hour being the full speed on a horizontal plane), and informs us that they are expressions for the velocity of transit on a descending or an ascending plane, &c., I must tell Mr. Herapath that, although he could obtain a certificate of the truth of his theorems signed by every F. R. S. in the kingdom, I would still remain an unbeliever.

Mr. IIerapath, in p. 182, vol. xxiii. attempts to give us what he calls a physical investigation of the truth of his theorems, deduced from principles given in his own theory of physics, (bless the mark!) but, strange to say, Mr. Editor, the great challenger of the Royal Society does not himself seem to have absolute confidence in his own handiwork, for he says (No. 618, p. 182), "Let it be distinctly understood, that not being quite certain of the principle alluded to, 1 do not offer it as a demonstrated solution; but I should be glad to see it brought to the test of experiment, &c." I am surprised that when Mr. Herapath was employed in making experiments on the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, he did not put this grand principle to the test of an experiment; or if the idea of its application has been an after-thought, he ought to have had it tested before he published it in the Mechanics' Magazine, when it might, perhaps, have been the means of propping up his own system of philosophy, and demonstrating that that grand principle which was first conceived by a Playfair, was doomed to be brought forth by a Herapath. But such sublime flights are too refined for a rough-shod Scotch Highlander; so I shall drop this part of the subject, and take a peep at Mr. Herapath's patch-work.

Some kind friend, no doubt, whispered in Mr. Herapath's ear, that infinite and negative velocities would be rather inconvenient for railway transit; in conse

quence of which, or something else, he has thought proper to assume a fall of 6 feet per mile, or 1 foot in 880, as the greatest limit when full steam is applied. But in making this concession, Mr. Herapath is still satisfied (this is a new thought) of the perfect accuracy of his theorems, although it should exceed 6 feet per mile. In the last article which he has written on the subject (No. 643, p. 195) he says, "that his reasons for limiting the descending application to a fall of 6 feet per mile, are not from any defect in the theorems, but from considerations of safety." Well, in the case of a fall of only 6 feet per mile, and a starting velocity of 30 miles per hour, he calculates that the velocity attained at the end of a mile will be 414 miles per hour. And again (No. 9 of his series, p. 425)

he tells us, that 2- =2—=1 mi.

11

nutes, the time in which 1 mile will be run. Now, a velocity of 1 mile in 1 minutes produces, at a uniform velocity, exactly 41 miles per hour. Hence it appears that Mr. Herapath, by some legerdemain trick, contrives, the instant the engine and train commence the descent, to convert the velocity of 30 miles per hour into a uniform velocity of 414 miles per hour! Instead of 41 miles, I calculated (No. 640) the velocity would only be 32 miles per hour, and this I did upon the supposition that the steam could act as efficiently on the descending plane as on a level. In doing so I have rather overrated than underrated the power of steam, so that the velocities deduced from the theorem V2+2 g h (although far below those deduced from Mr. Herapath's theorem) are rather above than below what would take place in real practice. Farther, Mr. Herapath tells us

which, for our globe and for our latitude, is well known to be 32 feet. My next communication will, I suppose, be all up-hill work; and as this night happens to be Hogmanaye, I shall conclude, Mr. Editor, by wishing you, and all your numerous readers and contributors, a happy new year, and all the best compliments and wishes of the season, &c. I am, Mr. Editor, yours, &c. IVER M'IVER.

Dec. 31, 1835.

ON THE STATE OF THE ARTS OF DESIGN IN ENGLAND, AND ENGRAVING IN METALLIC RELIEF.

In the clear and satisfactory evidence of the Editor of the Mechanics' Magazine before a Select Committee of the House of Commons on Arts and Manufactures, he gives it as his opinion that we are not behind the French in design as applied to manufacture (most assuredly not) -and mentions the circumstance of patterns for the French market being supplied by English artists. The thing, I believe, is very common; and it brings to my mind the case of a very clever artist (now dead), Mr. Baxter, whose enamels on China were of the very first order. He waited on Mr. Hope to solicit his patronage; that gentleman said he could do nothing for him unless he adopted the French style, and he showed him some China he had just purchased. Mr. Baxter assured him that what he then saw was painted by himself, but that, in his own defence, he had been obliged to adopt the French mark.

Desirable as metallic relief engravings would be, for the purpose of printing

* Landseer, in his fourth Lecture on Engraving (p. 201), delivered at the Royal Institution, observes on this interesting point:" I am under the necessity of postponing, in part, what I may have to state on the subject of wood-engraving, in consequence of certain suspicions which I could not help entertaining, and which I have not yet been able to remove, that at least some of the productions of the old masters, which are generally thonght to be impressions from wood, are really printed from some other material, and perhaps from the substance (whatever it may have been) that was originally used for letter-types. It appears to me, from the freedom and frequency of the dark crossings which distinguish these works from modern wood-engravings, and from this mode of working being obviously the easiest mode of producing the effects which their authors had in view, that they are either etchings (the lights being corroded away), or, which is yet more likely, that a prototype or matrix was cut in intaglio, probably with the graver, in which the tablets from whence the prints are taken were cast in the manner of letter-types,"

along with type, I imagine they never could be done to any considerable or useful extent, and can never extend much beyond outline; the attempt to produce any thing of a finished character would immediately involve an expense fatal to the whole affair.

An attempt has lately been made on steel, but it requires an after operation to sink those parts sufficiently deep which when printed are to be left pure white paper; that being the case, wood-engravings for printing with type will, I suspect, never be superseded. Lithography and soft ground both admit of an artist producing fac-similes of his designs-the former, though a sort of printing from the surface, cannot, that I am aware, be used with type; and the latter only with the rolling-press. There is another drawback to the production of original designs, to be printed from, and that is, the reversing of light and shade very often, and the action of figures always; for to make the latter (we will suppose swordsmen or reapers) right-handed on the impression, they must be left-handed in the design; this, though no difficulty to the engraver who copies, is a working in shackles to the artist who designs.

In answer to the question, Has justice been done to them (the artists) in allowing them a free inspection of works of art ? the answer is, I do not think it has; it certainly has not. Take the British Museum, for instance, which being supported by the public money, the public should have the full benefit of; it seems only opened for the convenience of those who have places there, not for the benefit of those who visit it. At all holiday times it is shut; of a Sunday it is shut; of evenings the same. I here confine my remarks to the Elgin and other marbles, those are the rooms more immediately addressed to the artist.

What I should propose is, that these rooms, in particular, should be open to the public after the morning service on Sundays, and at all holiday times, when many could avail themselves of these beautiful works of art, who otherwise could not; as it is, they are at the times mentioned closed, and silent as the grave. Indeed, the Elgin-room, beautiful as it is, is the most ill-contrived for the purpose of study, and is now almost deserted. There is so much light in every direction, that the figures, &c, are nearly without

shade; this would not be the case if properly lighted up of an evening in the manner of the Royal Academy.

I merely throw out these remarks, subject, of course, to laws and regulations, as hints for making these, as well as other works of a similar nature, more available to every class of artists in this country.

R. R.

MR. ELIJAH GALLOWAY'S PADDLE-WHEEL.

Sir,-A copy of your publication of the 26th ult. having been sent to me, I perceive therein a description of Mr. Elijah Galloway's new paddle-wheels for steamboats. As that gentleman is, at present, in the north of England (superintending the application of his invention to several steam-vessels of the largest class), I feel it necessary, on his behalf, to notice your

comments.

To your remarks, on the absence of certificates in Mr. Galloway's circular, it is only necessary to reply, that it was only intended for private circulation, and the facts merely were stated, and references given, by which corroboration was easy; as the circular was only addressed to persons interested in such an invention, the natural course for them to pursue was to have made farther inquiry. I am able to state, that Mr. Galloway is in possession of such testimonials, from impartial witnesses, as would convince any one of the efficacy of his new paddle-wheels. If you had taken the trouble to have inquired of any of the persons named in the eircular (and which you ought to have done before questioning the accuracy of the circumstances therein stated), you would have found this to be the case; and that the fact of the superior performance of these wheels did not rest, as you assume, on Mr. Galloway's solitary testimony. I attended professionally, together with several others, on board the Monarch steam tow-boat, both before and after the application of the new wheels, and can positively affirm, that, without any other alteration, either in the vessel or machinery, her speed was improved nearly a mile and a half per hour. The swell and vibrating action were also removed. I did not witness the experiment with the Rose steam-boat, but I know that the proprietors of that vessel have been induced, by the result in this

instance, to order (and pay a patent premium for) other wheels; a circumstance, I presume, which sets the question of their superiority wholly at rest.

I cannot avoid regretting the unfair spirit which seems to have actuated your remarks upon Mr. Galloway's inventions, and on his connexion with Mr. Morgan. You have very incorrectly stated, that Mr. Galloway sold his invention to that gentleman, for a valuable consideration. I am able to state, that Mr. Galloway devoted years of his time to bring that invention into successful operation, and was finally sued by the creditors of Mr. Morgan for the money paid him for merely personal expenditure; and that, so far from receiving a consideration, he paid a large sum at the final assignment of his right, to avoid the expenses and uncertainty of a law-suit. Notwithstanding these circumstances, Mr. Galloway came forward voluntarily as a witness in the cause, "Morgan against Seaward," to prevent the injury which perjury would otherwise have produced on the plaintiff's case. You are aware of the effect of that evidence, having been yourself a witness in the case. These are private affairs, however, with which the public have little to do; but as you have introduced the subject, it is but fair that the matter should be placed in its true light.

Mr. Galloway has, since the period of his connexion with Mr. Morgan, applied himself unremittingly, and through years of labour and privation, to this highly interesting department of science; and, I am proud to give my humble testimony, that he has, at last, realised a decided and valuable improvement, and feel assured, that he will speedily obtain a competent reward for his indefatigable and useful efforts.

I am able to add, that Mr. Galloway has entered into contracts for the whole of the vessels of the City of Dublin Steamboat Company, and other proprietors in the North; the vessels of which amount to several thousand horses' power, and some of them are of the same class with the Monarch steam-ship.

make no better defence of himself than his agent, Mr. Gill, has made for him. Mr. Gill says, that Mr. Galloway's circular was 66 only intended for private circulation," meaning thereby, we presume, that it was very wrong in us to make the contents of it public. We know well that it was intended for private (very private) circulation - so private, that it should, if possible, reach the hands of no one who could detect the gross misrepresentations which it contained; and therefore it was, that we felt it to be our duty to give it all the publicity in our power, that the dishonest object sought by such privacy might be defeated. We charged Mr. Galloway with practising a deliberate imposture, in stating that his new paddle-wheels had been fitted to "THE Monarch steam-vessel," inasmuch as the vessel known to all who are acquainted with British steam-navigation as THE Monarch, is one of the largest and best appointed steam-vessels afloat; while the Monarch to which Mr. Galloway's wheels have been actually applied is an old tug-boat, of some 20 or 30 tons burthen only, made use of for experiment merely-never heard of before by one nautical person in ten thousand-and which may, for any thing we know, have been thus royally christened for the nonce, that is to say, for the purpose of making persons not on the spot believe it was the real Monarch. Does Mr. Gill deny these facts? Does he dispute that Mr. Galloway's words were designed and calculated to convey the false impression we complain of? Nothing of the kind. He admits, on the contrary, that it was not THE MOnarch steam-vessel" which was really referred to, but "the Monarch steam tow boat and in admitting that, he admits the head and front" of his client's offending. But, says Mr. Gill, "if you had taken the trouble to have inquired of any of the persons named in the circular (and which you ought to have done before questioning the accuracy of the circumstances therein stated), you would have found that the fact of the superior performances of these wheels did not rest, as you assume, on Mr. Galloway's solitary testimony." We think we know what we 66 ought" to do in such cases as the present quite as

well as Mr. Gill can tell us; and feel assured that we did all that any reasonable person could expect of us. Foremost among "the persons named in the circular" or referred to rather, for there was nobody named-were, of course, the captain, owners, and agents of 66 THE Monarch;" and to one of these parties we did apply, who told us that the name of their vessel had been most unwarrantably and shamefully made use of. Was not this enough? Who, after being troubled with one false reference from a party, ever thinks of attending to a second? Mr. Galloway did not deserve, at our hands as honest journalists, that we should make a single further inquiry on the subject. Nor, though we had gone through all the "testimonies" he may be in possession of, should we, in all likelihood, have approached one step nearer the truth. The evidence which Mr. Gill has now volunteered in his client's behalf is, we dare say, as strong as any evidence that Mr. Galloway is able to produce. And what is that evidence? All "swell" and "vibrating action" removed, and an increase in speed of "nearly a mile and a half per hour"!!! We laugh to scorn such pretensions. Mr. Gill, as a gentleman not without some distinction in the scientific world, should be ashamed of lending them the sanction of his authority. The "swell" and "vibrating action" are not all caused by the wheels, and could not, therefore, be all removed by any improvement in them; nor, though Mr. Galloway's wheel were ten times better than it is (for, after all, it has some good points), could it possibly produce in river-navigation so considerable an increase of speed as Mr. Gill attests it to have realised. If it be on the faith of such representations as these that Mr. Galloway has obtained so many orders for his wheels from proprietors in the North," there must be wonderfully less wisdom in the North than the world has been accustomed to ascribe to it. But, after what we have seen, we must, with all due respect for Mr. Gill, take leave to doubt the perfect accuracy of his information on this head. With respect to Mr. Galloway and his connexion with Mr. Morgan, it may suffice to say, that we know nothing of its history; and that in assuming there was a

66

"valuable consideration" given by Morgan, we only took that for granted, which the law declares to be an essential ingredient of a good assignment of property. Mr. Gill cites, as a proof of Mr. Galloway's honourable treatment of Mr. Morgan, the evidence which he voluntarily gave in the cause, Morgan v. Seaward, to prevent the injury which perjury would otherwise have produced on the plaintiff's case;" but he forgets one thing which, it is only fair to all parties (the witness so harshly alluded to more particularly), should not be left out of sight, namely, that it is still a moot point on which side the perjury lay.-ED. M. M.

FIRST DISCLAIMER UNDER THE LATE PATENT LAW AMENDMENT ACT.

The first patent which has been amended under the late Act is that of Benjamin Rotch, Esq., for " improved guards or protectors for horses' legs and feet under certain circumstances," dated 20th of March, 1830. So important and peculiar was this invention, that double the usual time, that is, twelve months, were granted to the patentee to make up his mind as to the specification. We took some notice of it at the time of its appearance (see Mech. Mag. vol. xv. p. 246), and as the reader will see by reference to our remarks, did not think quite so highly of it as its inventor, or rather patentee. Mr. Rotch now states in his disclaimer (inrolled Dec. 22, 1835), that having since the inrolment of his specification discovered that surgeons and others have used bandages for parts of the human frame made of caoutchouc, he is doubtful whether he can claim the applying of the same to horses' feet and legs as his invention! He then disclaims the words " and feet" in his title, and in his claim; thus limiting the application of his India-rubber protectors to the legs and knees; though his premising doubt takes even this limited application away from him, if such doubt be well-founded.

The principal part of the invention consisted in stretching a bottle of Indiarubber, and pulling it over the hoof of the horse up to the postern-joint. This he disclaims.

This India-rubber boot was to be

pre

tected by an iron shoe, consisting of a plate, the shape of the sole of the hoof, with arms projecting at intervals round it, which were to be folded up and bent against the front and sides, thus grasp. ing the hoof. Very broad-headed rivets were also to be used in fastening the caoutchouc to the iron, which iron it was provided, might be protected by a slight shoe of steel of the ordinary shape. All these things, too, are disclaimed.

Ordinary bandages covering wounds on horses' legs were to be fastened at each end by a ring of India-rubber, clasping and holding by its elasticity the dressing in its proper place. This, also,

is disclaimed.

Another part of Mr. Rotch's invention was a cylinder of India-rubber, which was to encompass a wound on the leg or knee of a horse, and by its elasticity keep the dressing in its place. This, although not formally disclaimed, his first doubt, if well-founded, certainly puts an end to.

Some other trivial disclaimers are made in the mode of making the Indiarubber into bandages, &c.; and some verbal amendments are also made for the purpose of rendering the construction of the sentences, consistent one with another.

Mr. Rotch has, in fact, disclaimed his whole specification; he might well have saved himself the trouble, as, in all probability, its validity would never have been called in question.

SOME SUGGESTIONS RESPECTING A NEW PRINCIPLE IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF RAILWAYS FOR LOCOMOTIVE ENGINES. BY THE AUTHOR OF 66 THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPARED WITH

OTHERS,' ""THE RAILWAY TABLE," &c.

The nearest distance between two points being a straight line, railways are generally made as nearly straight as circumstances will admit. Deviations from a direct line, when admitted, are made to curve as gently as possible, to avoid any material increase in the friction against the rails. It has been usual to lay out the curve portions of railways as portions of circles, having certain given diameters, but as large as the nature of the country will allow, or other obstacles that may present them