SHIPS OF WAR—PETITION OF MR. JAMES CHALMERS. (Hansard, 14 April 1864)

§ THE DUKE OF SOMERSET

said, nothing could be more fair than that the noble Earl should, if he thought fit, bring under the notice of the House any grievance to which an inventor might think he had been subjected. With respect to the question of targets generally, he would state that it might be quite possible to produce one which could resist shot, and yet which could not with advantage be used in building the side of a ship. As to the particular plan of Mr. Chalmers in August 1862, Mr. Chalmers made application to the Admiralty to give it a trial. That application the Admi- 963 ralty referred to the Iron-plate Committee, who reported that the plan was so like another which was under their consideration, that they did not think it worth trying. The trial was accordingly refused, but Mr. Chalmers again and again renewed his application. Ultimately, the Admiralty told him, that if he constructed a target, he must do so at his own expense, and on the express understanding that they were not committed to any engagements for the future. Mr. Chalmers undertook that his target should be superior in every way to the Warrior target—that it should be lighter, of simpler construction, and more economical. But when it was made and tried it was proved to be heavier, to be more complicated in its construction, and to be more costly. The Warrior target weighed 347 lb. per square foot, but Mr. Chalmers' target was 385 lb. per square foot, without its supports, the weight of which brought it up to 485 lb. per square foot. As to the system of construction, the object sought was, as he had often stated to the House, that the iron plates should contribute to the strength of the structure of the ship. The Warrior target consisted of five parts, two only of which did not add to the structural strength of the ship; but the Chalmers' target consisted of seven parts, of which four did not add to the structural strength of the ship. In fact, the target was very complicated in construction, and he had been told by various persons connected with shipbuilding (to whom he had spoken ou the subject) that it would be extremely difficult to build a ship on that principle, even without regarding expense. In point of resistance, no doubt, the Chalmers' target did resist shot better, in some respects, than the Warrior target. It did not resist the 68-pounder quite so well. It was quite true that the target was very severely tried; but every target was submitted to the progress of gunnery. They submitted Mr. Chalmers' target to shot from guns of new construction, and Sir William Armstrong's 300-poundersent a steel shot right through it; but the Admiralty did not condemn it on that account. The Admiralty agreed to pay the cost of the target, and did pay £1,200 when the account was sent in; but Mr. Chalmers, being very much dissatisfied, wrote several letters to the Admiralty, asking them to make new targets and try further experiments on them. The Admiralty, however, having other series of experiments on hand, did not choose to go 964 on trying experiments with a principle which they did not mean to adopt. The great fault he had to find with inventors was, that they did not invent. They often make small adaptations of previous constructions and proclaim the result as a great discovery. It was very easy for people when they saw a new idea at work to suggest alterations which might be improvements; but if everybody who did that paraded his suggestion as a great invention, it would be impossible for the Admiralty to make any progress with their experiments. Then Mr. Chalmers asked to have his target back again, and when the Admiralty consented to that — being apparently by their assent deprived of a grievance — he wrote back angrily to say that they had no right to give it him back as it was public property, and that the Admiralty had made use of his improvements in other constructions. But that was not the case. A great many minor improvements had been adopted from time to time, but it could not be said that any particular person was entitled to claim them as his inventions. No doubt improvements had been made on the Warrior target. When that was first built the plates were only 4½in. thick—for the manufacturers then could not roll plates any thicker. It was many months before the manufacturers could roll 5½in., and months before they could turn out 6-inch plates. Then the Minotaur target was tried; in some respects it showed inferior resistance to the Warrior, but the fact was that the plates at that time were inferior. Now, however, so much improvement had been made in the manufacture of iron, that in three months he could get more iron plates, and of a better quality, than he could have got in two years before. He had no doubt that in another year or so they would get still better plates. With regard to the statement that the Bellerophon target was not submitted to the same test as Mr. Chalmers' target, that was true in some respects, but in others it was submitted to a severer test, and besides other trials to which it was subjected, it was experimented on with the 68-pounder gun, the Armstrong 110-pounder, and the Whitworth 70 and 150-pounders. The statement that anything was copied from Mr. Chalmers' target for the Bellerophon target was quite a mistake. Mr. Chalmers said there was a stringer of iron edge-ways round the vessel, but that was to some extent the case with the Warrior, 965 which had iron stringers at a distance of 3ft. 9in. apart. They might as fairly say that Mr. Chalmers had copied his stringer from the Warrior, as Mr. Chalmers could say they had taken his stringer for the Bellerophon. There had, indeed, been very little advance since the construction of the Warrior, except that they now got thicker plates and better iron. People complained of the cost of these experiments, but he was told by iron manufacturers that they had an immense effect in improving the manufacture of iron; and the result of the experiments was that I there was an increased supply of good iron. It was not at all his wish to do any injustice to inventors, but, on the contrary, he would be glad to see any inventions brought forward that were calculated to be useful.