On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
The following is a Report of the Judges, in department 5, group 1, of the Thirty-eighth Annual Fair of the American Institute, held in the city ofo New York, October, 1869 : No. 51. HARRIS' STEAM ENGINE (CORLISS).—For best results on net effective power shown at the trial, being from one to two per cent better than any other on competition, and for superiority of workmanship and general arrangement of valves and valve gearing. (1st medal and diploma). No. 848. BABCOCK AND WILCOX STEAM ENGINE.—For the most perfect and automatic expansion valve gearing on exhibition. The judges are of the opinion that, had the principles upon which the engine was based been properly carried out in its construction, it would have performed much better. Also, it was evident that during the trial of the Harris engine the steam was dryer than in the trials of the other engine. (1st medal and diploma). I hereby certify that the above is a true copy of the Report on file, as far as the same relates to Nos. 51 and 848. JOHN W. CHAMBERS, Secretary. Truly the mountain has labored and brought forth a mouse. It has taken this committee some four weeks to come to the conclusion, that of two engines out of all exhibited at the re: cent fair, each is better than the other. he Corliss engine having better valVe gear than the Babcock & Wilcox engine, the valve gear on the latter is the best ; or it is the other way. How is it ? Will somebody help us out of our confusion. We do not comprehend this mystery. What can the public gather from such a meager and in consistent reoort as this ? It was noto be expected that' out of ll the ,ngines exhibited more than two could gain the ;forst prize, of which we suppose each triumphant exhibitor may clahn the equal undivided half ; but it is to be supposed that other engines had merit enough to receive some mea-tion' honorable or otherwise ; and a more minute statement of the work perform,ed by each would have enabled the public to determine whether the action of the judges vas based upon good grounds. We put it as an intricate problem for our mathematical readers to solve, that if it has taken the judges four weeks to make the above elaborate report on engines, when may we expect the one on boilers?
