the mind of its contriver!” This undignified view of the case of the imprisoned, ruined, neglected inventor of the steam-engine, never deserved to be enrolled in the volume devoted to the life of his glorious but remote successor.[I]
Although, however, we have been presented with a view of De Caus as elevated through the medium of Arago’s eloquent Eloge, when endeavouring with true national zeal to claim the honour of the invention of the steam-engine (even on this slender proof) for his own country; this position seems only to have been assigned to him in the present instance, to make his downfall the more signally complete; for Mr. Muirhead most dispassionately observes:—“Considering the uselessness of the contrivance of De Caus, and the doubtfulness existing as to that of the Marquis, it is, perhaps, rather surprising that ‘the invention of the steam-engine’ should have been attributed to either of them, with such great confidence as both English and French writers have alternately shown.” Unfortunately for this antithesis, the one invention is not “worthless,” and the other is not properly to be charged with “doubtfulness.” It may be justly said, in one sense, that all the engines preceding those made in Watt’s time are “worthless,”—but we have here a wide range. In 1615 De Caus’s invention was not “worthless,” although its worth was limited to its demonstrating one simple mode of applying an important elementary principle. And the vast amount of accumulated evidence relating to the Marquis of Worcester’s Engine indisputably removes all “doubtfulness” as to its actual accomplishment and general construction, so far as words, irrespective of absolute models and drawings, can supply information; and the absence of these latter accessories is traceable solely to the lapse of time, combined with the indifference of the public to designs that went beyond general information on such matters, as well as from their exceeding the common manufacturing skill, and not captivating the small commercial enterprize of that age.