When President of the Institution of Civil Engineers, during the years 1845-6-7, I drew up detailed reports of the history of the profession from its commencement in Great Britain up to that time, showing what had been done in every department, by whom, and at what date. These reports are published in their ‘Transactions.’ Subsequent presidents have to some extent adopted a similar course; but with all due respect to them, they have not taken that large and scientific view of the profession of a civil engineer which it is imperatively necessary to adopt in order to keep the profession up to that high tone which its importance requires, not only for its own credit, but for the benefit of the world at large. Perhaps there is no profession (with all proper respect to others) that has conferred so much benefit upon mankind as that of the civil engineer. Its objects are clearly defined in the two mottoes belonging to the Smeatonian Society of Civil Engineers, which was the first of the kind established in this country, having originated with Smeaton, Mylne, and my father, namely, “Omnia numero pondere et mensurâ;” Ὦν φύσει κρατοῦντες τέχνῃ νιχώμεθα. Up to that date the profession of a civil engineer may be said to have been unknown in Great Britain; previous to that time we were simply known as “vulgar mechanics”—men who toiled with their hands, as masons, bricklayers, carpenters, blacksmiths, &c. But those who so called us would have entertained a very different idea of the “mechanics” if they had been forced to dispense with their services. Let me ask how could the various and complicated operations which alone render modern trade, and therefore modern civilization, possible, be carried on without the aid of the mechanic, alias the civil engineer?
The object of the Smeatonian Society was merely a social gathering in the form of a club, to assemble the members at dinner at certain times, when they could discuss in a friendly manner the various subjects connected with their profession, and to endeavour to obliterate all those rivalries and jealousies which unfortunately are too common amongst professional men of all classes. The society was to serve as a rallying point for the profession, and it was believed that when their members increased sufficiently (for there was little more than a dozen engineers in the kingdom at the time who were counted as such) the society might extend its usefulness by reading papers, discussing them, and publishing them regularly to the world, in the same manner as the already established scientific societies; this has since been done by the Institution of Civil Engineers. But I think the time has now arrived when that Institution should be enlarged, and take a wider sphere. It has hitherto been confined too much to the class practising purely engineering works; but the mechanical engineers now form a body which must be treated with every deference. It is very true that the latter are freely admitted into the institution, but there seems to be a tacit understanding amongst the former that they should not attain the honour of becoming presidents and vice-presidents. It is true that the late Mr. Field, a most distinguished mechanical engineer, was elected president, and served his time; but this, I believe, arose more from his having been one of the earliest members of the institution than from any respect due to the particular class of the profession to which he belonged. Now there cannot be a greater mistake than this. Every member of that institution, to whatever class he belongs, from the moment he is elected should be in every respect upon precisely the same footing as those who are now considered the governing class, and the ablest man should be chosen from each grade as president or vice-president alternately, so that each department should successively occupy the chair. Also, instead of choosing the president and council by rotation, according to seniority, the acknowledged best men in every department should be chosen as officers. And further, the institution thus regulated should have the power of giving certificates of competency after the candidates for admission have been duly examined by independent examiners; and until they have received these certificates they should not be allowed to practise. This is the rule in every other learned profession, and there can be no reason why it should not be adopted by the engineers. It is the only method by which it can take rank amongst the learned professions; and as no other requires more scientific knowledge, or is entrusted with a greater portion of responsibility or a larger amount of trust, or where failure becomes more disastrous, it is quite clear that no man should be allowed to practise it unless he has passed a proper examination, and has received a certificate of competency from proper authorities.
Against this proposal it may be argued, that many illiterate men, although of great original genius, would be excluded if their competency were tried by such a test. My reply is, let them not be tried only by the ordinary rules of scientific books, but also by the general principles which the candidate professes, and let those principles be tested, to prove how far they are in accordance with sound philosophy. A man like Stephenson or Brindley, although illiterate, may understand these principles perfectly, and yet may not be able to explain them. Nevertheless, let him be examined, but in a different manner from the ordinary routine, and it will soon be discovered whether his profession and his practice are founded upon true mechanical and philosophical principles.
If these examinations are properly conducted every possible objection will be abolished, and no scientific educated engineer, or any illiterate person of true scientific genius, will be prevented from pursuing the profession, whilst only the speculator and charlatan will be excluded. By this means the public will be assured that the works for which they subscribe the funds will be conducted in the best manner, and most probably to a successful termination. At present, the system upon which public works are carried on is wholly wrong. There is no system. Any man without business, competent or not, dubs himself engineer, starts a project, well or ill founded, as the case may be, generally the latter, and issues a prospectus to the public, to obtain the necessary funds to carry his proposal into effect. Next he gets a contractor to back him by taking a certain number of shares, provided that he has the contract at his own price. The shares he looks upon as good for nothing, and therefore adds so much more to his ordinary profits, so that instead of receiving 10 or 12 per cent. upon his cost price, which is the usual rule of the trade, he gets double, with the shares into the bargain, all of which is added to the capital of the undertaking; and in order to carry into effect this wasteful policy, the contractor generally stipulates for two or three of his own nominees to be placed upon the board, to “look after” his interests, so that, in point of fact, he pays himself pretty nearly what he likes. The engineer, who ought to be his master, loses all control over him, and in many cases becomes little better than his servant. This is certainly a most discreditable state of things, and has been the cause of the most wasteful expenditure, and the ruin of many valuable undertakings, and it will always continue to be the case so long as the present system prevails.
The real object of the civil engineer is to promote the civilization of the world, by the proper application of all the great mechanical means at his command, and to take a high, independent position as a scientific man, thoroughly versed in his profession both theoretically and practically, and wholly independent of contractors, and all sinister influences. Unless he can do this, he never will be held in that esteem and respect, or take that high position without which no professional man can properly discharge the duties that he owes to himself and to the public.
Against what I have said it may perhaps be urged that I assign too high a place to the profession to which my father and myself have had the honour to belong; but I think that when the subject has been calmly and fairly considered it will be generally admitted that I have not done so without reason. Without wishing for a moment to depreciate the merits of any other body of men, I think it will be conceded that the objects proposed by the engineer, and the acquirements, knowledge, and experience that he must possess before he can practise successfully, are at least equal to those of any other profession, particularly after the practical examples exhibited to the world of the great benefits that engineering has already conferred upon mankind. Therefore are we entitled to be ranked amongst the most learned professions, and to receive all the honours they have most justly earned; and I trust the time is not far distant when this justice will be accorded to them.
Before concluding this sketch of my career I will offer a few observations as to what I consider, from my experience, the best plan of education for the profession of a civil engineer. Hitherto there has been no regular system. A youth leaves school about the age of seventeen or eighteen, without any previous training, and his parents, thinking that he has got a mechanical turn, as it is termed, decide at once to make him a civil engineer, whether he likes it or is fit for it or not. They then send him, with a considerable premium, to an engineer of some standing and practice, who, unless special conditions are made (and very few engineers will make them), will not undertake to teach him the profession. The pupil is sent into the office, and placed under the direction of the principal assistant, who directs him to do whatever is required, if he can do it, whether drawing, writing, or calculating, or anything else; and if he wishes to learn anything, he must find it out himself: neither the principal nor assistant explains the principles or reasons of anything that is done. If he prove to be steady, intelligent, and useful, keeps the regular office hours, and evinces a determination to understand thoroughly the why and wherefore of every kind of work that is brought before him, and by this means acquires some practical knowledge, he will soon attract the notice of his employer, and will be gradually transferred from one department to another, until the expiration of his pupilage, which varies from three to four years; then, if he really has acquired a competent knowledge of the profession, and the employer thinks his old pupil can be of further service to him, he is engaged at a moderate salary, to be employed in such capacity as he is fit for. If during his pupilage he has made but little progress, nothing beyond mere routine, he is discharged with a certificate according to his merits, and sent into the world, to find his way forward as best he can.
Now it should be understood that the pupil only learns one part of his business, such as the construction of railways, canals, improvement of rivers, docks, drainage, harbours, and waterworks, and the buildings connected with them; but there is another and very important part of civil engineering, namely, the mechanical department, of which he remains totally ignorant. Nor will he gain any insight into the raising of coals, iron, or any other geological product. Now, in order to form a good civil engineer, in my opinion it is absolutely necessary that he should be well acquainted with all these different branches. To this it may be replied, that it is not necessary an engineer should be acquainted with all departments of the profession, but only with the one to which he intends more particularly to devote himself. Now this is a very great mistake, for they are all so intimately connected, that without having a general knowledge of the whole you cannot practise in any one department with complete success; for whenever you have to rely upon the resources of another department you can never make sure of being thoroughly well served, unless you are yourself a tolerable judge of work. I repeat, then, that an engineer who has studied only one department cannot be termed properly educated. And the question arises, what is the best mode of education for a pupil to obtain this multifarious, and, as I contend, absolutely necessary, information, to enable him to practise the profession of a civil engineer in the most enlightened, scientific, and practical manner? My answer is this: Let him first get a sound elementary education in the several departments of arithmetic, algebra, geometry, natural philosophy, geography, geology, astronomy, chemistry, land and hydrographical surveying, as well as grammar, English composition, history, French, German, and Latin, according to the improved system of modern education; every youth of ordinary talents has a tolerably fair knowledge of these at seventeen or eighteen. What then should be the training for an engineer? First let him go through the best course of modern education at his command, including the elements of geometry, mathematics, and the physical sciences, not excluding Latin and Greek, in spite of the prejudice against them now frequently expressed. Then let him be apprenticed for two or three years to some good steam engine and machinery manufacturer, where he should learn to make drawings and calculations, handle tools, make models, steam-engine machinery, and put machinery together. By this means, if he applies his mind to it properly, he may become a practical as well as theoretical mechanician, which is the soundest basis for good engineering; indeed, without this it is impossible for an engineer to be thoroughly successful, but being well grounded in this most important knowledge, all the others will become comparatively easy. Having gone through this apprenticeship, let him bind himself for three or four years to some well-known civil engineer, of large practice in railways, docks, harbours, waterworks, canals, drainage, rivers, &c. In this office the pupil will learn everything connected with these departments, and as they are founded more or less upon practical mechanics, he will soon find that from his previous mechanical education he has already acquired considerable knowledge of them, and it will only be necessary to apply those principles, modified according to the particular circumstances required: in fact, the principles are the same, although applied upon a larger scale.
In laying down a railway the young engineer will have to consider the particular local, geographical and geological features of the country through which the line is to pass, and the extent of mechanical power that will be necessary to work it effectually, consistent with the cost of making the cuttings and embankments. Here is a purely mechanical question, which the pupil’s previous instruction will enable him to decide, and which he could not do without this instruction.
If it be a question of improving a river, the quantity of water flowing through it, the inclination of its bed, the extent and levels of the district which it has to drain, will reduce themselves to the laws of the pressure and movement of fluids, which are explained under the general theorems of hydraulics and hydrostatics, supplemented by certain rules derived from practical experience, such as friction, &c.