[70] Mr. Zerah Colburn, in his excellent work on ‘Locomotive Engineering and the Mechanism of Railways,’ points out that Mr. Davies Gilbert noted the effect of the discharge of the waste steam up the chimney of Trevithick’s engine in increasing the draught, and wrote a letter to ‘Nicholson’s Journal’ (Sept. 1805) on the subject. Mr. Nicholson himself proceeded to investigate the subject, and in 1806 he took out a patent for “steam-blasting apparatus,” applicable to fixed engines. Trevithick himself, however, could not have had much faith in the steam-blast for locomotive purposes, or else he would not have taken out his patent for urging the fire by means of fanners. But the fact is, that while the speed of the locomotive was only four or five miles an hour, the blast was scarcely needed. It was only when high speeds were adopted that artificial methods of urging the fire became necessary, and that the full importance of the invention was recognised. Like many other inventions, stimulated if not originated by necessity, the steam-blast was certainly reinvented, if not invented, by George Stephenson.
[71] ‘Mining Journal,’ 9th September, 1858.
[73] Other machines, with legs, were patented in the following year by Lewis Gompertz and by Thomas Tindall. In Tindall’s specification it is provided that the power of the engine is to be assisted by a horizontal windmill; and the four pushers, or legs, are to be caused to come successively in contact with the ground, and impel the carriage!
[82] Speech at the opening of the Newcastle and Darlington Railway, June 18, 1844.
[95] The Editor of the ‘Athenæum’ having (Nov. 8th, 1862) characterized the author’s account of this affair as “perfectly untrue” and a “fiction,” it becomes necessary to say a few words in explanation of it. The Editor of the ‘Athenæum’ quotes in support of his statement a passage from Mr. Nicholas Wood, who, however does not say that the anecdote is “perfectly untrue,” but merely that “the danger was not quite so great as is represented:” he adds that “at most an explosion might have burnt the hands of the operator, but would not extend a few feet from the blower.” However that may be, we were not without good authority for making the original statement. The facts were verbally communicated to the author in the first place by Robert Stephenson, to whom the chapter was afterwards read in MS., in the presence of Mr. Sopwith, F.R.S. at Mr. Stephenson’s house in Gloucester Square, and received his entire approval. But at the time at which Mr. Stephenson communicated the verbal information, he also handed a little book with his name written in it, still in the author’s possession, saying, “Read that, you will find it all there.” We have again referred to the little book which contains, among other things, a pamphlet, entitled Report on the Claims of Mr. George Stephenson relative to the Invention of his Safety Lamp. By the Committee appointed at a Meeting holden in Newcastle, on this 1st of November, 1817. With an Appendix containing the Evidence. Among the witnesses examined were George Stephenson, Nicholas Wood, and John Moodie, and their evidence is given in the pamphlet. We quote that of Stephenson and Moodie, which was not contradicted, but in all material points confirmed by Wood, and was published, we believe, with his sanction. George Stephenson said, that he tried the first lamp “in a part of the mine where the air was highly explosive. Nicholas Wood and John Moodie were his companions when the trial was made. They became frightened when they came within hearing of the blower, and would not go any further. Mr. Stephenson went alone with the lamp to the mouth of the blower,” etc. This evidence was confirmed by John Moodie, who said the air of the place where the experiment was about to be tried was such, that, if a lighted candle had been introduced, an explosion would have taken place that would have been “extremely dangerous.” “Told Stephenson it was foul, and hinted at the danger; nevertheless, Stephenson would try the lamp, confiding in its safety. Stephenson took the lamp and went with it into the place in which Moodie had been, and Moodie and Wood, apprehensive of the danger, retired to a greater distance,” etc. The other details of the statement made in the text, are fully borne out by the published evidence, the accuracy of which, so far as the author is aware, has never before been called in question.
[105] The tankard bore the following inscription—“This piece of plate, purchased with a part of the sum of £1000, a subscription raised for the remuneration of Mr. George Stephenson for having discovered the fact that inflamed fire-damp will not pass through tubes and apertures of small dimensions, and having been the first to apply that principle in the construction of a safety-lamp calculated for the preservation of human life in situations formerly of the greatest danger, was presented to him at a general meeting of the subscribers, Charles John Brandling, Esq., in the Chair. January 12th, 1818.”
[107] The accident above referred to was described in the ‘Barnsley Times,’ a copy of which, containing the account, Robert Stephenson forwarded to the author, with the observation that “it is evidently written by a practical miner, and is, I think, worthy of record in my father’s Life.”
[125] Mr. Pease died at Darlington, on the 31st of July, 1858, aged ninety two.
[129] The story has been told that George was a former suitor of Miss Hindmarsh, while occupying the position of a humble workman at Black Callerton, but that having been rejected by her, he made love to and married Fanny Henderson; and that long after the death of the latter, when he had become a comparatively thriving man, he again made up to Miss Hindmarsh, and was on the second occasion accepted. This is the popular story, and different versions of it are current. Desirous of ascertaining the facts, the author called on Thomas Hindmarsh, Mrs. Stephenson’s brother, who assured him that George knew nothing of his sister until he (Hindmarsh) introduced him to her, at George’s express request, about the year 1818 or 1819. The author was himself originally attracted by the much more romantic version of the story, and gave publicity to it many years since; but after Mr. Hindmarsh’s explicit statement, he thought fit to adopt the soberer, and perhaps, the truer view.
[130] The first clause in any railway act, empowering the employment of locomotive engines for the working of passenger traffic.