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.
In the same lecture referred to, delivered i by Mr. Raymond, he asserted that Capt. Ericsson was the inventor of the blast in locomotives, and that at the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester railway, he employed it on his trial locomotive. This is not correct ; the Novelty, the locomotive of Braithwaite and Ericsson, employed a blower, and not the blast, on her trial. Let any person examine page 608, Heberts History of the Steam Engine, and he will see for himself that the Novelty, had a blower, nothing more and nothing less. It was a beautiful locomotive, and much favor was shown to it but it failed entirely to compete with the Rocket, and there was nothing in it as a principal feature that is now employed on locomotives Timothy Hackworth is the inventor of the blast on locomotives ; he employed it on the Sanspa-reil, which was the only locomotive that had it at the trial on the Liverpool and Manchester Railroad. The blast is also claimed for M. Pelletan. a French engineer, who no doubt invented it without any knowledge of Hack-worths application, but at a subsequent period. We have been thus particular on a subject which concerns the honor of inventors in geneial, because we deem it our duty, to allow of no injustice to any one of them, either through ignorance or malice, to pass unnoticed. We can furnish indubitable proofs to confirm the truth of all we have uttered. It is our opinion that the editor of the New York Times had no intention in making the statements referred to above, of doing injustice to those inventors over wnom he placed the claims of Capt. Ericsson ; what he stated, we believe, was uttered under the impression of its truthfulness. Correct and full information on such subjects is not so easily obtained but on that very account editors should be exceedingly careful of what they say upon such subjects, in order that they may always award honor to whom honor is due.
