CHAPTER XI.
The Society receive a Letter from the Treasury respecting Mr. Babbage’s Calculating Machine—Letter from Mr. Babbage to Sir H. Davy—A Committee appointed to consider Mr. Babbage’s Plan—They Report in favour of it—Mr. Babbage has an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer—Government advance 1,500_l_.—Difference-Engine commenced—Mr. Babbage gives all his labour gratuitously—Advice of the Society again requested—Mr. Babbage’s Statement—Committee appointed to inspect the Engine—Their Report—Heavy Expenses not met by the Treasury—Meeting of Mr. Babbage’s personal friends—Their Report—Duke of Wellington inspects the Works—His Grace recommends the Treasury to make further Payments—Letter from Mr. Babbage to the Treasury—Communication from the Treasury to the Council—Referred to a Committee—Report of Committee—They recommend the Works to be removed to the vicinity of Mr. Babbage’s Residence—Government act on the Recommendation—Fire-proof Buildings erected—Misunderstanding with Mr. Clement—Works stopped—Mr. Babbage discovers new principles which supersede those connected with the Difference-Engine—He requests an interview with Lord Melbourne—Letter to M. Quetelet explaining the principles of Analytical-Engine—Mr. Babbage visits Turin—M. Menabrea’s account of the Engine—Translated with Notes by Lady Lovelace—Mr. Babbage applies to Government for their Determination—Letter from the Chancellor of the Exchequer—Mr. Babbage’s Answer—Government resolve not to proceed with the Engine—Mr. Babbage has an interview with Sir R. Peel—Difference-Engine placed in the Museum of King’s College—Present State of the Analytical-Engine.
---------------
1820-25.
On the 1st April, 1823, a letter was received from the Treasury, requesting the Council to take into consideration a plan which had been submitted to Government by Mr. Babbage, for “applying machinery to the purposes of calculating and printing mathematical tables;” and the Lords of the Treasury further desired “to be favoured with the opinion of the Royal Society on the merits and utility of this invention[28].”
This is the earliest allusion to the celebrated Calculating Engine of Mr. Babbage, in the records of the Society[29]. But the invention had been brought before them in the previous year by a letter from Mr. Babbage to Sir H. Davy, dated July 3, 1822, in which he gives some account of a small model of his engine for calculating differences, which “produced figures at the rate of 44 a minute, and performed with rapidity and precision all those calculations for which it was designed[30].” He then proceeds to enumerate various tables which the machine was adapted to calculate, and concludes: “I am aware that these statements may perhaps be viewed as something more than Utopian, and that the philosophers of Laputa may be called up to dispute my claim to originality. Should such be the case, I hope the resemblance will be found to adhere to the nature of the subject, rather than to the manner in which it has been treated. Conscious from my own experience of the difficulty of convincing those who are but little skilled in mathematical knowledge, of the possibility of making a machine which shall perform calculations, I was naturally anxious, in introducing it to the public, to appeal to the testimony of one so distinguished in the records of British science[31]. Induced by a conviction of the great utility of such engines, to withdraw for some time my attention from a subject on which it has been engaged during several years, and which possesses charms of a higher order, I have now arrived at a point where success is no longer doubtful. It must, however, be attained at a very considerable expense, which would not probably be replaced by the works it might produce for a long period of time, and which is an undertaking I should feel unwilling to commence, as altogether foreign to my habits and pursuits.”
The Council appointed a Committee to take Mr. Babbage’s plan into consideration, which was composed of the following gentlemen: Sir H. Davy, Mr. Brande, Mr. Combe, Mr. Baily, Mr. (now Sir Mark Isambard) Brunel, Major (now General) Colby, Mr. Davies Gilbert, Mr. (now Sir John) Herschel, Captain Kater, Mr. Pond (Astronomer-Royal), Dr. Wollaston, and Dr. Young. On the 1st May, 1823, the Committee reported: “That it appears that Mr. Babbage has displayed great talents and ingenuity in the construction of his machine for computation, which the Committee think fully adequate to the attainment of the objects proposed by the inventor, and that they consider Mr. Babbage as highly deserving of public encouragement in the prosecution of his arduous undertaking[32].”
This Report was transmitted to the Lords of the Treasury, by whom it was, with Mr. Babbage’s letter to Sir H. Davy, printed and laid before Parliament[33].
In July, 1823, Mr. Babbage had an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Robinson (now Earl of Ripon), to ascertain if it were the wish of Government that he should construct a large engine of the kind, which would also print the results it calculated. Unfortunately, no Minute of that conversation was made at the time, nor was any sufficiently distinct understanding arrived at, as it afterwards appeared that a contrary impression was left on the mind of either party[34]. Mr. Babbage’s conviction was, that whatever might be the labour and difficulty of the undertaking, the engine itself would, of course, become the property of the Government, which had paid for its construction.
Soon after this interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a letter was sent from the Treasury to the Royal Society, informing them that the Lords of the Treasury “had directed the issue of 1,500_l._ to Mr. Babbage, to enable him to bring his invention to perfection, in the manner recommended.”
These words “_in the manner recommended_,” can refer only to the previous recommendation by the Royal Society; but it does not appear from their Report, that any plan, terms, or conditions had been pointed out.
Towards the end of July, 1823, Mr. Babbage took measures for the construction of the present Difference-Engine[35], and it was regularly proceeded with for four years.
And here it is right to state, that Mr. Babbage gave his mental labour gratuitously, and that from first to last he has not derived any emolument whatever from Government[36]. Sectional, and other drawings, of the most delicate nature had to be made; tools to be formed expressly to meet mechanical difficulties; and workmen to be educated in the practical knowledge necessary in the construction of the machine. The mechanical department was placed under the management of Mr. Clement, a draughtsman of great ability, and a practical mechanic of the highest order[37]. Money was advanced from time to time by the Treasury, the accounts furnished by the engineer undergoing the examination of auditors[38], and passing through the hands of Mr. Babbage. Thus years elapsed, and public attention became at length directed to the fact, that a large sum had been expended upon the construction of the engine, which was not completed. Again the advice of the Royal Society was solicited.
In December, 1828, Government begged the Council “to institute such enquiries as would enable them to report upon the state to which it (the machine) had then arrived; and also whether the progress made in its construction confirmed them in the opinion which they had formerly expressed, that it would ultimately prove adequate to the important object which it was intended to attain.”
Accompanying this communication was a statement from Mr. Babbage of the condition of the engine, in which he says:—
“The machine has required a longer time and greater expense than was anticipated, and Mr. Babbage has already expended about 6,000_l._ on this object. The work is now in a state of considerable forwardness, numerous and large drawings of it have been made, and much of the mechanism has been executed, and many workmen are occupied daily in its completion.”
A Committee was appointed by the Council, consisting of Mr. Gilbert (President), Dr. Roget, Captain Sabine, Sir John Herschel, Mr. Baily, Mr. Brunel, Captain Kater, Mr. Donkin, Mr. Penn, Mr. Rennie, Mr. Barton, and Mr. Warburton.[39]
They minutely inspected the drawings, tools, and the parts of the engine then executed, and drew up a report, “declining to consider the principle on which the practicability of the machinery depends, and of the public utility of the object which it proposes to attain; because they considered the former fully admitted, and the latter obvious to all who consider the immense advantage of accurate numerical tables in all matters of calculation, which it is professedly the object of the engine to calculate and print with perfect accuracy.”
They further stated, that “the progress made was as great as could be expected, considering the numerous difficulties to be overcome; and lastly, that they had no hesitation in giving it as their opinion, that the engine was likely to fulfil the expectations entertained of it by its inventor.”
The Council adopted the Report, expressing their trust, that while Mr. Babbage’s mind was intently occupied on an undertaking likely to do so much honour to his country, he might be relieved as much as possible from all other sources of anxiety.
It is clear that the Council of the Royal Society regarded Mr. Babbage’s engine, as it then existed, in a favourable light, and were sanguine respecting its satisfactory completion.
Government acted on the foregoing Report; funds were advanced, the machinery was declared national property, and the works were continued. But there was evidently a misgiving on the part of the Lords of the Treasury, for the official payments soon failed to meet the heavy and increasing expenses incurred by Mr. Babbage.
Under these circumstances, by the advice of Mr. Wolryche Whitmore (Mr. Babbage’s brother-in-law), a meeting of Mr. Babbage’s personal friends was held on the 12th of May, 1829. It consisted of:—
The Duke of Somerset, F.R.S., Lord Ashley, M.P., Sir John Franklin, Capt. R.N., F.R.S., Mr. Wolryche Whitmore, M.P., Dr. Fitton, F.R.S., Mr. Francis Baily, F.R.S., Sir John Herschel, F.R.S.
They drew up the annexed Report:—
“_May 12, 1829._
“The attention of the undersigned personal friends of Mr. Babbage having been called by him to the actual state of his Machine for Calculating and Printing Mathematical Tables; and to his relation to the Government on the one hand, and to the Engineers and workmen employed by him in its execution on the other, declare themselves satisfied, from his statements and from the documents they have perused, of the following facts.
“That Mr. Babbage was originally induced to take up the work on its present extensive scale, by an understanding on his part, that it was the wish of Government he should do so, and by an advance of 1,500_l._ in the outset, with a full impression on his mind that such further advances would be made as the progress of the work should require, and as should secure him from ultimate loss.
“That the public and scientific importance of the Engine has been acknowledged, in a Report of a Committee of the Royal Society, made at the time of its first receiving the sanction of His Majesty’s Government, and that its actual state of progress is such, as in the opinion of the most eminent Engineers and other Members of the Royal Society, as detailed in a further Report of a Committee of that body, to warrant their impression of the moral certainty of its success, should funds not be wanting for its completion.
“That it appears, that Mr. Babbage’s actual expenditure has amounted to nearly 7,000_l._ and that the whole sum advanced to him by the Government is 3,000_l._
“That Mr. Babbage has devoted, from the commencement of his arduous undertaking, the most assiduous and anxious attention to the work in hand, to the injury of his health, and the neglect and refusal of other profitable occupations.
“That a very huge expense still remains to be incurred, to the probable amount of at least 4,000_l._, as far as he can foresee, before the Engine can be completed; but that Mr. Babbage’s private fortune is not such as, in their opinion, to justify the sacrifices he must make in completing it without further and effectual assistance from Government; taking into consideration not only his own interest, but that of his family dependent on him.
“Under these circumstances, it is their opinion that a full and speedy representation of the case ought to be made to Government, and that in the most direct manner by a personal application to his Grace the Duke of Wellington.
“And that in case of such application proving unsuccessful in procuring effectual and adequate assistance, they must regard Mr. Babbage as no longer called on—considering the pecuniary and personal sacrifices he will then have made; considering the entire and _bonâ fide_ expenditure of all that he will have received from the public purse on the object of its destination, and considering the moral certainty to which it is at length by his exertions reduced—as no longer called on to go on with an undertaking which may prove the destruction of his health, and the great injury, if not the ruin of his fortune.
“That it is their opinion that Mr. W. Whitmore and Mr. Herschel should request an interview with the Duke of Wellington for the purpose of making this representation.
(Signed,) SOMERSET. ASHLEY. JOHN FRANKLIN. W. W. WHITMORE. WM. HENRY FITTON. FRANCIS BAILY. J. F. W. HERSCHEL.”
In consequence of what passed at this interview, which took place as suggested, the Duke of Wellington, accompanied by the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Goulburn) and Lord Ashley, inspected the _model_ of the engine, the drawings, and parts in progress. The Duke recommended that a grant of 3,000_l._ should be made towards the completion of the machine, which was duly paid by the Treasury.
In the mean time, difficulties of another kind arose. The engineer, who had constructed the Engine under Mr. Babbage’s directions, had delivered his bills in such a state, that it was impossible to judge how far the charges were just and reasonable; and although Mr. Babbage had paid several thousand pounds, there yet remained a considerable balance, which could not be liquidated until the accounts had been examined, and the charges approved by professional engineers.
With a view of drawing attention to these charges, Mr. Babbage addressed the following letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer:—
“_Dorset Street, 21 December, 1830._ “MY LORD, “I beg to call your Lordship’s attention to the enclosed account[40] of the expenses of the Machine for calculating and printing mathematical tables, by which it appears that a sum of 592_l._ 4_s._ 8_d._ remained due to myself upon the last account, and that a further sum of nearly 600_l._ has since become due to Mr. Clement.
“It is for the payment of this latter sum that I wish to call your Lordship’s attention. Mr. Maudslay, one of the engineers appointed by the Government to examine the bills of Mr. Clement, having been unable from illness to attend, his report has been delayed, and Mr. Clement informs me that should the money remain unpaid much longer, he shall be obliged, from want of funds, to discharge some of the workmen; an event which I need not inform your Lordship would be very prejudicial to the progress of the machine.
“Another point which I wish to submit to your attention, when your Lordship shall have had leisure to examine personally the present state of the works, is, that since it is absolutely necessary to find additional room for the erection of the machine, it becomes a matter of serious consideration whether it would not contribute to the speedier completion of the machine, and also to economy in expenditure, to remove the works to the neighbourhood of my own residence. “I have, &c. “C. BABBAGE.”
The receipt of this letter caused the Treasury to make the following communication to the Secretary of the Royal Society:—
“_Treasury, 24 December, 1830._ “SIR, “The Lords Commissioners of H. M. Treasury, having had under their consideration a letter from Mr. Babbage, containing an account of the expense which has been incurred in the construction of the Machine for calculating and printing mathematical tables, amounting to the sum of 7,192_l._ 4_s._ 8_d._, and requesting an advance of 600_l._ to defray a part of that expense; I am commanded by their Lordships to refer you to the Report of the Council of the Royal Society dated 16th February, 1829, which entirely satisfied their Lordships of the propriety of supporting Mr. Babbage in the construction of this machine, and to state that advances to the amount of 6,000_l._ have been made on this account, and that directions have been given for a further advance of 600_l._
“I am also to acquaint you, that the Machine is the property of Government, and consequently my Lords propose to defray the further expense necessary for its completion. I am further to request you will move the Council of the Royal Society to cause the machine to be inspected, and to favour my Lords with their opinion whether the work is proceeding in a satisfactory manner, and without unnecessary expense, and what further sum may probably be necessary for completing it. “I am, &c. “J. STEWART.” “_The Secretary, Royal Society._”
The consideration of this letter was referred to the same Committee which had previously been appointed for a similar purpose, with the addition of Sir John Lubbock and Mr. Troughton.
Again the Committee met[41] Mr. Babbage, at No. 21, Prospect Place, Lambeth (where the construction of the engine was carried on), and minutely inspected the machinery and drawings.
Their Report embodied the whole facts of the case:—the workmanship of the various parts of the machine was declared to have been executed with the greatest possible degree of perfection, and the pains taken to verify the charges on the part of the Government altogether satisfactory. It was recommended that the vacancy occasioned by the decease of Mr. Maudslay, who had been appointed to inspect the accounts, should be filled up by another engineer, conversant with the execution of machinery, and the value thereof. With respect to the suggested removal of the workshops nearer to Mr. Babbage’s residence, the Committee gave their entire concurrence, on the ground that greater expedition would thereby be attained in carrying on the work, and that it was highly essential to secure all the machinery and drawings in fire-proof premises, without delay. A plot of ground held on lease by Mr. Babbage, adjacent to his garden at the back of his house in Dorset Street, was recommended as a desirable site for the contemplated erections, of which the plans and estimates had been submitted to the Committee. The framers of the Report stated in conclusion that:—
“Such an arrangement would be eminently conducive to the speedy and economical completion of the Machine, as well as to the effectual working and employment of the same, after it shall have been completed.
“That as to the sum which may be necessary for completing the Engine, they attach hereto the estimate of Mr. Brunel.”[42]
The Report, with Mr. Brunel’s estimate, were sent to the Treasury on the 13th April, 1831: and having been approved by a Committee of practical engineers appointed by Government, the latter acted on the recommendations which it contained. The piece of ground adjoining Mr. Babbage’s garden was taken, and a fire-proof building erected, designed to contain the plans and drawings, and also the engine when completed. But new and unforeseen difficulties arose. When about 17,000_l._ had been expended, further progress was arrested on account of a misunderstanding with Mr. Clement, who made the most extravagant demands as compensation for carrying on the construction of the engine in the new buildings. These demands could not be satisfied with proper regard to the justice due to Government. Mr. Clement accordingly withdrew from the undertaking, and carried with him all the valuable tools that had been used in the work; a proceeding the more unfortunate, as many of them had been invented expressly to meet the unusual forms and combinations arising out of the novel construction.[43]
An offer was made to surrender the tools, for a given sum, which was declined, and the works came to a stand-still. But other circumstances interposed to prevent the completion of the original design.
During the suspension of the works, Mr. Babbage had been deprived of the use of his own drawings. Having in the meanwhile naturally speculated upon the general principles on which machinery for calculation might be constructed, _a principle of an entirely new kind_ occurred to him, the power of which over the most complicated arithmetical operations seemed nearly unbounded. This was the executing of analytical operations by means of an analytical-engine. On re-examining his drawings, when returned to him by the engineer, the new principle appeared to be limited only by the extent of the mechanism it might require. The invention of simpler mechanical means for performing the elementary operations of the engine, now derived a far greater importance than it had hitherto possessed; and should such simplifications be discovered, it seemed difficult to anticipate, or even to over-estimate, the vast results which might be attained.
These new views acquired additional importance from their bearings upon the engine already partly executed for the Government; for, if such simplifications should be discovered, it might happen that the Analytical-Engine would execute with greater rapidity the calculations for which the Difference-Engine was intended; or that the Difference-Engine would itself be superseded by a far simpler mode of construction.
Though these views might perhaps at that period have appeared visionary, they have subsequently been completely realized. To have allowed the construction of the Difference-Engine to be resumed, while these new conceptions were withheld from the Government, would have been improper; yet the state of uncertainty in which those views were then necessarily involved, rendered any written communication respecting their probable bearing on that engine, a task of very great difficulty. It therefore appeared to Mr. Babbage, that the most straightforward course was to ask for an interview with the head of the Government, and to communicate to him the exact state of the case.
On the 26th September, 1834, Mr. Babbage requested an audience of Lord Melbourne, for the purpose of placing these views before him; his Lordship acceded to the request, but from some cause the interview was postponed; and soon after, the ministry went out of office, without the desired conference having taken place.
The duration of the Duke of Wellington’s administration was short; and no decision on the subject of the _Difference_-Engine was obtained.
In May, 1835, Mr. Babbage announced in a letter[44] to M. Quetelet, which was laid before the Academy of Sciences at Brussels, that he had “for six months been engaged in making the drawings of a new calculating engine of _far greater power than the first_.” “I am myself astonished,” says Mr. Babbage, “at the power I have been enabled to give to this machine; a year ago I should not have believed this result possible. This machine is intended to contain a hundred variables, or numbers susceptible of changing, and each of these numbers may consist of twenty-five figures. The greatest difficulties of the invention have already been surmounted, and the plans will be finished in a few months.”
Subsequently to the date of this letter, Mr. Babbage visited Turin, where he explained to Baron Plana, M. Menabrea, and several other distinguished philosophers of that city, the mathematical principles of his Analytical-Engine, and also the drawings and engravings of the more curious mechanical contrivances, by which those principles were to be carried into effect. M. Menabrea, with Mr. Babbage’s consent, published the information which he had received in the 41st volume of the _Bibliothèque Universelle de Génève_. The article is remarkable as giving the first account of the Analytical-Engine.[45] An English translation, with copious original notes, made by a lady of distinguished rank and talent,[46] was published in the third volume of Taylor’s _Scientific Memoirs_.
But it did not contain all the information respecting the Difference-Engine that was desirable, and Mr. Babbage was consequently led to communicate a short article upon this subject to the _Philosophical Magazine_, which is inserted in the 23rd volume[47]. The more comprehensive statements and official documents which Mr. Babbage has placed at my disposal renders it unnecessary to do more than allude to that article.
For nine years, that is, from the year 1833, when the construction of the Difference-Engine was suspended, until 1842, no decision respecting the machine was arrived at, although Mr. Babbage made several applications to Government on the subject.
On the 21st October, 1838, he wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, stating that the question he wished to have settled was:—“Whether the Government required him to superintend the completion of the Difference-Engine, which had been suspended during the last five years, according to the original plan and principle, or whether they intended to discontinue it altogether.” This letter produced no result. Time wore on, and Sir Robert Peel became Prime Minister. This was in 1841. Up to the termination of the Parliamentary Session in 1842, Mr. Babbage had received no other communication on the subject than a note from Sir George Clerk (Secretary to the Treasury), written in January of that year, stating that he feared the pressing official duties of Sir Robert Peel would prevent him turning his attention to the matter for some days.
Having availed himself of several private channels for recalling the question to Sir Robert Peel’s attention without effect, Mr. Babbage, on the 8th of October, 1842, again wrote to him, requesting an early decision.
At last Mr. Babbage received the following letter:—
“_Downing Street, Nov. 3, 1842._ “MY DEAR SIR, “The Solicitor-General has informed me that you are most anxious to have an early and decided answer as to the determination of the Government with respect to the completion of your Calculating Engine. I accordingly took the earliest opportunity of communicating with Sir R. Peel on the subject.
“We both regret the necessity of abandoning the completion of a Machine on which so much scientific ingenuity and labour have been bestowed. But on the other hand, the expense which would be necessary in order to render it either satisfactory to yourself, or generally useful, appears on the lowest calculation so far to exceed what we should be justified in incurring, that we consider ourselves as having no other alternative.
“We trust that by withdrawing all claim on the part of the Government to the Machine as at present constructed, and by placing it at your entire disposal, we may, to a degree, assist your future exertions in the cause of science. “I am, &c. “HENRY GOULBURN. “_Charles Babbage, Esq._”
“P.S. Sir R. Peel begs me to add, that as I have undertaken to express to you our joint opinion on this matter, he trusts you will excuse his not separately replying to the letter, which you addressed to him on the subject a short time since.”
To this letter Mr. Babbage replied as follows:—
“_Dorset Street, Nov. 6, 1842._ “MY DEAR SIR, “I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3rd of Nov., containing your own and Sir Robert Peel’s decision respecting the Engine for calculating and printing mathematical tables by means of Differences, the construction of which has been suspended about eight years.
“You inform me that both regret the necessity of abandoning the completion of the Engine, but that not feeling justified in incurring the large expense which it may probably require, you have no other alternative.
“You also offer, on the part of Government, to withdraw all claim in the Machine as at present constructed, and to place it at my entire disposal, with the view of assisting my future exertions in the cause of science.
“The drawings and the parts of the Machine already executed are, as you are aware, the absolute property of Government, and I have no claim whatever to them.
“Whilst I thank you for the feeling which that offer manifests, I must, under all the circumstances, decline accepting it. “I am, &c. “C. BABBAGE.”
Mr. Babbage had an interview with Sir R. Peel subsequently to the date of the foregoing letter: the result was, however, entirely unsatisfactory; and thus, with the communication from the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, terminated an engagement which had existed upwards of twenty years, during which period it is due to Mr. Babbage to state, that he refused more than one highly desirable and profitable situation,[48] in order that he might give his whole time and thoughts to the fulfilment of the contract, which he considered himself to have entered into with the Government.
With respect to the Difference-Engine little remains to be added. In 1843, an application was made to Government, by the Trustees of King’s College, London, to allow the Engine, as it existed, to be removed to the museum of that institution. The request was complied with; and the Engine, enclosed within a glass case, now stands nearly in the centre of the Museum. It is capable of calculating to five figures, and two orders of differences, and performs the work with absolute precision; but no portion whatever of printing machinery, which was one of the great objects in the construction of the Engine, exists. All the drawings of the machinery and other contrivances are also in King’s College.
Before closing this Chapter, it will not be out of place to put upon record the state of the Analytical-Engine at this period (1848).
Mechanical Notations have been made, both of the actions of detached parts, and of the general action of the whole, which cover about four or five hundred large folio sheets of paper.
The original rough sketches are contained in about five volumes. There are upwards of one hundred large drawings. No part of the construction of the Analytical-Engine has yet been commenced. A long series of experiments have, however, been made upon the art of shaping metals; and the tools to be employed for that purpose have been discussed, and many drawings of them prepared. The great object of these inquiries and experiments is, on the one hand, by simplifying the construction as much as possible, and on the other, by contriving new and cheaper means of execution, ultimately to reduce the expense within those limits which a private individual may command.
[28] In the following account of the Difference and Analytical Engines, besides the MS. documents in the Archives of the Royal Society, I have derived very valuable information from an unpublished statement drawn up by Mr. Babbage, which he has been so kind as to place in my hands. The original documents which are in Mr. Babbage’s possession, and which are referred to, I have myself examined.
[29] The idea of a Calculating Engine is not new. The celebrated Pascal constructed a machine for executing the ordinary operations of arithmetic, a description of which will be found in the _Encycl. Méthod._, and in the Works of Pascal, Tom. IV. p. 7, Paris, 1819. In his _Pensées_ he says, alluding to this Engine: “_La machine arithmétique fait des effets qui approchent plus de la pensée que tout ce que font les animaux; mais elle ne fait rien qui puisse faire dire qu’elle a de la volonté comme les animaux._” Subsequently, Leibnitz invented a machine by which, says Mr. De Morgan, “arithmetic computations could be made.” Polenus, a learned and ingenious Italian, invented a machine by which multiplication was performed—and mechanical contrivances for performing particular arithmetical processes were made about a century ago, but they were merely modifications of Pascal’s. These Engines were very different to Mr. Babbage’s Difference-Engine.
[30] This letter was printed and published in July, 1822.
[31] Sir H. Davy had witnessed and expressed his admiration of the performances of the Engine.
[32] I am informed upon good authority, that Dr. Young differed in opinion from his colleagues. Without doubting that an engine could be made, he conceived that it would be far more useful to invest the probable cost of constructing such a calculating machine as was proposed, in the funds, and apply the dividends to paying calculators.
[33] Parliamentary Paper, No. 370, 1823.
[34] Mr. Babbage very justly observes, that had the mutual relations of the two parties, and the details of the plans then adopted, been clearly defined, there is little doubt but that the Difference-Engine would long since have existed.
[35] It will be desirable to distinguish between,
1. The small _Model_ of the Original or Difference-Engine.
2. The Difference-Engine itself, belonging to the Government, a part only of which has been put together.
3. The designs for another Engine called the Analytical-Engine.
[36] Sir R. Peel distinctly admitted this in the House of Commons in March, 1843.
[37] A curious anecdote is related illustrative of the great perfection to which Mr. Clement was in the habit of bringing machinery. He received an order from America to construct a large screw in the _best possible manner_, and he accordingly made one with the greatest mathematical accuracy. But his bill amounted to some hundreds of pounds, which completely staggered the American, who never calculated upon paying more than 20_l._ at the utmost for the screw. The matter was referred to arbitrators, who gave an opinion in favour of Mr. Clement.
[38] They were Messrs. Brunel, Donkin, and Field.
[39] Colonel Sabine informs me, that Dr. Whewell was afterwards added to the Committee.
[40] £ s. d. Expense to end of 1824 600 0 0 Expense to end of 1827 521 16 9 Mr. Clement’s Bills to June, 1827 4,775 15 3 Ditto, 9th May, 1829 730 12 8 ------------- 6,628 4 8 Deduct old tools sold 36 0 0 ------------- 6,592 4 8 Mr. Clement’s Bill to December, 1830, about 600 0 0 ------------- 7,192 4 8 -------------
[41] I have a letter of Sir J. Herschel’s before me, expressing his regret at being unable to attend on this occasion, but that his faith in the engine and its inventor remained unshaken.
[42] Mr. Brunel’s estimate appears in the following letter to Mr. Warburton:—
“_Feb. 28, 1831._ “DEAR SIR, “Having taken in consideration the erection of the proposed shops, the removal of the machinery, the accommodation for it, and also for the maker; having also taken into consideration the further completion of the drawings, and the ultimate accomplishment of the Engine until it is capable of producing plates for printing; though I feel confident that the sum of 8,000_l._ will be ample to realize the objects that are contemplated, I should nevertheless recommend that the Government be advised to provide for the sum of 12,000_l._ by way of estimate, and that the yearly sum required, exclusive of the sum requisite for the buildings and removal (say 2,000_l._), will not exceed from 2,000_l._ to 2,500_l._ “I am, &c. “M. I. BRUNEL.” “_Henry Warburton, Esq._”
[43] This Mr. Clement had a legal right to do. Startling as it may appear to the unprofessional reader, it is nevertheless the fact, that engineers and mechanics possess the right of property to all tools that they have constructed, although the cost of construction has been defrayed by their employers.
[44] Mr. Babbage informs me, that this letter was intended only as a private communication.
[45] In the _Ninth Bridgewater Treatise_, Mr. Babbage has employed various arguments deduced from the Analytical-Engine, which afford some idea of its powers. See second edition. In 1838, several copies of plans of this new engine, engraved on wood, were circulated amongst Mr. Babbage’s friends at the Meeting of the British Association at Newcastle.
In 1840, Mr. Babbage had one of his general plans of the Analytical-Engine lithographed at Paris.
[46] I am authorized by Lord Lovelace to say, that the translator is Lady Lovelace.
[47] “The Difference-Engine could only tabulate, and was incapable by its nature of developing; the Analytical-Engine was intended to either tabulate or develop. The Difference-Engine is the embodying of one particular and very limited set of operations, the Analytical-Engine, the embodying of the science of operations. The distinctive characteristic of the Analytical-Engine, is the introduction into it of the principle which Jacquard devised for regulating by means of punched cards the most complicated patterns in the fabrication of brocaded stuffs. Nothing of the sort exists in the Difference-Engine. We may say most aptly, that the Analytical-Engine weaves _Algebraical patterns_, just as the Jacquard loom weaves flowers and leaves!”—Note to translation of Menabrea’s Memoir. The 59th volume of the _Edinburgh Review_ contains an able and elaborate article upon the Difference-Engine, written by Dr. Lardner.
[48] Mr. Babbage has shown me letters by which it appears that he declined offices of great emolument, the acceptance of which would have interfered with his labours upon the Difference-Engine.
The annexed Review of the Eleventh Chapter of MR. WELD’S HISTORY OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY, by Professor DE MORGAN, has been reprinted with his permission, and that of the Editor, _verbatim_, from the Athenæum of October 14th, 1848.
Three Notes at the foot of the pages have been added for the purpose of explanation.
These are followed by the remarks upon them, reprinted from the “_Athenæum_” of 16th December, 1848.
PROFESSOR DE MORGAN’S REVIEW _of_ WELD’S HISTORY _of the_ ROYAL SOCIETY.
---------------
THE ATHENÆUM. _LONDON, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1848._
---------------
MR. BABBAGE’S CALCULATING MACHINE.
In our review of Mr. Weld’s “History of the Royal Society,” [_ante_, p. 621,] we noted that one chapter was devoted to the history of the celebrated undertaking above named. This chapter is taken from materials furnished by Mr. Babbage himself, all the documents having undergone the inspection of Mr. Weld. Of recent publications on the subject it may be well to note—1. A short account of the transactions with the Government, communicated by Mr. Babbage to the _Philosophical Magazine_ for September, 1843. 2. A sketch of the _Analytical Engine_ (on which Mr. Babbage is now at work, that commenced by the Government being the _Difference Engine_) written in Italian by Menabrea, and translated, with notes (and a list of all previous publications), by the Countess of Lovelace (August 1843). The statements put forward by Mr. Babbage have thus been in substance before the public for five years, without contradiction: for though the account (No. 1) was not signed, it was stated to be _from authority_, allowed to pass as such by the Editors of the magazine, and generally understood to emanate from Mr. Babbage. We are then bound to take this first statement as admitted by Government, more especially after the publication by Mr. Weld, avowedly made from the documents furnished by Mr. Babbage himself: and assuredly we understand Mr. Weld as conceiving himself to be distinctly informed by Mr. Babbage, that _all_ documents of any importance had been communicated.
The heads of the public history of the _Difference Engine_ are as follows:—In April, 1823, the Government requested the opinion of the Royal Society on Mr. Babbage’s plan for “applying machinery to the purposes of calculating and printing mathematical tables.” The Royal Society reported favourably, that the machine was “fully adequate to the objects proposed,”—and this report was laid before Parliament. In July, Mr. Babbage had an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Earl of Ripon) to ascertain if Government would wish him to construct for _printing_ as well as _calculating_. There is no minute of this conversation, and the parties have different memories upon it. But soon after, the Treasury informs the Royal Society that 1,500_l._ was to be issued to Mr. Babbage “to enable him to bring his invention to perfection, in the manner recommended.” Mr. Weld remarks that no plan had been pointed out; but it must be noticed that the original application was for an opinion upon _calculating and printing_, that the opinion spoke of the _full adequacy_ of the plan for _the objects proposed_, and that the final determination of the Government was to proceed _as recommended_. Unless there were a previous understanding that all documents should either speak with the verbal completeness of an indictment or be wholly void, it is clear that the Government determined to assist Mr. Babbage in realizing the full invention, and told him so.[49]
The work went on for four years, under advances of money from time to time: the funds were applied by Mr. Babbage, and the accounts were audited by Messrs. Brunel, Donkin, and Field. We suppose that Government did not exceed the proposed advance of 1,500_l._; but this is not expressly stated. In December, 1828, Government applied again to the Royal Society to report upon the state, progress, and prospects of the machine. Mr. Babbage at the same time stated that he had expended 6,000_l._—meaning, we suppose, 4,500_l._ over and above the Government advance. A Committee, consisting of Messrs. Gilbert, Roget, Sabine, Herschel, Baily, Brunel (the elder), Kater, Donkin, Penn, Rennie, Barton, Warburton, declined to report on practicability or utility, considering both as fully established, and reported that, the difficulties considered, the progress was as great as could be expected, and that the engine was likely to fulfil the expectations of its inventor. On this report the Government made further advances, and the machine was declared national property. But the official payments soon failed: and Mr. Babbage called a meeting of private friends, in May 1829, who, on the representation that he had then advanced 4,000_l._ himself, in addition to the Government advance of 3,000_l._, advised him strongly not to proceed without adequate help from the Government. On this representation, the Duke of Wellington, Mr. Goulburn, and Lord Ashley inspected what there was to show, and the Treasury advanced 3,000_l._ more. In December 1830, nearly 600_l._ was still due to Mr. Babbage, “upon the last account,” and that sum to the superintendent, Mr. Clement. The Treasury gave directions for the advance of 600_l._ to pay Mr. Clement, and desired a fresh inspection and opinion from the Royal Society. The Committee above named (with the addition of Sir J. Lubbock and Mr. Troughton) reported (April 1831) as favourably as before on every point, and recommended attention to Mr. Babbage’s suggestion that the workshops should be removed to the neighbourhood of his residence. With regard to probable expense, they subjoined Mr. Brunel’s estimate that 8,000_l._ additional would be sufficient; but recommending that the Government be advised to provide for 12,000_l._ by way of estimate. A piece of ground adjoining Mr. Babbage’s garden was taken, and a fire-proof building was erected. When about 17,000_l._ had been expended altogether, further progress was arrested by the extravagant demands made by Mr. Clement, as compensation for carrying on the construction in the new buildings. These were out of the question: and Mr. Clement withdrew, taking with him all the tools which had been used, many of which had been invented for the occasion. For it is the law that engineers and mechanics possess the right of property in all tools they have constructed, even though the cost of construction may have been defrayed by their employers. A special agreement ought, the reader will say, to have been made as to these tools; but whether the neglect is to be charged on Mr. Babbage, or on the Government, those must say who feel able. As it very seldom happens that the employer furnishes tools, it is easy to see how the necessity for a special agreement may have escaped the notice of all parties.
So far all is intelligible enough, and no blame attaches to either side, at least that we can venture to impute. But now the question divides in a curious way. While the works were suspended, Mr. Babbage reconsidered the whole question, and invented what he calls the _Analytical Engine_,—which we will take, on his word and Menabrea’s publication, derived from his communications, to be immensely superior to the _Difference Engine_. To resume the latter, while Government was unacquainted with these new and more simple conceptions, would have been improper; to write on unfinished speculations would have been difficult. Mr. Babbage therefore (September 1834) requested a personal interview with Lord Melbourne; which was agreed to,—but before it took place the ministry was dissolved. From this time until 1842 Mr. Babbage made applications to the various administrations, which remained unanswered; until at last, in November, 1842, a letter from Mr. Goulburn, in answer to a new application, informed Mr. Babbage that the Government intended to discontinue the project on the ground of expense.
In the meanwhile Mr. Babbage incurred severe censure in scientific circles, as being himself the cause of the delay. It was asserted that he had compromised the Royal Society, which had so strongly recommended his project to the Government. It was pretty generally believed that the delay arose from his determination that the Government should take up the new engine and abandon the old one.
But, until the statement made by him shall be proved either false or defective, it must stand that the Government never returned any answer to the question—Shall the new engine be constructed, or shall the old one be proceeded with? We are of opinion that they ought to have required him to proceed with the old one. They ought to have said—The public can only judge by results: how well satisfied soever men of science may be that the new machine is immeasurably superior to the old one, society at large will never comprehend the abandonment of a scheme on which so much has been expended; they will say—What if, in constructing No. 2, No. 3 should be discovered, as much superior to No. 2 as No. 2 is to No. 1! And if Mr. Babbage had declined to proceed with his first project, when thus urged, it is our opinion that he would have richly deserved a very harsh censure. And of this we are sure, that if Government had allowed him to finish the first machine, and he had done so with success, the House of Commons would willingly have granted money for the second,—aye, and for the third and fourth, if he had invented them. But the Government itself prevented the matter from coming to any such issue. It is possible that Sir R. Peel and Mr. Goulburn allowed Mr. Babbage’s well-known wish[50] to abandon the first plan in favour of the new one to influence their decision. It may be that they were startled at finding that 17,000_l._ expended upon one project was only the precursor of another. If so, we think they put themselves in the wrong by not fastening on Mr. Babbage the alternative of either proceeding with the existing construction, or taking the entire responsibility of refusal upon himself. As the matter now stands, and unless Mr. Babbage can be refuted, the answer to the question why he did not proceed is, that during the eight years in which he had to bear the blame of the delay he could not procure even the attention of the Government, much less any decision on the course to be taken.
It is generally understood that Mr. Babbage is determined to proceed with the _Analytical Engine_, gradually, and at his own expense; and that the drawings are in a state of great forwardness. According to Mr. Babbage himself, many experiments have been made with the object “on the one hand, by simplifying the construction as much as possible, and on the other, by contriving new and cheaper means of execution, ultimately to reduce the expense within those limits which a private individual may command.”
In looking at all the circumstances of this statement, we regret its divided responsibility. Mr. Weld has seen Mr. Babbage’s documents. Should he have made an insufficient selection, who is to blame? Mr. Weld says, “I have derived very valuable information from an unpublished statement drawn up by Mr. Babbage, which he has been so kind as to place in my hands. The original documents, which are in Mr. Babbage’s possession, and which are referred to, I have myself examined.” From all this we should conclude that if Mr. Weld had omitted anything material, or fallen into any misconception, Mr. Babbage would before this have set it right. But it would be more satisfactory if we had Mr. Babbage’s own acceptance of the statement thus made, as being that on which he is content to rest his case; at least until some specific counter-statement should demand more detail of explanation. Continued silence will be tantamount to such acceptance.
There is also one piece of information which must be drawn out before the case can be finally adjudicated. We stand thus:—Scientific rumour states that Mr. Babbage compelled the Government to give him up by demanding permission to abandon the _Difference Engine_ and substitute the _Analytical Engine_. To this, in the formal point of view, Mr. Babbage has fully answered, by showing that the Government never communicated to him that it was their pleasure he should proceed on the plan originally contemplated. The question now remains—Did Mr. Babbage, or did he not, in the several unanswered applications which he made to the Ministry, press the claims of the new machine and the abandonment of the old? If so, did he do it in such a manner as to give to understand, or make apparent, that he would not consent to recommence operations at the point of relinquishment? The “several applications” which were made from 1833 to 1838 are not particularized, much less described as to contents. But, in October 1838, Mr. Babbage wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, stating, to use Mr. Weld’s words, that “the question he wished to have settled” was, whether the Government required him to superintend the completion of the _Difference Engine_ according to the original plan and principle, or whether they intended to discontinue it altogether. Now the words _quoted_ are very like the idiom a person would employ who had in his mind that up to that time some other question had been among those proposed for discussion. And it is worthy of note that all the communications are undescribed until we come to the one of October 1838; which shows that then at least, whether before or not, Mr. Babbage had put the question on the right issue. Of what tenor, then, were the undescribed applications?[51] If of the same as that of October 1838, Mr. Babbage stands quite clear; but if they were such as fairly to give rise to the rumour above mentioned, then it must be said, that though _he_ had every disposition to get wrong, Government always prevented him by blocking his path with an error of its own. But in any case it is to be remembered, that for the last four years of unanswered application Mr. Babbage stood upon the right ground; and also that the rumoured _refusal_ to proceed never was made.
The public, we think, has a right to explanation from the Government, and to further explanation from Mr. Babbage. Sir R. Peel turned it off with a joke in the House of Commons. He recommended that the machine should be set to calculate the time at which it would be of use. He ought rather to have advised that it should be set to compute the number of applications which might remain unanswered before a Minister, if the subject were not one which might affect his parliamentary power. If it had done this, it would have shown that its usefulness had commenced.
[49] By the words “_no plan_,” the reviewer here evidently refers to the _mechanical and mathematical plan_, on the fitness of which the Royal Society had already, as he observes, made a report. Mr. Weld, on the other hand, refers to the _mutual relations_ of the two parties, Mr. Babbage and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, relative to the expenses and even to the ownership of the _Difference-Engine_, as appears by the footnote (34) at page 256. C. B.
[50] It is scarcely possible that this _supposed_ wish could have influenced Sir Robert Peel, because he had before him a written disavowal of it from Mr. Babbage himself. C. B.
[51] The two following will sufficiently explain them:—On the 23d December, 1834, Mr. Babbage addressed a statement to the Duke of Wellington, pointing out the only plans which, in his opinion, could be pursued for terminating the questions relative to the _Difference Engine_, namely:
_First_, the Government might desire Mr. Babbage to continue the construction of the Engine in the hands of the person who has hitherto been employed in making it.
_Secondly_, the Government might wish to know whether any other person could be substituted for the engineer at present employed to continue the construction; a course which was possible.
_Thirdly_, the Government might (although he did not presume that they would) substitute some person to superintend the completion of the Engine instead of Mr. Babbage himself.
_Fourthly_, the Government might be disposed to give up the undertaking entirely.
A letter to Sir R. Peel from Mr. Babbage, dated 7th April, 1835, and enclosing the above plans, concludes thus:—
“The delays and difficulties of years will, I hope, excuse my expressing a wish that I may at length be relieved from them by an early decision of the Government on the question.” C. B.
_From the_ ATHENÆUM _of_ SATURDAY, DEC. _16th, 1848_.
---------------
Mr. Babbage has reprinted, for private circulation, Mr. Weld’s chapter on his _Calculating Machine_, and has appended to it our review[52] of that chapter [see _ante_, p. 1029] with three short foot-notes. The first of these is on a point immaterial to the issue; the second and third contain distinct statements of fact from Mr. Babbage, in reference to our comments upon his proceedings and those of the Government. Our readers will remember that from September 1834 to November 1842, Mr. Babbage could not procure the attention of the Government to the state of the engine, on which 17,000_l._ had been spent; and that, about the beginning of that period, Mr. Babbage had invented the new engine, which he called the _Analytical Engine_. And further, they will remember that all notion of the possibility of blame having been justly incurred by Mr. Babbage rested, in our comment, upon the hypothesis that he had put his wish to abandon the _Difference Engine_ and substitute the _Analytical Engine_ before the Government in such a form as to give them a right to suppose that he was unwilling to proceed with the former. On our remark that it is possible that Sir R. Peel and Mr. Goulburn allowed his well-known wish to influence their decision, Mr. Babbage observes:—“It is scarcely possible that this _supposed_ wish could have influenced Sir Robert Peel, because he had before him a written disavowal of it from Mr. Babbage himself.”
Again, of the first half of the period of unanswered application Mr. Weld gives no account, as to the tenor of the applications therein made to the Government: though he shows by documents that during the second half Mr. Babbage, to repeat our own phrase, “stood upon the right ground.” And thereupon we expressed our opinion that the public had a right to explanation from the Government, and to further explanation from Mr. Babbage. This further explanation Mr. Babbage now gives, in the following words; among which we insert some bracketed comments:—
“The two following [applications made to the Government] will sufficiently explain them [the undescribed applications of the first half of the period of unanswered application]:—On the 23rd December, 1834, Mr. Babbage addressed a statement to the Duke of Wellington, pointing out the only [the reader will remark this word _only_] plans which in his opinion could be pursued for terminating the questions relative to the _Difference Engine_, namely—_First_, the Government might desire Mr. Babbage to continue the construction of the engine in the hands of the person who has hitherto been employed in making it. _Secondly_, the Government might wish to know whether any other person could be substituted for the engineer at present employed to continue the construction—a course which was possible. _Thirdly_, the Government might (although he did not presume that they would) substitute some person to superintend the completion of the engine instead of Mr. Babbage himself. _Fourthly_, the Government might be disposed to give up the undertaking entirely.” A letter to Sir Robert Peel from Mr. Babbage, dated the 7th of April, 1835, and enclosing the above plans, concludes thus: “The delays and difficulties of years will, I hope, excuse my expressing a wish that I may at length be relieved from them by an early decision of the Government on the question.”
From the above it appears that at the end of 1834, Mr. Babbage—though then so full of the _new_ engine, that in September he had asked an audience of Lord Melbourne, to communicate the exact state of the case, and to request, of course, his consideration of the question whether the new engine should or should not take the place of the old one—began his applications to the Government with distinct reference to the _old_ engine, and to the question of its completion or abandonment. Certainly the first of the two applications was not well timed, for it was made when the Duke of Wellington held all the seals, and a Government courier was hunting Sir Robert Peel all over Italy, to tell him to come home quick and be Prime Minister. But it was repeated to Sir Robert Peel in the April following, when the latter was also in official possession of the previous letter.
Mr. Babbage having thus filled up the only _lacuna_ which the public press has brought to his notice, we can but repeat that those who would impute to him the blame of the failure of Government to complete his Calculating Machine must begin by proving his statement to be false or defective. In 1835 he complains _to_ the Government of “delays and difficulties,” which he implies to be mainly caused _by_ the Government, and he gets no answer whatever to repeated applications, until 1843. Those who have propagated the rumours that his conduct was the cause of the delay, and that he compromised his friends in the Royal Society, who had aided in bringing him under the notice of the Government, are bound to abstain in future, or to show cause.
We end by a quotation from Mr. Weld, which we abstained from giving so long as we supposed that the discontinuance of the Calculating Machine might be, in any degree, Mr. Babbage’s fault. “Mr. Babbage has shown me letters, by which it appears that he declined offices of great emolument, the acceptance of which would have interfered with his labours upon the _Difference Engine_.”
[52] We said in that review that Menabrea’s Memoir was in Italian:—we should have said French.
THE END.
Transcriber’s Notes.
New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.
Italic text is denoted by underscores _thus_, small capitals have been changed to all capitals.
Some words are inconsistently hyphenated such as “light-house”, “lighthouse” and “astronomer-royal”, “astronomer royal”. These have been left as originally printed.
The footnotes have been renumbered throughout the book and moved to the ends of the chapters.
The Appendix consists of extracts from other publications. The footnotes have been renumbered but there remain references to page numbers in the original publications.
Some small changes have been made as follows:
A closing quotation mark at the end of the first sentence of footnote 47 has been removed since all of this text is taken from the note cited.
In order to obtain the correct alignment of text:
On page 126 the dashes serving to indicate repeated text have been replaced by duplicated text.
In the table in footnote 40 the ditto marks have been replaced by duplicated text.
In the table on page 220 “The Bath” has been repeated instead of being bracketed to “Military” and “Civil”.