Jaxes
Stockdale. Annales Caemoelenses.
John
Randall, Broseley And Its
Surroundings
Swedish
View Of The West Midlands In 1802-3.
John
Granthan. ‘Iron As A Material For
Shipbuilding.
Notes
On Steam Navigation On Shallow Rivers
George
Piggott Boiler Plate Working.
Hugh
Williamson Steamboats On The River
Loire, 1822-1852,
John
Vernon. On The Construction
Of Iron Ships
On
The Building Of Iron Merchant Vessels
York Courant
Tuesday,
May 27th, 1777.
Last
Tuesday, a new pleasure-boat, constructed of sheet-iron, was launched into the
River Foss. She is twelve feet in length, six in breadth, has sailed with
fifteen persons on board, and may be conveyed to and from the river by two men.
Note:
the above is copied verbatim into the Gentleman's Magazine for May 1777, giving
the launch as Tuesday 20 (p 244). It is later repeated in a slightly different
form (p 291). Curiously, the index item referring to these two entries is under
Cast Iron, Boat of.
Gentleman's Magazine
Vo1.57,
1787, p 732.
Birmingham,
July 28.
A
few days ago a boat built with English iron by J Wilkinson Esq. of Bradley
Forge, came up our canal to this town, loaded with 22 tons and 1500 weight of
its own metal, &c. It is nearly of equal, dimensions with the other boats
employed upon the canal, being 70 feet long, and 6 feet 8½ inches wide. The
thickness of the plates with which it is made is about 5-16ths of an inch, and
it is put together with rivets, like copper, or fire-engine boilers; but the
stern-posts are wood, and the gunwale is lined with, and the beams are made of,
elm planks. Her weight is about eight tons; she will carry in deep water upwards
of 32 tons, and when light she draws about the same as a common wooden boat,
viz. eight or nine inches of water.
Mr
Stalcouth, at the instance of a copper company, is building a vessel whose
bottom is to be entirely of copper without any planking, which, were it to be
continually suspended in water, might answer every purpose of commerce; but
whether it will be bear to be laid aground when loaded seems doubtful.
Note:
This is the time-honoured source for the Trial, but there is a fuller account in
Aris's Birmingham Gazette of Monday, July 30th, 1787. (Even this may not be the
original source.) This account sandwiches the above text (with only trivial
differences, such as "like coppers", but omitting Mr Stalcouth's
copper boat) between two additional paragraphs:
We
have pleasure to mention the following instance of the increasing manufacture,
and opulence of those concerned in the iron trade in this kingdom. The spirited
proprietor of this vessel is, we understand, going to build another of a larger
size.
Aris's Birmingham Gazette
Monday,
3rd November, 1788.
Birmingham, November 3rd: The iron barge, built by John Wilkinson, Esq, was lately launched at Willey Wharf, to the admiration of some, the surprise of many, and the conviction of all: it was perfectly tight, moves very easy on the water, and draws about eight inches when quite freighted (sic), It was immediately laden with iron, for Stourport, where its arrival gained the attention of all that place.
Universal Magazine.
Volume
83, November, 1788, page 276.
November
8th: An iron barge built by John Wilkinson, Esq, was lately launched at Willey
Wharf, Shrewsbury. She is perfectly tight, moves very easy on the water, and
draws about eight inches, with every &. on board.
Note:
Not only is the text slightly different from the quotation on this by Randall,
but more significantly it is from a year later than implied by Randall.
Rees' Cyclopaedia
Article:
CANAL, dated February 1806.
p
333. Construction of boats for canals and rivers.
......Since
the use of cast-iron has become so general, Mr John Wilkinson has constructed
boats and barges of iron, some of which are used on the Severn river, and others
upon the different canals in Staffordshire, Worcestershire, &c.
p
390. Mr John Wilkinson introduced some barges made of cast-iron plates for
navigating this river.....
Boat Register Staffs
C.R.0
Ref Q/RUB 1.
1795-7
Certificates
issued on 29th August 1795, under 35 Geo.3 ch 58:
Three
boats, burthen 20 tons, owned by John Wilkinson, of Bilston.
Each
was declared to be used from Autherley to Birmingham, 22 miles (i.e. on the
Birmingham Canal, but excluding the links to Stourport, curiously). Their crews
were a master and one man, employed for steering and driving the horse. They
were to carry painted numbers related to the owner:
No.1,
Master: Joseph Hill, of the Parish of Sedgley. N0.2, Master: William Turner,
ditto.
No.3,
Master: John Whittle, ditto.
There is a loose letter in this Register, of some interest:
To
Mr John Collins, Clerk of the Peace, Stafford.
October 24th, 1795. Sir,
I
have 1 moore boat to register as I intend working, it is to work about 200 yards
upon the Birm Canall, to carry coals from at Pitt of Mr J Wilkinson's to the
Furnis. Boat is No.5 & it is able to carry 24 tons but being short of water
I carry from 18 ton to 20 or 21. Thos Bate steers er of Tipton & a lad with
him. I should be glad if you will register this boat No.5 & send me the
sativikit. I will send the money by whom you will there is a carryer goes
through Bilstone every Satturday wich I will send it by him if you are
agreeable. Please to send in your letter how much it is. I shall take it as a
favour if you will send it by return of post. NB please to direct for me at
Enoch
Smith, Coseley.
(Note:
The only boats actually registered under this owner were Nos 10, 11, apparently
used as a pair, with Master Joseph Coleborn, and two men, from Tipton to
Oxford.)
Jaxes Stockdale. Annales Caemoelenses.
ULVERSTON, 1872.
p124.
... In my collection I have one of these silver coins: on the obverse is
an excellent likeness of John Wilkinson, with the inscription "JOHN
WILKINSON, IRONMASTER"; on the reverse, a ship (70 tons burthen) in full
sail, being a representation of the First Iron Ship ever built, he being the
builder and inventor, in 1787......
(Note:
This coin was dated 1788. It is unfortunate that such a ridiculous description
has been used here: it can but cast doubt on the reliability of the rest of the
evidence, which ought to have been one of our best sources. Fell is rather
dismissive of Stockdale as a source on other matters; and Stockdale himself
refers to being unable to correct early errors, because the book was printed in
sections as written.)
22
p210-1.
Isaac Wilkinson and his son John must have acquired more or less means
even .in this petty trade of "flat smoothing iron making", for about
1742, or perhaps a little later, they built or purchased the iron furnace and
forge at Wilson House, near Lindal, in the parish of Cartmel, intending to smelt
there the rich haematite iron ore of Furness with turbary or peat moss, large
tracts of which at that time were on every side, nearly, of the furnace, and up
to which place the river Winster was then navigable for vessels of light
burthen. The first operation after the purchase of the property was to cut a
canal into the midst of this large tract of turbary, sufficiently wide for the
passage of a small boat, intended to be used in conveying the peat moss to the
iron furnace; which boat, tradition says, was actually constructed, not of wood,
but of Iron! and there are people still living (amongst others Mr Nicholas
Atkinson, of Cart Lane) who remember having seen it about seventy years ago. A
novel idea had suddenly flashed across John Wilkinson's mind! a great but simple
truth, till then hidden to all the world! that iron might be made to float in
water! that a heavier body might be made, under certain circumstances, to float
in a lighter! And may it not be reasonably assumed that the building of this
small boat at Wilson House, in Cartmel parish, furnished John Wilkinson with the
idea of building the much larger vessels he afterwards constructed of iron in
1787-8, at Willey, in Shropshire (described hereafter), and that Cartmel parish
has the high honour of having had the first iron vessel constructed in it, and
that too by the inventor, one of its own parishioners! Yes; that this Wilson
House Iron Boat really was the parent of all the iron ships that have ever since
been built - our noble iron-sided men-of-war, and that leviathan of ships, the
"Great Eastern" herself, not excepted! Labor omnia vincit! or, as the
old English rhyme has it - "By hammer and hand All things do stand".
(Note:
we may notice 1787-8. But that Randall claims not to have seen Stockdale's book
when he first wrote on the subject, one might suppose that this was the source
of his own hyperbole.)
p216-8.
Before taking his journey to France, John Wilkinson had made some
attempts to build an iron boat for the, canal at Bradley, and, as before said,
had succeeded in building and using a small one on the canal he had made in the
peat moss at Wilson House, in Cartmel parish. On his return from France in July
1786, he recommenced in earnest these iron boat building experiments, and in
about a year afterwards addressed a letter to my grandfather, James Stockdale,
of Carke, of which the following is a copy, and is proof positive that to him, a
man so intimately connected with Cartmel parish, belongs the honour of inventing
and building the first iron ship; iron now, in our day, being on the point of
superseding wood altogether in ship building, so that hereafter the saying will
be "the iron walls", not "the wooden walls of old England".
Broseley,
14th July, 1787.
James
Stockdale, Esq., Carke.
Dear
Sir, - Yesterday week my Iron Boat was launched. It answers all my expectations,
and has convinced the unbelievers, who were 999 in 1,000. It will be a nine
days' wonder, and then be like Columbus's egg.
I
remain, dear Sir, yours very truly,
signed,
JOHN WILKINSON.
This
iron boat was launched at Willey Wharf, and floated very lightly on the water;
she was of about seventy tons (some say only forty tons) burthen, and called
"The
Trial",
her captain's name being Palmer. To commemorate this event, John Wilkinson had
medals and tokens struck... date 1787.... In another letter, also to my
grandfather, dated Bradley Ironworks, October 20th, 1788, he says, "There
have been launched two Iron Vessels in my service since September 1st: one is a
canal boat for this (Bradley navigation), the other a barge of forty tons, for
the river Severn. The last was floated on Monday, and is, I expect, at Stourport
with a loading of bar iron. My clerk at Broseley advises me that she swims
remarkably light, and exceeds my expectations...."
.
p596.
In concluding this rather lengthy account of the Parish of Cartmel, I
venture to claim for the district I am writing about, all the honour to which it
may be entitled, and that cannot be inconsiderable, as the place where the very
first iron vessel ever built was designed and constructed, and that too by one
of its own parishioners, John Wilkinson, of Castlehead, called afterwards
"The Great Iron Master", now about one hundred and twenty-two years
ago – such having been my chief object in communicating this and other matter
regarding Cartnel to Mr Smiles, the popular writer, in 1861); and to add further
that this small vessel, which truly may be said to have been the parent of all
the iron vessels ever built - "the iron walls of old England" not
excepted - after being long disused on the canal John Wilkinson had cut for it
into the Witherslack Peatmoss, laid for years nearly covered with mud at the
bottom of the river Winster, near to or in Helton Tarn. There are some few
persons still. living who remember having seen it lying there.
"Tempus
omnia revelat; tandem sit surculus arbor."
John Randall, Broseley And Its Surroundings,
1879,
pp 106-9.
.......It
was the difficulty of getting barges of the ordinary kind built; fast enough to
carry his castings (pipes and/or guns for France) that led Wilkinson to
construct the
First
Iron Vessel: The Trial.
Compared
with the armed leviathans of the same metal now upon the ocean she was, it is
true, a Severn minnow, a mere stickleback contrasted with a whale, but she was a
notable innovation in that day, and created a wonderful sensation among the
barge builders and barge owners, and indeed through the kingdom generally. The
barge builders had a sort of monopoly, and thought Wilkinson could not do
without them; and when he said "I will make an iron barge", they
laughed at him. Wilkinson, however, set an ingenious smith, whose name was John
Jones, but who went by the name of John O'Lincoln, to work; and during the
spring and summer of 1787 John's hammer and tongs were plied in riveting and
fastening plate after plate of Wilkinson's best iron, whilst :zany a joke was
cracked by passers by, who denounced the innovation in terms embellished by
rounds of oaths. Early and late John's hammer was heard – rat-tat-tat-tat,
rat-at-tat-tat, till the woods echoed back the busy sounds. It was a quiet rural
spot; and its solitude had favoured, as we have said, the exportation of good
gun iron to the French.
The
autumn of 1787 arrived, and a great crowd came down to witness the launch. The
woods wore their autumnal foliage, the sun sent down approving smiles, and the
Apley rookery,, disturbed by incursive visitors, furnished a hovering cloud of
sable spectators. The plodding ploughman left his task, the artisan his shop,
the pedlar his pack, and yeomen from vale and upland came pouring down to
witness the launch. "Will she swim ?", "Will she work and prove
manageable on the water ?", and "Who will he get to work her ?"
were questions that served to occupy the time. Never did son of Vulcan look more
proud than John O'Lincoln; if his descent direct from the patron god had been
made out and patented he could not have felt more so. A discharge of 32-pounders
told that all was ready; and before the white curling smoke had well died away,
the Trial descended the way-pieces into the river with a splash. It carried 30
tons, and Edward Palmer, who lived near the Wood Bridge, as Coalport Bridge was
then called, was her captain.
The
following is Wilkinson's account of the event in a letter to Mr.Stockdale:
(Note: exactly as in Stockdale, omitted here).
Wilkinson
went on building other barges. In a letter, dated "Bradley Ironworks, 20th
October, 1787", he says:
‘There have been two iron vessels launched in my service since 1st September, one is a canal boat for this navigation - the other a barge of 40 tons for the river Severn. The last was floated on Monday, and is I expect now at Stourport with a lading of bar iron. My clerk at Broseley advises me that she swims remarkably light, and exceeds even my own expectations.’
The
Universal Magazine for that year, Volume 83, p 276, says:
‘November the 8th, an iron vessel, built by John Wilkinson, Esq., was lately launched at Willey Wharf. She is perfectly tight, moves very easily on the water, and draws about eight inches with every accompaniment on board.’
In 1810 John Onions and Son, of Broseley, built a lighter, of about 50 tons, called the ‘Victory’, which was designed for the Severn trade; and also on at their works in Brierley, which was sent to London, in parts, and which was we believe, the first iron vessel on the Thames. In 1811 they built several which traded extensively between Brierley and London, and between Broseley and Stourport.
Note:
The Universal magazine cited is actually 1788, not 1787, as is the Wilkinson
letter from Bradley.
John Randall The Wilkinsons
Madeley,
No date
This
account contains several differences from that above, the significant ones being
summarised as:
‘but
she was to be the first, and the precursor of others on the Clyde, the Mersey
and the Thames .......... the first iron keel was laid...........Wilkinson could
not get barges of wood built fast enough. The bargebuilders had a monopoly of
the trade, and were quite independent ...... He set to work at Willey Wharf, and
John Jones ... was
foreman ..... Wilkinson's iron was of the best quality ...... quiet,
sylvan rural spot.’
following
the quotation from the Universal magazin
‘The Gentleman's Magazine of the same year had, we believe, a similar notice. Others caught up the idea, and iron barges have been common to the Severn ever since...... In 1810.. a lighter-which was sent to Mr Bishop of London in parts ...... out of the metallic hills of Shropshire, therefore, came the first iron rails, the first iron barge and the first iron bridge.’
An
anecdote is told of a local country blacksmith, who had dropped his hammer
temporarily to listen for the first time, to the relation by a neighbour of the
story he had heard of Wilkinson's intention to make a canal boat of iron; and
who, 'with the utmost astonishment and incredulity, threw into his water bath
the horse shoe he had been working on, and asked the relator if he thought iron
would swim. when the shoe had sunk to the bottom in a moment.
Swedish View Of The West Midlands In 1802-3.
W.
A. SMITH, in ‘WEST MIDLANDS STUDIES’,
Vol 3, 1969, pp 66-1; being a translation of the account by E. T.
Svedenstierna of his travels in 1803. At Bradley Ironworks:
Note:
an independent translation of the complete work exists (also from the German
translation rather than the Swedish original), and differs significantly in
other matters of local interest. Phrases in square brackets come from this
second translation – SVEDENSTIERNA’S TOUR - GREAT BRITAIN 1802-3,
Trans.
E.L.Dellow, Ed. K.W.Flinn, 1973.
On
the canal near to the works there were several 20 ton barges made of sheet iron
[iron plates] and of the same shape as the customary wooden barges, i.e.
flat-bottomed with a rounded [blunt] stern and triangular bows. They lay
altogether [in general] higher in the water and moved more easily than the
wooden ones and were fairly water-tight and stood up to rough usage, however
they cost 3 or 4 times as much as a wooden barge and since one of the latter can
be used for 20 years with a few repairs it is not yet clear whether this
experiment will be financially practicable.
Wilkinson
is also said to have a larger vessel of sheet iron [iron plates] on the Severn,
but for some reason it was less successful. I was unable to meet him personally,
since he was in London when I visited his works, and I therefore had no
opportunity to find out more about some of his experiments and plant. He is an
old man now, although he still has a wealth of new ideas, even if these are said
to have enriched science more than himself.
A. N.
Palmer, John Wilkinson And The Old
Bersham Iron Works
1899
Reprinted from:
Transactions
of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodarion; pp 7-8, 25.
In
1740, according to Mr Stockdale, Mr Isaac Wilkinson migrated to the village of
Backbarrow in the parish of Coulton in Furness, where he had a good house, and
began business in a small way by the manufacture of flat iron heaters. In this
he was assisted by his eldest son John. They had, at first, no furnace of their
own, but got their melted metal from a furnace worked at Backbarrow by the
Machells and others, bringing it in large ladles across the road, where they
poured it into moulds. But "about 1748, or perhaps a little later, they
built or purchased the iron furnace and forge at Wilson House, near Lindal, in
the parish of Cartmel, intending to smelt there the rich haematite ore of
Furness with turbary or peat moss, large tracts of which at that time were on
every side nearly of the furnace." Into this turbary he dug a canal, and in
order to bring the peat along this canal to the furnace, he made, acting, it is
said, upon the suggestion of his son John, a small iron boat, "the parent,
as Mr Stockdale says, "of all the iron ships that have ever since been
built". The many experiments made by the two with the object of smelting
iron ore with peat moss proved, however, unsuccessful, and they had to revert to
the use of wood charcoal. Nevertheless, they here invented and patented
"the common box smoothing iron, even to this day but little altered".
(Stockdale) Soon after, John Wilkinson left his father and got employment first
at Wolverhampton, and then at Bilston, Staffordshire, where, after ten years he
"succeeded in obtaining sufficient means to enable him to build the first
blast furnace ever constructed in Bilston township, which he called Bradley
Furnace, where he ultimately, after many failures, attained complete success in
substituting mineral coal for wood charcoal in the smelting and puddling of iron
ore.
As
to the silver tokens .... dated 1788, the design of which is identical in every
respect with the copper tokens issued in the same year, containing, that is, on
the reverse a ship in full sail. ...... It commemorates the large iron boat
which Wilkinson launched in .July 1787, at Willey Wharf, the first successor to
the small iron boat which he had constructed years before at Lindal. Mr.
Stockdale says that he has in his collection a silver token of the same design
as that just described, but dated 1787...
A Set Of Tables For Ascertaining The Weight Of Cargoes Carried By Narrow Boats, Navigating On The River Trent
and
other navigations communicating therewith, done under the direction of tb
Committee of Proprietors of the River Trent Navigation, printed by Samuel Tupman
and E. B. Robinson, 1801-8. Nottingham.
Record
No.46.
Mamaatt
& Co., Brinsley.
No.3.
S.Kenney, Kastez
Mr.
Jewsbury of Measham, for the late Mr. Joseph year 1804. The present owners are
Mr. Wilkes' employed her in the Lime Stone Trade on the Crumford Canal. This
boat had never been trimmed when these gauges were taken.
She had no floor, being built of iron.
Her length is 70feet, and breadth, across the midships, 5 feet 9 inches.
She drew 7 – 7/16 inches when light, and 29 inches when laden with 20
tons.
When
these gauges were taken, there were on board, a small jury-mast and line only.
As
25 tons put this boat down 26.92 inches, one ton upon average puts her down 1.07
inches
(There
follows a table of depths for each one ton increment in load light to 25 tons.
To 17 tons the immersion changes uniformly by 1.08 inches per ton: thereafter by
1.07 inches per ton)
Note.
From internal evidence it would appear that this boat was gauged in 1806. The
last six entries in the set, only, contain the additional information that
plates were fixed at the quarter points of the hold, the length of which was
recorded. It seems reasonable to suppose that four plates were affixed to each
boat, two each side, calibrated in eighths of an inch or better to justify the
use of two places of decimals, and. averaged over the four results for an
average draught, equivalent to the boat being on an even keel. The individual
gaugings are so consistent that it is obvious that great care was taken over
this work. It does not emerge from this booklet whether the gauge plates were
permanent, or a single set re-used on each boat; but I would suppose the latter,
as they would be unreadable after a period in service, and such accuracy would
be of little use in normal service. (In many cases the weights of covers and
miscellaneous equipment not on board is separately noted, and was up to a
quarter of a ton.) The condition of the boats was also noted briefly. A few were
noted as very foul, when the floors were taken up, but most were good. Not all
had floors, which helps to explain the variations in draught, perhaps. We are
however left to suppose that the boats were free of water. The jury-mast was
universal, and associated with the towing line.
Measham
* was the terminus of the Ashby Canal, with two possible circuitous routes from
the Cromford Canal, and a variety of lock sizes on each route.
John Granthan. ‘Iron As A Material For Shipbuilding.’
1842,
pp5ff.
Early
History of Iron Vessels.
It
is a common error to suppose that vessels have but recently been constructed of
iron, and that the principle is only advocated by a few whose interest, as
workers in iron, leads them to promote it. Many therefore, naturally enough,
still view the subject with distrust, and regard it as one of the visionary
schemes of this wonders-working age, which will soon be relinquished and
forgotten. But I trust I shall be enabled to prove that the construction of iron
vessels is not an invention of recent date; that the value of iron as a material
for ship-building has long been known; and that it has for many years been
making a sure, though slow, progress towards the improved state it has already
attained.
Iron
Canal Boats.
The
first traces that I can discover of the construction of iron vessels, are of
those built for the canals of this country. Of these, a few, I believe, were
built as far back as forty years since, and it is stated by those who have had a
good opportunity of knowing, that some of them may still be in existence. During
the Meeting of the British Association in Glasgow, after a paper had been read
on the subject of iron vessels, several gentlemen communicated facts, which had
come within their own knowledge, with respect to their early introduction. A
friend, in writing on this subject, states that a gentleman in Staffordshire was
at that time cutting up some iron vessels which had been at work twenty-eight
years. My partner, Mr Page, was engaged in building several canal boats of iron,
upwards of thirty years since; and I have myself seen iron vessels in
Staffordshire, of a still greater age, but the precise date of the construction
of which I could not ascertain. These facts are interesting, not only as proving
that the subject has long been under the attention of practical men, but as
evidence of the strength and durability of iron vessels, points to which I shall
hereafter more fully allude.
(Note:
the text continues in some detail on the early adoption of iron steamers, and is
the main source for such items in the chronology. By 1858, when he wrote the
first edition of Iron Shipbuilding, Grantham was able to add the passage on the
Trial from the Gentleman's Magazine. The wording of this and later editions is
slightly different from the passage cited, but not as to materially alter the
interpretation. There appears to be no published record of the Glasgow
discussion.)
He
incorporates a letter from his friend Thomas Jevons, of Liverpool, written in
1842:
‘...and having been the first individual, I believe, that ever launched an iron boat on salt water... In August 1815, I launched a small iron boat, which I fitted up as a pleasure boat, and frequently sailed in it on the river Mersey. It was built by Mr Joshua Horton, of Tipton, near Birmingham, but fitted up in Liverpool by the late Mr Roger Hunter, and the late F.J.Humble. When not in use, this boat was put up in the Duke's Dock, where it was open to the gaze of any passer by; and, not being what a sailor would term ship-shape, owing to its being built inland, it was rather a curiosity. Its buoyant powers, however, and the remarkable ease with which it maintained its way, when once put in motion, attracted the notice of many.....’
(Note: the letter continues to describe the sabotage of this boat, which led to the construction of the first unsinkable, self-righting iron life-boat at Tipton between 1818 and 1820. This too was sabotaged at an early stage, but was recovered and sold to the West Indies.)
Notes On Steam Navigation On Shallow Rivers
ARTIZAK,
January and February 1851. ………being
the result of eighteen years' experience on the Loire and Garonne, by a
Practical Engineer.
Hugh
Williamson identified the author of this extraordinary account for me, in the
course of his studies of steamboats on the Loire. Thompson had been sent to
France in 182? by Fawcett as an engine erector. He stayed on in the Loire area
for some fifteen years, pursuing a variety of interests.
‘.....I
had only been there two months when the boats were all stopped, owing to the
shallowness of the water. The first year I did not think much about it, but the
second, I began to think that something could be done to remedy this serious
evil; but I was told by everybody that there was no help for it. I was not,
however, of their opinion, and my first job was to make a high-pressure boiler,
to replace one of Fawcett's, which I patented. This boiler was of cylindrical
form with D-shaped flues, and weighed one ton less than the old one, which
weighed 5 tons and worked at 4 lbs per square inch. By the increased pressure,
24 lbs per square inch, which this boiler would carry with safety, the power of
the engine was nearly doubled, and the speed of the boat much increased. A very
strong opposition had been started against our company by a rival company, which
had got engines from Barnes and Miller of London, and their boats previously
beat ours by an hour, and took all the traffic from us. With the new boiler we
beat them by an hour and a half, and the opposition was soon over. This was in
1830. In 1831, I made a 24-horse engine for a boat that had had a 12-horse
engine in, previously, but the new engine was lighter than the old one. I
carried 30 lbs pressure in the boiler, and by making the condenser larger than
usual, and keeping the air-pump the ordinary size, I found I could get as good a
vacuum as in a low-pressure engine. In 1832, I began to think seriously about
building light iron steamers, for the boats were all stopped about three months
every summer, and at the very time when most money was to be made. But in this
attempt I was worse off than Noah, for I had no one to give me the least
instruction how to draught, or calculate, or build a boat, but I thought I would
try, so I began by displacing a cubic foot of water and weighing it, and then I
weighed a square foot of sheet iron, and a lineal foot of iron for the ribs.
Then I made models and put them afloat, and worked on in this way the most part
of 1832. In the beginning of 1833 I found that I could build a boat that would
draw only eight inches of water, but I told the company nine inches, but they
would not risk any money on it, so I spoke to some of my friends about it, and
in three months we had the affair all settled. ..... I tried the engine on
Christmas Day, and on New Year's Day (1834) we ran the boat about four leagues.
She was drawing only six inches of water, but had nothing in her, except the
engines, and boilers, and about a ton of coals. To give a better idea of the
boat, I will describe her construction. Length, 100 feet; breadth, 10 feet 5
inches. The sheet iron $he was built of was one eleventh of an inch thick, the
ribs 3 lbs to the lineal foot, and two feet apart. The sides of the boat 3 feet
6 inches high, and where the engines were, 5 feet 6 inches. The iron for the
paddle-boxes etc, was as light as I could get it. The cabins were made with
strong canvas, with a light wood framing; the outside was well tarred, and the
inside covered with fine cloth. Fore and aft the cabins there was a kind of
platform, where the passengers could enjoy the air, under an awning. Where the
cabins were, there was a small gangway, outside the boat, for the men to pass
fore and aft without going through the cabins. The engine was a beam engine, of
24-horse power, with sheet-iron beams, made very thin and deep. In like manner
every advantage was taken to use wrought iron, for strength and lightness.
Diameter of cylinder 16 inches, and 2 feet stroke. Paddle-wheels 12 feet
diameter, and 4 feet wide. Number =of revolutions per minute, 43, Vacuum, 24
inches. Pressure of steam 38 lbs on the square inch. The engine, boiler, shafts,
and wheels weighed 6. tons, and the boat and the engine complete, 14 tons.
We
started with her for Orleans on the 24th March, 1834, when there was only 8
inches of water, and the novelty of this circumstance caused it to be remarked
on by the newspapers. She ran. for some time, between Tours and Orleans, and
when the boats that ran from Nantes to Angers were stopped for want of water,
she was put upon the latter station, and very soon repaid the owners her cost. I
was then commissioned to build a boat, 125 feet long by 14 feet beam, but before
she was laid down ...... I took the two engines and built two light boats for
them, with decks fore and aft; otherwise, and in the strength of the iron, they
resembled the first one. The deck planks were 5/8 of an inch thick; deck beams 2
inches x l½ inches, and placed two feet apart, with two rows of light columns
inside. The deck was covered with strong canvas, for it would not stand
caulking. These boats were 125 feet long and 10 feet broad, and drew 10 inches
of water ....... a boat of 140 feet long and 13 feet broad. I changed the system
of the boilers in this boat, making a cylindrical shell and a cylindrical flue
through it; the shell 30 inches, and the flue 22 inches diameter, and thirty
feet long. At the furnaces it was 3 feet 6 inches diameter. A steam chest on
each, 5 feet high. These boilers worked at 60 lbs on the square inch, and the
steam was expanded and condensed. This boat was partly built to oppose a boat,
built and fitted with engines in France, which had non-condensing engines
working at 75 lb pressure. She beat all our boats, but drew too much water for
the summer time; however, when our new boat started, she was full master of her,
and finally ran her off the station. In 1837, I built another boat, 146 feet
long and 11 feet 6 inches broad, with a 55 horse engine, working at 68 lbs
pressure and condensing, and she ran 48 leagues in 11% hours.
......I
fear I have wearied your readers with this egotistical narrative, but I am no
writer, and you have the facts as I have noted them down.
In
1838 I was chiefly occupied in constructing some land engines for flour and
cotton mills, and did not build any boats. However, about this time, all my
plans having become well known, a French builder tried his hand at light iron
boats, but his first attempt was a failure;- she did nut draw much water, but
she would not go. He was supported, however, by bome noblemen, and went to work
again. This time he succeeded in getting a fair speed with 10 inches draft of
water. Those of your, readers who have ever been employed abroad, will easily
understand that as soon as one of their own countrymen could imitate my work, I
was de trop, or in plain English, that my room was more welcome than my company.
(Author's
note: A detailed drawing of one of Thompson's boilers is contained in Annales
des Fonts et Chaussees, 2nd Series, 1842, 2nd semestre, in an account of the
formal inquiries into a number of boiler explosions in France.
Other
issues in the 1830's and 1840's contain detailed accounts of river navigations,
both the introduction of steamboats on rivers other than the Loire, and of the
maintenance and improvement of the waterways themselves. Some of these will form
the basis of a future paper.)
George Piggott Boiler Plate Working.
1865
in British Association, Birmingham and the Midlands Hardware District,
Reports
edited by Samuel Timmins, 1866.
....Less
than half a century back nearly everything was done by manual labour, now nearly
everything is done by the aid of machinery. Formerly the boiler maker punched
the holes in the plates by repeated blows with a sledge hammer on the head of a
punch, and it required about fire or six blows with a hammer of 14 pounds weight
to punch a hole 5/8 inch diameter through a plate 3/8 inch in thickness. Screw
presses were then used, and afterwards lever presses, combining a pair of
cutters for shearing, were introduced, but still worked by manual labour and
very slow in operation. It is about 40 years since punching and shearing
machines were generally driven by steam power......
....Before
the introduction of rolled iron, the rivets for boiler making were made from
square hammered bars; the iron was rounded to the size of the intended rivet in
a tool on the anvil at a smith's fire, then cut off and headed in a tool, with a
hand hammer, just as wrought iron nails: are now made by hand. This mode of
making rivets was continued long after the introduction of rolled round bars.
One man could make about 300 rivets per day. The first machine for making boiler
rivets was invented by Mr. Griffiths, of Smethwick, in the year 1838......
.....Setting
plates and putting them together used to be pretty nearly one process in boiler
making, for each plate was formed to an approximate shape and then temporarily
fixed in its place on the boiler while red hot. It was then and there hammered
into its required form, and when cooled was marked for punching from the holes
of the adjoining plates to which it had been fitted. Many rude contrivances were
resorted to to place and keep the work in shape, and it was no uncommon thing
for a boiler, when it was put together ready for rivetting up, to be so full of
stretching screws to pull in one place, and props to push out in another, that
there was little space left for the holder-up man. ....The boiler maker of the
present day reaps many advantages from the improvements made in the manufacture
of iron; not in the quality, for that is deteriorated, but in the variety in
form in which it is now made, and in the length of bars and increased size of
plates produced. Going back to the period before rolled plates were known,
boilers were then made of hammered plates; they were about 2 feet long and 15
inches to 18 inches wide, and about 5/8 inch thick in the middle, tapered all
round to about 1/4 inch :hick at the sides. As it was only the thinned edges of
the plates that could be punched, the boiler maker was compelled to put them in
his work of the size and form that he received them from the forge, and it was
usual to order a few "half plates", that is, plates of about half the
ordinary width, to be used as closers in completing each row or circle of plates
in the boiler, and this practice of using half plates was retained after the
introduction of rolled iron.
.....The
general form of the boiler was what has been called the "balloon"
shape. The upper part of this boiler being hemispherical was composed entirely
of taper plates, but the boiler maker of that day was ignorant of the method of
calculating, or by any way obtaining the proper taper for the plates, so he had
to guess it, and it sometimes that it happened that the vertical joints got very
far out of perpendicular in consequence of the plates being tapered too much,
this he at once rectified by putting in a parallel plate, or if needful, one
with the wide -end uppermost. The writer of this has seen a balloon-shaped
boiler in which were several "half-plates", and some plates reversed
for the purpose of rectifying the excess of taper; the rivets were 5/8 inch
diameter made from square iron.
Hugh Williamson Steamboats On The River Loire, 1822-1852,
(privately printed by his widow, Mrs Kathleen Williamson, 1986)
Note:
This work reproduces the evidence of arbitrators of the Nantes Chamber of
Commerce, concerning the reason for delays in the construction of two iron
steamboats during the winter of 1837-8 at Mons. Guibert's yard. Their report is
very revealing of contemporary methods and problems. It relates to the
construction of boats typically 35 metres long, 4 metres wide, working at about
0.25 metres draught, and powered by side paddle-wheels;
18th
January.
‘We
proceeded to the shipyard of Messrs Guibert Fr6res, Prairie de la Magdalene,
opposite the Pompe A Feu. Monsieur Guibert showed us the hull of an iron boat in
six sections. These sections had been raised clear of the wooden building frames
and were ready for turning over, so that they could be moved to the water's edge
for rivetting together. On the second building frame we saw all the ribs of
another iron boat in place with about half the bottom plates rivetted to them.
In the workshop we saw a sizeable quantity of pieces of sheet iron ready for the
second boat. There were no workmen in the yard nor in the covered workshop,
We
agreed that five working days would have been sufficient to get the first boat
on to the water, so that work on the interior could proceed. Since the 7th of
this month, however, the cold has been so intense that the workmen have had to
halt, as we know to be the case in all open yards, including those constructing
wooden boats. Not only are the men unable to hold their tools, but both wood and
iron have become unworkable. We were shown a slightly curved iron sheet that had
developed a large crack, even though it had been rolled in the workshop. The
wooden building frames have to be set up in the open because of the crane that
has to lift the six hull sections.’
On
the 22nd January, Guibert reported that he had been able to get the workmen back
on to the second boat, but he was immediately interrupted by floods, which
prevented further work until the 3rd April.
John Vernon. On The Construction Of Iron Ships
1863.
In Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.
‘...which
is the more remarkable from the fact that less than twenty years ago it was
considered by many persons of great experience to be a matter of doubt whether
iron ships could be adopted at all for general service with any advantage. This
doubt however was not shared in by many thoughtful mechanical men, who were
strongly impressed with the advantages to be obtained from the introduction of
iron; and the correctness of their views is now thoroughly established by the
practical results that have been obtained on such an extensive scale.
The
first consideration in the order of the subject will be the main points of
superiority of iron ships over those built of wood. These consist in the
superior strength, greater durability and less cost of iron ships, together with
their larger carrying capacity, greater facility of construction, and the more
certain supply of the material.
...There
is perhaps no branch of iron shipbuilding in which more special advantages are
obtained from the use of iron than in the construction of flat bottomed boats
for river navigation. The extremely small draught of water thereby obtained may
be said to be utterly impossible except by the use of iron as the material of
construction.’
(Anonymous)
On The Building Of Iron Merchant Vessels
In
Naval Science, Volume 3, 1874
....We
would like to ask, in the first place, whether there exists any legitimate or
sensible reason why a length of bar-keel, intended to be straight, rectangular,
and "out of winding", should be crooked from end to end, with sudden
inequalities on either side, with its section not rectangular in many places,
and its ends winding to form the letter "X" ?
....The
results are that the keels of many vessels are crooked and winding; the rivet
holes in them are not square to their work; the scarphs are ill-fitted and
unduly strained; the keel rivets are required to fill roughly-gouged and unfair
holes, and are consequently leaky.
....We
shall say nothing here about keels of other forms.... except to mention that the
foremost and aftermost plates, in cases of flat keel plates, are often most
severely burnt and unmercifully battered through the want of proper care and
foresight in the first heating and bending to form.
....where
stems with much curve have the rivet holes in the way of the curves drilled
before the curves are effected, the said holes are drawn into an oval form, and
the probability is that the rivets do not fill them. The consequences need not
be stated. Very often, too, the scarph uniting the stem and keel is very poorly
fitted, the butts not fitting as to length, and not conforming as to breadth.
The under surface is chipped fair, but the fact remains that it is
"slop-work", unpleasant as the phrase may sound.
....it
would seem ....that even were the bevellings given not quite correct, they could
not be far out in the breadth of the flange of an angle iron; that even if they
were out here and there, iron was of a ductile nature, and a few good blows from
a sufficiently heavy hammer would set matters right.
....the
plating is brought on to this unfair and ill-bevelled collection of frames, and
if it be of only moderate thickness it cannot possibly be got to fit them,
notwithstanding the screwing and battering that it and they receive. A very
unfair outer surface is nearly sure to follow; the plating itself has been
battered and distressed and "drifted" out of its natural strength and
tenacity; holes that perhaps once conformed conform no longer; the inevitable
gouge and drift--punch are brought to bear upon them, and the riveting, as a
natural consequence, is unsound.
....For
the most part these evils are not observable when we congratulate ourselves upon
a successful trial, for even in an iron vessel a large proportion of the vital
work is covered up; cement and ceiling - so easily applied, so quickly wrought -
may hide from a too inquisitorial eye much that may be open to serious
objection; and how often may we note how quickly these stages of the work are
carried out ?
....Without
doubt again, the rivet holes about the bilges should not be put through until
the frames are bent, for otherwise the holes must necessarily become elongated,
and hence are not properly filled.
....one
would imagine that now, at any rate, the butts of all plates helping to form the
skin of the vessel would be planed. This, however, is not the case; many vessels
are even now under construction wherein the butts of the plating know no contact
with the planing machine, The old process of beating up a ridge across each butt
before the plates are put in position, and of beating the ridges down again when
the plates are in position, is still in vogue. It is a process valuable for the
facility it offers of quickly rendering a slovenly-fitted butt apparently close,
and hence it is dying hardly.
....Then,
again, the amount of carelessness observable in the disposition of the rivet
holes in the edges of the plating is still a reproach to us. With the system of
templates usually adopted, we fail to see why this should be so; but perhaps
much of the cause lies in the fact that the class of men who perform the work
cannot be said to be skilled mechanics in the strict sense of the term. It is
almost impossible to refer to the subject without experiencing the natural
regret that our shipwrights in years past Should have deemed such work beneath
their dignity, and allowed it to pass to a class then so much inferior to them,
for some of the best fitted work we have ever seen has been performed by
shipwrights, and notably in some instances where it has been their first
attempt.
....As
another practical point requiring mention we would call attention to the
carelessness often displayed in dealing with the plates requiring to be bent to
fit the bilges. These plates are punched before being brought to the rollers for
bending, and this fact alone should be sufficient to insure their being
carefully dealt with, for there is no gainsaying the fact that in the present
day ship plates generally are much wanting in malleability. The truth, however,
is that they very frequently receive very improper treatment through the wish to
bring them to the desired curvature too suddenly; hence we find many plates
broken through at the butts, and not unfrequently along the middle.
....During
the process of bending it is desirable to insure that the edges of the outside
strokes should receive quite their full amount of curvature, in order that when
placed in position the caulking edges may be brought in close contact with the
plating beneath; but what can be said of supervision while it is possible to
find that this end is sought to be obtained by hastily placing chips, or gravel,
or handfuls of earth along the edges of the plates to be so bent ? Is it any
wonder that plates are found cracked and unfair when recourse is had to almost
any rough expedient to bring them to something like the required form ? This
bending process is, too, the one especially calculated to test the amount of
scale and blister upon plates, and it is certainly nearly time that iron
manufacturers should be given to understand that with plates even for
shipbuilding purposes some line or limit of roughness should be drawn.