[70] General T. Perronet Thompson is another remarkable instance of a person without ear for music, who has mastered the principles of harmony and applied them in the invention of his “Enharmonic Organ.”

[71] Watt seems to have made other organs besides those above mentioned. Not long since a barrel-organ of his construction was offered for sale at Glasgow. It was originally in the form of a table, about three feet square, having no appearance of a musical instrument externally. At this table, when Watt and his friends were seated, he would set the concealed mechanism in action, and surprise them with the production of the music. It has since been mounted with an organ front and sides, with gilt pipes. When in proper tune it is of considerable power and pleasing harmony; and continues orthodox in its psalm tunes, which range from “Martyrs” to the “Old Hundred.” A correspondent writes as follows:—“A large organ made and used by Watt when he had his shop in Glasgow, was disposed of by him, when he finally left this city. It came into the possession of the late Mr. Archibald M‘Lellan, coach-builder, Miller Street, Glasgow, and he had it fitted up in his elegant residence in that fine old street. I have heard it played by Mr. M‘Lellan. After his death it was sold, and purchased by Mr. James G. Adam of the Denny print-works. Mr. Adam died, and the organ was advertised for sale, in 1864, and purchased for 10l., by Adam Sim, Esq., of Coulter Mains, in whose possession it now is. Mr. Sim has authentic documents to prove that this organ was really James Watt’s.”

[72] The club he frequented was called the Anderston Club, of which Mr. (afterwards Professor) Millar, Dr. Robert Simson, the mathematician, Dr. Adam Smith, Dr. Black, and Dr. Cullen, were members. The standing dish of the club was hen-broth, consisting of a decoction of “how-towdies” (fowls), thickened with black beans, and seasoned with pepper. Dr. Strang says Professor Simson was in the habit of counting the steps from his house to the club, so that he could tell the distance to the fraction of an inch. But it is not stated whether he counted the steps on his return, and found the number of steps the same.

[73] John Anderson was a native of Greenock, and an intimate friend of James Watt. He was appointed professor of Hebrew in his twenty-seventh year, and succeeded Dr. Dick as professor of Natural Philosophy in 1757. Watt spent many of his evenings at his residence within the College, and had the free use of his excellent private library. Professor Anderson is entitled to the honour of being the first to open classes for the instruction of working men—“anti-toga classes,” as he called them—in the principles of Natural Philosophy; and at his death he bequeathed his property for the purpose of founding an institution with the same object. The Andersonian University was opened in 1796, long before the age of Mechanics’ Institutes.

[74] At a meeting held in Glasgow in 1839 to erect a monument to Watt, Dr. Ure observed:—“As to the latent heat of steam,” said Mr. Watt to me, “it was a piece of knowledge essential to my inquiries, and I worked it out myself in the best way that I could. I used apothecaries’ phials for my apparatus, and by means of them I got approximations sufficient for my purpose at the time.” The passage affords a striking illustration of the large results that may be arrived at by means of the humblest instruments. In like manner Cavendish, when asked by a foreigner to be shown over his laboratories, pointed to an old tea-tray on the table, containing a few watch-glasses, test papers, a balance, and a blowpipe, and observed, “There is all the laboratory I possess.”

[75] Watt’s notes to Robison’s Articles on ‘Steam and Steam-engines.’

[76] The following advertisement in the ‘Glasgow Journal’ of the 1st Dec., 1763, fixes the date of this last removal:—

[77] About the site of the Humane Society’s House.

[78] Mr. Robert Hart’s ‘Reminiscences of James Watt,’ in ‘Transactions of the Glasgow Archæological Society, 1859.’

[79] “The last step of all,” says Professor Jardine, “was more difficult—the forming of the separate condensing vessel. The great knowledge he had acquired of the mechanical powers enabled him to construct it, but I have often heard him say this was a work of great difficulty, and that he met with many disappointments before he succeeded. I have often made use of this beautiful analysis received from Mr. Watt, in another department in which I have been long engaged, to illustrate and encourage the progress of genius in youth, to show, that once in possession of a habit of attention, under proper direction, it may be carried from one easy step to another, till the mind becomes qualified and invigorated for uniting and concentrating effort—the highest exertion of genius.”

[80] “I have now (April, 1765) almost a certainty of the facturum of the fire-engine, having determined the following particulars: The quantity of steam produced; the ultimatum of the lever engine; the quantity of steam destroyed by the cold of its cylinder; the quantity destroyed in mine; and if there be not some devil in the hedge, mine ought to raise water to 44 feet with the same quantity of steam that theirs does to 32 (supposing my cylinder as thick as theirs), which I think I can demonstrate. I can now make a cylinder 2 feet diameter and 3 feet high, only a 40th of an inch thick, and strong enough to resist the atmosphere; sed tace. In short, I can think of nothing else but this machine.”—Watt to Dr. Lind, quoted in Muirhead’s ‘Life of Watt,’ 94–5.

[81] For Memoir of Roebuck, see ‘Industrial Biography,’ p. 133.

[82] When we visited the place many years ago, Miss Stewart’s spinnet still stood in the drawing-room, but there was not a tone left in it. Like many other old houses, Kinneil has the reputation of being haunted. The ghost is that of a “Lady Lilburne,” wife of the Parliamentary General, who is said to have thrown herself out of one of the windows during her husband’s absence.

[83] Dr. Small was born in 1734 at Carmylie, Angus, Scotland, of which parish his father was the minister. He had been for some time the professor of Natural Philosophy in the University of Williamsburg, Virginia, from whence he returned to England and settled at Birmingham.

[84] “I have,” he writes, “just now got a curious book, being an account of all the machines, furnaces, methods of working, profits, &c., of the mines of the Upper Hartz. It is unluckily in German, which I understand little of, but am improving in by the help of a truly Chymical Swiss Dyer, who is come here to dye standing red on linen and cotton, in which he is successful. He is according to the custom of philosophers ennuyé to a great degree, but seems to be more modest than is usual with them; and, what is still more unusual, is attached only to his dyeing, though he has a tolerable knowledge of chymestry. He promises to make me a coat that will not wet though boiled in water. This would be of great use to a hundred people I see just now running by, wet to the skin.... I verily believe the drops are an inch in diameter! To return to the book—it contains an account of all the unsuccessful experiments that have been tried in the Hartz, and I assure you it gives me some consolation to see the great Liebnitz, the rival of Newton, bungling repeatedly, applying wind mills to raise ore while water ran idle past him. There is among other machines the fellow of Blackie’s, only worked by water, and a full and true account of why it did not succeed, which he should read. Their machines in general display great ingenuity though ignorance of principles.”—Watt to Small, May 28, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[85] “I mentioned to you a method of still doubling the effect of the steam, and that tolerably easy, by using the power of steam rushing into a vacuum, at present lost. This would do a little more than double the effect, but it would too much enlarge the vessels to use it all. It is peculiarly applicable to wheel engines, and may supply the want of a condenser where force of steam is only used; for, open one of the steam valves and admit steam, until one-fourth of the distance between it and the next valve is filled with steam, shut the valve, and the steam will continue to expand and to press round the wheel with a diminishing power, ending in one-fourth of its first exertion. The sum of this series you will find greater than one-half, though only one-fourth steam was used. The power will indeed be unequal, but this can be remedied by a fly, or in several other ways.”—Watt to Small, 28th May, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[86] He anticipated the use of high-pressure steam, as afterwards employed in the locomotive by Trevithick, in the following passage:—“I intend,” he said, “in many cases to employ the expansive force of steam to press on the piston, or whatever is used instead of one, in the same manner as the weight of the atmosphere is now employed in common fire-engines. In some cases I intend to use both the condenser and this force of steam, so that the powers of these engines will as much exceed those pressed only by the air, as the expansive power of the steam is greater than the weight of the atmosphere. In other cases, when plenty of cold water cannot be had, I intend to work the engines by the force of steam only, and to discharge it into the air by proper outlets after it has done its office.”—Watt to Small, March, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[87] Mr. Hart’s “Reminiscences of James Watt,” in ‘Transactions of the Glasgow Archæological Society,’ Part I. 1859.

[88] The telescope was mounted with two parallel horizontal hairs in the focus of the eyeglass, crossed by one perpendicular hair. The measuring pole was divided into feet and inches, so that, wrote Watt, “if the hairs comprehend one foot at one chain distance, they will comprehend ten feet at ten chains,” and so on. This invention Watt made in 1770, and used the telescope in his various surveys. Eight years later, in 1778, the Society of Arts awarded to a Mr. Green a premium for precisely the same invention.

[89] Letter to Small, 24th Nov. 1772. Watt, however, took no steps to bring this invention before the public, and in 1777, a similar instrument having been invented by Dr. Maskelyne, was presented by him to the Royal Society. Thus Watt also lost the credit of this invention.

[90] The Company afterwards came to grief. The original subscription list was not filled up, and the stagnation in trade which took place at the outbreak of the American war, brought the works to a standstill. In 1782 the concern was sold to the Messrs. Stirling, who eventually became the sole proprietors and finished the undertaking.

[91] There was then a ford at Dumbuck, a few miles below Glasgow, which prevented boats of more than ten tons burden ascending to the Broomielaw. This was shortly after removed by the Clyde Trust, who have expended 3,564,397l. in improvement of the navigation between 1770 and 1863, the revenue collected during the same time in dues having been 2,288,000l. Vessels drawing 21 feet can now ascend to the Broomielaw; and when the present improvements are completed the depth at high water is expected to be upwards of 24 feet.

[92] Watt to Small, 21st Dec. 1770. Boulton MSS.

[93] The bridge was partially destroyed by a flood in 1806, when one of the central piers was thrown down. Two of the arches fell, and were rebuilt, but the others stand as originally constructed.

[94] The child was stillborn. Of four other children who were the fruit of this marriage, two died young. A son and daughter survived; the son, James, succeeded his father, and died unmarried, at Aston Hall, near Birmingham, in 1848. The daughter married Mr. Miller, of Glasgow, whose grandson, the present J. W. Gibson Watt, Esq., succeeded to the Watt property.

[95] There seems reason to believe that the capacity for skilled industry is to a certain extent transmissible; and that the special aptitude for mechanics which characterises the population of certain districts, is in a great measure the result of centuries of experience, transmitted from one generation to another. Mr. Morell takes the same view: “We have every reason to believe,” he says, “that the power of specialised instincts is transmitted, and when the circumstances favour it, goes on increasing from age to age in intensity, and in a particular adaptation to the purposes demanded. All confirmed habits which become a part of the animal nature, seem to be imparted by hereditary descent; and thus what seems to be an original instinct may, after all, be but the accumulated growth and experience of many generations.”

[96] For Memoir of Huntsman, see ‘Industrial Biography,’ 102–110.

[97] While on Snow-hill, Mr. Boulton’s business was principally confined to the making of buttons, shoe-buckles, articles in steel, and various kinds of trinkets. His designation was that of “toymaker,” as is shown by the following document copied from the original:—“Received of Matthew Boulton, toymaker, Snow-hill, three shillings and sixpence, for which sum I solemnly engage, if he should be chosen by lot to serve in the militia for this parish, at the first meeting for that purpose, to procure a substitute that shall be approved of. Birmingham, January 11, 1762, Henry Brookes, Sergt.” The Birmingham toymaker was, however, often a man doing a large business, producing articles of utility as well as ornament. Mr. Osler, the Birmingham manufacturer of glass beads and other toys, when examined before a Committee of the House of Commons many years since, astonished the members by informing them that trifling though dolls’ eyes might appear to be as an article of manufacture, he had once obtained an order for 500l. worth of the article. “Eighteen years ago,” said he, “on my first going to London, a respectable-looking man in the city asked me if I could supply him with dolls’ eyes; and I was foolish enough to feel half offended; I thought it derogatory to my dignity as a manufacturer to make dolls’ eyes. He took me into a room quite as wide, and perhaps twice the length of this, and we had just room to walk between the stacks, from the floor to the ceiling, of parts of dolls. He said, ‘These are only the legs and the arms; the trunks are below.’ But I saw enough to convince me, that he wanted a great many eyes.... He ordered various quantities, and of various sizes and qualities. On returning to the Tavistock Hotel, I found that the order amounted to upwards of 500l.... Calculating on every child in this country not using a doll till two years old, and throwing it aside at seven, and having a new one annually, I satisfied myself that the eyes alone would produce a circulation of a great many thousand pounds. I mention this merely to show the importance of trifles.”—Babbage, ‘Economy of Machinery and Manufactures,’ 243–5.

[98] Mr. Boulton afterwards purchased the fee simple of the property, together with much of the adjoining land. The nature of his tenure caused him to take a lively interest in the question of common lands enclosure, and at a much later period (17th April, 1790) we find him writing to the Right Hon. Lord Hawkesbury as follows:—“The argument of robbing the poor [by enclosures of wastes] is fallacious. They have no legal title to the common land; and the more of it that is cultivated, the more work and the more bread there will be for them. I speak from experience; for I founded my manufactory upon one of the most barren commons in England, where there existed but a few miserable huts filled with idle beggarly people, who by the help of the common land and a little thieving made shift to live without working. The scene is now entirely changed. I have employed a thousand men, women, and children, in my aforesaid manufactory for nearly thirty years past. The Lord of the Manor hath exterminated these very poor cottages, and hundreds of clean comfortable cheerful houses are found erected in their place. Thus the inhabitants of the parish have been trebled without at all increasing the poor levies. I am more confirmed in this view when I turn my eyes to a neighbouring parish (Sutton Colefield), where there are 10,000 acres of common land uncultivated, and yet the poor rates are very high. Let this land be divided, enclosed, cultivated, and rendered saleable to active, industrious, and spirited men; and the poor will then have plenty of work, and the next generation of them will be fully reconciled to earning their bread instead of begging for it.”—Boulton MSS.

[99] Mr. Keir, in a MS. memoir of Mr. Boulton now before us, says he was the first to introduce the silver plate business at Birmingham, and to make complete services in solid silver. But the business was not profitable, in consequence of the great value of the material, the loss of interest upon which was not compensated by the additional price put upon it for workmanship. One good consequence of the silver plate business, however, was the establishment of an assay office in Birmingham, the necessary Act for which was obtained at Mr. Boulton’s expense, and proved of much advantage to the town.

[100] “If, in the course of your future travelling,” he wrote Mr. Wendler (July, 1767), “you can pick up for me any metallic ores or fossil substances, or any other curious natural productions, I should be much obliged to you, as I am fond of all those things that have a tendency to improve my knowledge in mechanical arts, in which my manufactory will every year become more and more general, and therefore wish to know the taste, the fashions, the toys, both useful and ornamental, the implements, vessels, &c., that prevail in all the different parts of Europe, as I should be glad to work for all Europe in all things that they may have occasion for—gold, silver, copper, plated, gilt, pinchbeck, steel, platina, tortoiseshell, or anything else that may become an article of general demand. I have lately begun to make snuff-boxes, instrument-cases, tooth-picks, &c., in metal, gilt, and in tortoiseshell inlaid, likewise gilt and pinchbeck watch-chains. We are now being completely fixed at Soho, and when Mr. Fothergill returns (which will not be for six months), I shall then have more time to attend to improvements than I have at present.”—Boulton MSS.

[101] Boulton to Wedgwood, January, 1769.—Wedgwood was one of his most intimate friends; the two alike aiming at excellence in their respective branches of production. Their kindred efforts seem to have excited the ire of some satirist, whose effusion against them in the ‘Public Ledger’ is thus referred to in the postscript of a letter from Wedgwood to Boulton, dated 19th February, 1771:—“If you take in the ‘Public Ledger’ you’ll see that Mr. Antipuffado has done me the honour to rank me with the most stupendous geniuses of the age, and has really cut me up very cleanly. He talks, too, that he should not wonder if some surprising genius at Birmingham should be tempted to make Roman medals and tenpenny nails, or Corinthian knives and daggers, and style himself Roman medal and Etruscan tenpenny nail-maker to the Empress of Abyssinia. But see the paper: I believe it is the first week in February, and is one of the better sort of this class.”—Boulton MSS.

[102] The clocks, with several other articles, were sent out to Russia, and submitted to the Empress through the kindness of Earl Cathcart. His lordship, in communicating the result to Mr. Boulton, said—“I have the pleasure to inform you that her Imperial Majesty not only bought them all, last week, but did me the honour to tell me that she was extremely pleased with them, and thought them superior in every respect to the French, as well as cheaper, which entitled them in all lights to a preference.”

[103] Pet names of his two children, Matthew Robinson and Anne Boulton.

[104] These letters are without date, but we infer that they were written in the summer of 1767.

[105] Boulton to the Duke of Richmond, April 8, 1770. The Duke was engaged at the time in preparing a set of machines for making the various experiments in Natural Philosophy described in S’Gravande’s book. The Duke was himself a good turner and worker in metal.

[106] The manufactory was complete so far as regarded the hardware manufacture. But additions were constantly being made to it; and, as other branches of industry were added, it became more than doubled in extent and accommodation.

[107] Boulton to John Taylor, 23rd January, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[108] When the canal came to be constructed at the point at which it passed Soho, it occasioned him great anxiety through the leakage of the canal banks and loss of water for the purposes of his manufactory. The supply, especially in dry summers, was already too limited; but the canal threatened to destroy it altogether. Writing to Mr. Thomas Gilbert, M.P., on the subject in February, 1769, he said, “The very holes which Mr. Smeaton hath dug to try the ground, drink up the water nearly as fast as you can pour it in.... Let Smeaton or Brindley, or all the engineers upon earth give what evidence they will before Parliament, I am convinced by last summer’s experience that if the proprietors of the canal continue to take the two streams on which my mill depends, it is ruined. I might as well have built it upon the summit of the hill.” After the act had passed he wrote his friend Garbett, “I have seen the testimony of the two engineers, Smeaton and Yeoman, but I value the opinions of neither of them, nor of Brindley nor Simcox (in this case), nor of the whole tribe of jobbing ditchers, who are retained as evidence on any side which first applies for them.” His alarms, however, proved unfounded, as the leakage of the canal was eventually remedied; and in November, 1772, we find him writing to the Earl of Warwick, “Our navigation goes on prosperously; the junction with the Wolverhampton Canal is complete; and we already sail from Birmingham to Bristol and to Hull.”—Boulton MSS.

[109] Among Boulton’s scientific memoranda, we find some curious speculations, bearing the date of 1765, relative to improvements which he was trying to work out in gunnery. He proposed the truer boring of the guns, the use of a telescopic sight, and a cylindrical shot with its end of a parabolic form as presenting in his opinion the least resistance to the air.

[110] On the 22nd May, 1765, Franklin writes Boulton,—“Mr. Baskerville informs me that you have lately had a considerable addition to your fortune, on which I sincerely congratulate you. I beg leave to introduce my friend Doctor Small to your acquaintance, and to recommend him to your civilities. I would not take this freedom, if I were not sure it would be agreeable to you; and that you will thank me for adding to the number of those who from their knowledge of you must respect you, one who is both an ingenious philosopher and a most worthy honest man. If anything new in magnetism or electricity, or any other branch of natural knowledge, has occurred to your fruitful genius since I last had the pleasure of seeing you, you will by communicating it greatly oblige me.”

[111] Franklin to Boulton, March 19, 1766. Boulton MSS.

[112] Darwin to Boulton, March 11, 1766. Boulton MSS.

[113] The following passage occurs in his letter:—“Suppose one piston up, and the vacuum made under it by the jet d’eau froid. That piston cannot yet descend, because the cock is not yet opened which admits the steam into its antagonist cylinder. Hence the two pistons are in equilibrio, being either of them pressed by the atmosphere. Then, I say, if the cock which admits the steam into the antagonist cylinder be opened gradually and not with a jerk, that the first mentioned [piston in the] cylinder will descend gradually and yet not less forcibly. Hence by the management of the steam cocks the motion may be accelerated, retarded, destroyed, revived, instantly and easily. And if this answers in practice as it does in theory, the machine cannot fail of success! Eureka!”

[114] Small wrote Watt from Birmingham, on the 7th January, 1768:—“Our friend Boulton will by this post send letters both to you and Dr. Roebuck. I know not well how to resolve without seeing you. I have not the pleasure of being enough acquainted with Dr. R. to judge whether we should all suit one another. His integrity and generosity everybody agrees are great. You certainly know the proposal he has made to Boulton, who will tell you his determination about it. Before I knew of your connexion with Dr. R. my idea was that you should settle here, and that Boulton and I should assist you as much as we could, which in any case we will most certainly do. I have no kind of doubt of your success, nor of your acquiring fortune, if you proceed upon a proper plan as to the manner of doing business; which, if you do, you will be sole possessor of the affair even after your patent has expired. I had not thoroughly considered this part of the matter when you left me. In a partnership that I liked, I should not hesitate to employ any sum of money I can command on your scheme, and I am certain it may be managed with only a moderate capital. Whether it would be possible to manage the wheel and reciprocating engines by separate partnerships without their interfering I am not certain. If it is, Boulton and I would engage with you in either, provided you will live here.”—Boulton MSS.

[115] Watt to Small, January 28, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[116] Small to Watt, 18th April, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[117] Roebuck was at this time willing to admit Boulton as a partner in the patent, but only as respected the profits of engines sold in the counties of Warwick, Stafford, and Derby. This Boulton declined, saying, “It would not be worth my while to make engines for three counties only; but it might be worth my while to make for all the world.”

[118] Watt to Small, 28th April, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[119] Watt to Small, 20th September, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[120] “I am really very sorry on my own account,” he wrote, “that your engagements hinder you from entering into our scheme, for that ought to be the result of your deliberation. Though there are few things I have wished more for than being connected with you on many accounts, yet I should be very loath to purchase that pleasure at the expense of your quiet, which might be the case if you involved yourself in more business than you could easily manage, or, what is worse, find money for. Besides, this is not a trade, but a project; and no man should risk more money on a project than he can afford to lose.”—Watt to Small, 21st October, 1769. Boulton MSS.

[121] Watt to Small, 20th September, 1769.

[122] Small informed Watt that it was intended to make an engine for the purpose of drawing canal boats. “What Mr. Boulton and I,” he wrote, “are very desirous of is, to move canal boats by this engine; so we have made this model of a size sufficient for that purpose. We propose first to operate without any condenser, because coals are here exceedingly cheap, and because you can, more commodiously than we, make experiments on condensers, having several already by you. Above 150 boats are now employed on these new waveless canals, so if we can succeed, the field is not narrow.” This suggestion of working canal boats by steam immediately elicited a reply from Watt on the subject. Invention was so habitual to him that a new method of employing power was no sooner hinted than his active mind at once set to work to solve the problem. “Have you ever,” he wrote Small, “considered a spiral oar for that purpose, or are you for two wheels?” And to make his meaning clear, he sketched out a rough but graphic outline of a screw propeller. Small’s reply was unfavourable: he replied, “I have tried models of spiral oars, and have found them all inferior to oars of either of the other forms; I believe because a cylinder of water immersed in water can be easily turned round its own axis. We propose to try gun-lock springs with the fixed part longer than the moving. If we cannot succeed, we will have recourse to what you have so obligingly and clearly described.” Finally Watt writes a fortnight later, “concerning spirals, I do not continue fond of them.”

[123] Roebuck to Boulton, February 12, 1770.

[124] Small to Watt, 17th September, 1770. Boulton MSS.

[125] Watt to Small, 20th October, 1770. Boulton MSS.

[126] He then held an eighth share in the pottery, which brought him in about 70l. a year clear.

[127] Watt to Small, 30th August, 1772. Boulton MSS.

[128] Small to Watt, 16th November, 1772. Boulton MSS.

[129] About this time, in order to bring himself and his engine into notice, Watt contemplated writing a treatise on steam and its applications. “I have some thoughts,” he wrote to Small, “of writing a book on the elements of the theory of steam-engines, in which, however, I shall only give the enunciation of the perfect engine. This book might do me and the scheme good. It would still leave the world in the dark as to the true construction of the engine. Something of this kind is necessary, as Smeaton is labouring hard at the subject, and if I can make no profit, at least I ought not to lose the honour of my experiments.”—Watt to Small, 17th August, 1773. Boulton MSS. To this letter Small replied, “The more I consider the propriety of your publishing about steam, the more I wish you to publish. Smeaton has only trifled hitherto, though he may perhaps discover something. He told Boulton some time ago that the circular engine would not do. He said he had considered it, and was sure of this. As B. does not much respect his genius, this had no effect.” Watt’s treatise was, however, never written; his attention being shortly after fully occupied by other and more engrossing subjects.

[130] Boulton to Watt, 29th March, 1773. Boulton MSS.

[131] “As I found the engine at Kinneil perishing, and as it is from circumstances highly improper that it should continue there longer, and as I have nowhere else to put it, I have this week taken it to pieces and packed up the ironwork, cylinder, and pump, ready to be shipped for London on its way to Birmingham, as the only place where the experiments can be completed with propriety. I suppose the whole will not weigh above four tons. I have left the whole of the woodwork until we see what we are to do.”—Watt to Small, 20th May, 1773. Boulton MSS.

[132] In a letter to Small, Watt wrote, “I begin now to see daylight through the affairs that have detained me so long, and think of setting out for you in a fortnight at furthest. I am monstrously plagued with my headaches, and not a little with unprofitable business. I don’t mean my own whims: these I never work at when I can do any other thing; but I have got too many acquaintances; and there are too many beggars in this country, which I am afraid is going to the devil altogether. Provisions continue excessively dear, and laws are made to keep them so. But luckily the spirit of emigrating rises high, and the people seem disposed to show their oppressive masters that they can live without them. By the time some twenty or thirty thousand more leave the country, matters will take a turn not much to the profit of the landholders.”—Watt to Small, 29th April, 1774. Boulton MSS.

[133] Watt to Small, 25th July, 1773. Boulton MSS.

[134] Mr. Edgeworth was first introduced to the notice of Mr. Boulton in the following letter from Dr. Darwin (1767):—“Dear Boulton, I have got with me a mechanical friend, Mr. Edgeworth, from Oxfordshire,—the greatest conjurer I ever saw. God send fine weather, and pray come to my assistance, and prevail on Dr. Small and Mrs. Boulton to attend you to-morrow morning, and we will reconvey you to Birmingham if the devil permit. E. has the principles of nature in his palm, and moulds them as he pleases,—can take away polarity, or give it to the needle by rubbing it thrice on the palm of his hand! And can see through two solid oak boards without glasses! Wonderful! astonishing!! diabolical!!! Pray tell Dr. Small he must come to see these miracles. Adieu, E. Darwin.”

[135] Richard Lovell Edgeworth says of this distinguished coterie,—“By means of Mr. Keir I became acquainted with Dr. Small of Birmingham, a man esteemed by all who knew him, and by all who were admitted to his friendship beloved with no common enthusiasm. Dr. Small formed a link which combined Mr. Boulton, Mr. Watt, Dr. Darwin, Mr. Wedgwood, Mr. Day, and myself together—men of very different characters, but all devoted to literature and science. This mutual intimacy has never been broken but by death, nor have any of the number failed to distinguish themselves in science or literature. Some may think that I ought with due modesty to except myself. Mr. Keir with his knowledge of the world and good sense; Dr. Small, with his benevolence and profound sagacity; Wedgwood, with his increasing industry, experimental variety, and calm investigation; Boulton, with his mobility, quick perception, and bold adventure; Watt, with his strong inventive faculty, undeviating steadiness, and bold resources; Darwin, with his imagination, science, and poetical excellence; and Day, with his unwearied research after truth, his integrity and eloquence;—proved altogether such a society as few men have had the good fortune to live with; such an assemblage of friends, as fewer still have had the happiness to possess, and keep through life.”—Memoirs, i. 186.