The Tunnelling Machine

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

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.

MESSRS. EDITORSI perceive in your pa. per of the 5th inst. a paragraph, that, Irom a similarity of phraseology, seems to have been copied frgm a paper in this city. It announ. ces with much plausibility that "the Hoosic Tunnelling Machine has proved a failure." To enable you to see how much truth there is in that assertion, I wish to quote the very Ian. gaage used by ODe of the most distinguished engineers of Western New York, in a conver. sation between himself and one of our city lawyers of high distinction ; in answering the question, " what is your opinion of the mao chine 1" he said, " I have seen the machine operate and have examined it well : it is my deliberate opinion it will cut out more rock in a day than can be removed by any mp' n. known to me." If that can be called a fail. ure, what must it be capable of doing to enti. tie it to the appellation of a successful mao chine 1 As I am a constant reader ot the" SCI. entific American," such an expression of opi. nion on its page must, of course be somewhat annoying to me, as I claim to he the inventor of said machine, and have ever entertained the highest respect for the candor as well as the scientific character of your paper. I take the liberty of sending you an article on the doings of the machine by an eye-witness, who has honestly given the dark as well as the bright side of the matter' It you have not seen this before, it may afford some additional light on the subject, and I cannot yet believe you are one of those who prefer darkness to light. CRas. Wilson. Boston, Feb. 9, 1853. LThe article referred to by Mr. Wilson appeared in the " Boston Transcript" of the 7th inst., which con firms the opinion expressed by the engineer mentioned above. We enter tain something of a dread to notice anything that appears in some papers, as news, about inventors, for the very reason that nine time! out of ten it is incorrecteither wIlfully or by mistake.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American