David Napier by David Napier and David Bell: Chapter V

Millwall House

Millwall House

Chapter V: Life in London: 1837-1869

Mr. Napier continued in business at Lancefield Foundry till 1836, and then decided, as the Memoir states, to withdraw from public business. In doing so he did not contemplate inactivity, but only a change in the character of his work. He now meant to have greater leisure for the maturing of improvements that had been occupying his attention, and opportunity for the building of iron vessels by his sons, fitted with machinery embodying his inventions, so that experiments could be carried out with these in practical service. The proposed steamboats which this scheme implied could, obviously, have been constructed quite conveniently on the Clyde; but the question of finding a service where they might be employed profitably was, in this case, a consideration of the first importance. He already had a number of passenger steamers on the Clyde, and the excessive competition that had arisen there made it undesirable to increase their number. In this respect the Thames would doubtless appear to offer a much more favourable field. The building of iron steamships had only been recently commenced on the Thames; passenger traffic there was capable of great extension; and the prospect, further, of his sons being able to establish a business for themselves, with his assistance, in such an important centre would prove attractive. The family as a whole favoured the proposed change, and, after due consideration, it was definitely resolved upon. Napier could not but recognise the sacrifice involved in leaving his well-known works, established in a locality so favourably situated in respect of coal, iron and labour; but the feeling of enterprise and hopefulness carried the day, and the removal was carried out.

By the close of 1837, land had been acquired for the new establishment, the site as it came into Napier's hands being bare river-side ground, part of the "waste marsh-land which formed the Isle of Dogs." It was of considerable extent, and what was reckoned "a high price" was paid for it. Much additional expense, however, was incurred, and a great amount of difficult work was found necessary to fit the ground for the purpose in view. In the following year building-slips were formed, workshops built, and the requisite machinery erected in place. The upper part of the ground was reserved for a dwelling-house, garden, and offices, in much the same way as had been done at Lancefield. Fairbairn's shipyard immediately adjoined Napier's, and both yards, as afterwards referred to, were used together for the building of the SS Great Eastern. The new premises came to be known as the "Napier Yard," and the dwelling-house as "Napier House." It is curious to find that after a lapse of seventy-five years, these names remain in current use, — "Napier Yard" being the present address of Messrs. Joseph Westwood & Co., Ltd., and their offices still designated "Napier House." (Illustrations showing front and back views of this house, reproduced from photographs kindly taken by Mr. Hy. Rigby, manager of Messrs. Joseph Westwood & Co., in 1904, are shown at pages 36 and 38.) While the works were being completed, Napier designed the first of his experimental steamboats, and her construction was commenced in 1839 by his sons, John and Francis, whose work is more fully referred to later. The combination of iron shipbuilding with the more familiar work of marine engineering had a peculiar interest, at this time, alike for Napier and the juniors. He found himself here in most congenial surroundings.

Writing to a gentleman in Scotland shortly after the works had been started, he explained that he would have liked to spend some time with his friend, but from week to week found himself unable to leave. "My sons," he wrote, "are as busy as nailers, and paying more in wages than I ever paid in my most bustling days. They think they would do as well if I were absenting myself oftener, but I cannot think of quitting such a busy scene."

His interest in everything pertaining to steamboats and the furtherance of steam navigation was as keen as ever, and his time was now given mainly to his improvements, patents and experiments. He was, as in former years, frequently consulted with regard to the establishment and extension of steamship concerns, and as his steamboat connections and other interests involved much correspondence, with occasional visits to Scotland and elsewhere, his life continued to be one of much activity.

Not long after his settlement in London an incident occurred which appears to have given him considerable anxiety. One of the vessels he had engined years previously experienced the not uncommon misfortune of a boiler flue collapsing, through insufficiency of water, and the explosion which resulted was attended with fatal results. No responsibility rested upon Napier, but as maker of the boiler, he was called upon to attend the judicial enquiry that followed. It was shown that he had previously recommended a condensing apparatus to prevent formation of the deposit, which was a known source of danger to the boiler, but this had not been complied with, and, of course, he had no control otherwise. It became apparent that some of the London engineers were disposed to impute the accident not to its real Muse, but to the design of the boiler, and he felt obliged to protest strongly, pointing out that a boiler made by one of these same engineers had, but a short time before, met with a similar disaster, and that nothing in the design of his boiler could be held as accounting for the present accident. It happened about the same time that the British Queen, engined by Robert Napier at Glasgow, arrived in the Thames, and a letter written by David has the following observation: "I went down the river with the British Queen, they unfortunately let one of the boilers get dry while coming round, either carelessly or willingly, which has given the Cockneys another handle against Scotch engineers. I have no doubt that she will make a good passage both out and home, which will close their mouths." The complete success of this vessel, it may be said, amply fulfilled Napier's prediction.

To a correspondent who requested him to undertake the introduction of a newly-patented engine he expressed regret at being unable to do so, but referred the patentee to his cousin Robert, to whom he thought the scheme might be useful, adding that, if wished, he would have pleasure in recommending it. To another correspondent in America, who asked a quotation for engines similar to those the writer had seen in Liverpool (the Richmond's probably), he explained that he removed to London for the purpose of putting his sons into business, and they would be glad to supply the engines wanted at fifty pounds per horse-power, delivered on board complete. "They are," he added, "making alterations, rendering them still more compact. If you are not particularly partial to double engines, single engines could be made for five pounds per horse-power less. We made a steamer, at present plying on the Thames, with a single engine of upwards of 100 horse-power, called the Eclipse. She is the fastest in this country, and we are at present making another, still more powerful, with a single engine." The Eclipse was said to have a speed of about sixteen miles an hour, and the report that she was the fastest steamer in Britain appears to have gained a wide currency. It attracted the notice of Mr. Thomas Assheton Smith, of Wales, an enthusiast in the building of steam yachts, whose paddle yacht Fire King, built to his own model, was said to have a speed of fifteen miles per hour.

Speeds, it may be recalled however, were not at that time ascertained by reliable measured-mile trials as now. Mr. Smith, a sporting man, had issued a challenge in Bell's Life that his Fire King would run against any steamer then afloat from Dover pier round Eddystone Lighthouse and back, for five thousand guineas. He appears further to have addressed this challenge to David Napier personally, whose brief reply was as follows:

MILLWALL, May 11, 1842.
ASSHETON SMITH, ESQ.,

Sir,— On looking at the chart, from Dover round Eddystone Lighthouse and back to Dover is a longer run than the Eclipse is calculated for. I have no objection to accepting the challenge from Dover round the Isle of Wight and back to Dover, neither vessel to use sails. —I am, etc.,

D. NAPIER.

It is not known whether the contest was carried out, but if it took place the result may be somewhere chronicled. Smith for many years after this continued to have a succession of steam yachts, paddle and screw, built by his friend Robert Napier, both owner and builder doing their utmost to secure the best speed results.

In this same year David was invited by what appears to have been a Parliamentary Committee to state his views on certain naval questions then under discussion. One of the topics submitted was the relative merits of "full bows" and "sharp bows." His replies, given apparently viva voce, have not been found, but as he had solved this question conclusively more than twenty years before, there can be no doubt as to the opinion he would express. He pointed out that owners were still in the habit of "putting their full-bowed vessels into dock to get them made sharper," and with the best results. Another subject put forward was the utility of "floating breakwaters," which Napier thought might be tried, but no particulars have been found as to the local conditions which these structures were intended to meet, or their proposed form, method of mooring, etc.

When consulted, as he frequently was, by inventors with respect to proposed patents or new mechanical devices, he gave to such enquiries, as his letters show, the most courteous and careful consideration, his replies in some cases being most cordial and encouraging, while in others he indicated frankly defects or features in the scheme that would preclude the successful claiming of a patent. While thus "aye ready " to give assistance freely to practical persons, it is evident on the other hand that he could express his impatience emphatically when his professional advice had been sought and given but was persistently neglected or set aside. To the secretary of a steamship company, for example, whose directors requested his continued attendance at their weekly meetings, he intimated that, as the matters he "ought to have knowledge of and had fully reported on were still being disregarded," he must decline further attendance, he found it impossible he added to go on meeting with "a dozen people three-fourths of whom did not know anything of the subject they were talking about."

His interests were not, however, confined to engineering matters of a strictly professional kind, and among the schemes that shared his attention at this time was a plan which he submitted voluntarily to the municipal authorities of Glasgow for the disposal of that city's sewage. This was a problem that had long been discussed, but was still found difficult of solution. A report by Messrs. Bateman and Bazalgette, who were employed to deal with the subject, mentions that Napier proposed to intercept the sewage at the outfalls, where it passed into the Clyde, by the use of suitable hopper-barges, which would convey the sludge far out into the Firth, and discharge it into deep water, remote from residential places. He offered, it is said, a sum of five hundred pounds to give this plan a trial but although a similar system has been carried out elsewhere on a large scale, and with much success, it would undoubtedly have proved wholly inadequate to meet the rapidly growing needs of Glasgow and the Clyde area.

Mr. Napier's sons, John and Francis, under the style of "J. & F. Napier," and with their father's assistance, commenced business as engineers and shipbuilders at Millwall in 1839, their younger brother Robert assisting. They began with the construction of Mr. Napier's first experimental iron steamboat, Eclipse, 156 feet long, 19 feet beam and 80 tons measurement. Being built in accordance with the patent of April, 1839, she had a double bottom, divided longitudinally by girders 16 inches apart, the spaces between them forming channels through which the exhaust steam was made to pass to be condensed. Above the inner bottom, a water space, one and a half inches deep, was formed by another light but water-tight plating, and a continuous flow of sea water passed through this space from stem to stern. The steam condensed by the cold surfaces above and below was collected and returned to the boiler. This construction, it was claimed, added at the same time greatly to the vessel's strength. The engine had a single cylinder, and four boilers were used, in order to experiment with flues of different kinds. The first wheels were of ordinary form, but replaced for experiment by others of the form patented in 1841. After trials it was considered that the latter gave an increased speed. The speed was about sixteen miles an hour, which an independent writer states "was about two miles an hour faster than any steamer at that time on this side of the Atlantic," a performance which "gave a great impetus to marine engineering."

The Eclipse was, in 1840, placed on the route between Blackwall and Margate, her runs being subsequently extended to Herne Bay and Dover. Her passenger capacity, four to five hundred, was frequently tested in the conveyance of troops under an agreement with the War Office. The young men were naturally proud of their first vessel's success, and their father, after fully a year's experience, wrote that his sons "had been successful beyond expectation, the steamer's speed being so far beyond that of others that opposition is out of the question." After two seasons' running it was remarked, "we have not yet met with a competitor to the Eclipse," and she evidently attracted considerable attention both at home and abroad, various offers having been made to purchase or charter her. In Barham's ‘Smuggler's Leap’ her name occurs in the lines:

"If in one of the trips of the steamboat Eclipse You should go down to Margate to look at the ships, Or take what the bathing-room people call 'dips.'"

In 1841 two more vessels were put in hand; first, the Rocket, a small experimental steamer of which the dimensions have not been ascertained. She had one 36-inch cylinder, a tubular boiler working at about twenty pounds pressure, but her speed was less than that of the Eclipse. After being tried with different wheels she was placed on the Margate route. The second steamer of this period was the Isle of Thanet, completed in 1842, and placed on the Margate and Ramsgate station. No particulars have been found of her dimensions or machinery, but she "surpassed all the other steamers several miles an hour, exceeding even the Eclipse."

From a historical sketch of "The Thames Steamboat Companies," published by The Engineer, Sept., 1900, and Nov., 1897, the following interesting particulars are obtained of another steamer, built at the Millwall works probably about 1843:

The Steeple Engine of 'Waterman No. 9'

"Of the twelve boats owned by the Waterman Steam Packet Company, eleven were engined by the Messrs. Penn (although the name of the last fitted by them was Waterman No. 12). These had oscillating engines, embracing their makers' latest improvements.

"Of the one steamboat of the dozen (Waterman No. 9) not engined by Penn there is something worth noting. Possibly it may not be known that the mystic art of ‘betting’ is not altogether a product of these enlightened days. It flourished half a century ago, and heavy bets were made on the performances of some of our river steamboats, so high had the spirit of rivalry attained among the captains, if not the owners, of these boats. The order for Waterman No. 9 boat was therefore given to her builder, Mr. David Napier of Millwall, under rather onerous conditions. She was to be constructed of iron, and fitted with engines, under a guarantee that she should, when completed and tried, beat every other vessel of her class on the river, while burning less fuel, and this she did thoroughly. The dimensions of this vessel were: Length between perpendiculars, 107 feet; breadth at paddle boxes, 15 feet; depth under deck, 7 feet 2 inches; draught of water, 2 feet 9 inches. She was propelled by a single engine—known as a 'steeple-engine'— having a cylinder 30 inches diameter, with a piston stroke of 3 feet. Its piston was fitted with four piston-rods, whose upper ends were attached to a four-armed crosshead, from the centre of which the connecting-rod hung, the lower end of the latter embracing the crank-pin brasses, with a strap secured to it with a gib and cotter. The air, feed and bilge pumps were worked by a rocking beam, one end of which was connected by links to the piston-rods crosshead. The engine was of the surface-condensing type. The vessel being double-bottomed, the space between the two bottoms was used as a condenser, into which the steam, after use in the cylinder, was admitted, its condensation being effected by external cold, the resultant fresh water being used for boiler feed. This engine, invented by Mr. Napier, offered many advantages by its compactness and direct action for river-boat service. Its one objection was the protrusion of a large portion of the machinery above the deck, which rendered it unsuitable for sea-going vessels.

"The boiler supplying this engine with steam was of the vertical cylindrical type, 7 feet diameter, with a circular fire-grate, over which was a 14-inch water-space, in whose upper or tube-plate was a series of concentric circles of tube holes, fitted with water-tubes. Their lower ends communicated with the bottom water-space, and the upper ends with the water above the top tube-plate, the hot air and gases in their passage from the fire-box permeating among the tubes, — which were of brass, — and thus imparting their heat before reaching the chimney. The steam-producing power of this boiler was very great, and its consumption of fuel exceedingly moderate."

As competing steamboats were plying to the same ports as Napier's, although none were equal in speed, a keen rivalry appears to have existed between the masters of the respective vessels. This at times led to incidents on both sides manifesting more zeal than discretion, and a total disregard of passengers' wishes and convenience. A curious episode of this nature involved no less a personage than Charles Dickens, and his indignant letter on the subject to Messrs. Napier may be quoted, as illustrating these amenities of old-time travel:

1 DEVONSHIRE TERRACE, YORK GATE, REGENT'S PARK,
Monday, Second October, 1843.

SIR,
I beg to inform you that this morning, at Margate, a travelling bag belonging to me, a drab bag fastened with a padlock and two leather straps, containing among other things some articles of plate, was carried by my servant on board of the Isle of Thanet Steam Packet by mistake. The Captain refused to allow it out of the vessel, and to prevent its being taken away had it removed from the heap of luggage.

I went on board myself and explained to him that no one belonging to me had been on board for an instant except my servant, and requested to have it delivered up.

I did so in the presence of another gentleman who was with me. He still refused to comply with my request, and did so with great insolence and violence of manner.

Being unable to recover the bag I was obliged to leave it in the possession of this person, who had, I need scarcely say, as much right to it as if he had stopped it on the highway. I cannot think that the Company by whom this Officer is employed would willingly expose any gentleman to conduct so unwarranted and perfectly unjustifiable. I therefore make the circumstances known to you, and request your immediate attention to it. At the same time I hold myself bound to say that if I do not receive my property tonight, at my own house, I shall make a personal application on the subject tomorrow morning in the City Justice Room, for the twofold purpose of recovering what belongs to me, and of making the public acquainted with the circumstances of a proceeding in which they are quite as much interested as I am, now that the opposition on these Stations proceeds to such outrageous lengths.
I am, SIR,
Your obedient Servant,

CHARLES DICKENS.

To the Clerk, or Agent,
Isle of Thanet Steam Packet Office.

Charity may credit the captain with a virtuous sense of duty in preventing the removal of articles left in his vessel for which he might be held responsible, but with greater probability it may be assumed that he had simply determined to secure the owner of the bag if possible as a passenger, rather than let passenger and bag go to the vessel of the opposition company. Needless to say the "bag" was duly restored to its owner, with Messrs. Napier's apologies for their officer's misapplied zeal. Up till this time the mercantile and working arrangements of the steamboats had been managed by the younger Napiers, but, from the increase of traffic, and the claims of their own proper work, they felt now obliged to relinquish the steamboat business, although to their father's regret. The Millwall establishment was carried on for about ten or eleven years after this, a considerable amount of new and repair work passing through the firm's hands, reference to which however does not fall within the scope of the present narrative. Another iron experimental steamer, the Severn, appears to have been built there to Mr. Napier's instructions, fitted with his rotary engine, which proved to be quite successful. This vessel plied for some time at Worcester under his personal supervision, and another was projected but not built, which he intended should be a screw steamer.

It had ultimately become apparent, from the experience of so many years, that the natural disadvantages of the Thames gave little prospect of a permanently successful engineering business. Mr. Napier had himself to admit that "London never would be a place for building steamers, on account of everything connected with their production being higher there than in the north." This conclusion having been arrived at, it was, of mutual consent, agreed to bring the business to a close, and allow the premises to be leased or disposed of. The works therefore stood idle for fully a year, until, in 1853, a further use was found for them. As the Napier Yard adjoined that where Mr. J. Scott Russell was then commencing the construction of the Great Eastern, and the space and resources of both places being found necessary for that undertaking, an arrangement was made to combine them temporarily. Part of the Napier property was accordingly leased, in 1853 or 1854, and a small portion, that had been otherwise occupied, was arranged for at a later date. The following extracts are of interest:

"37 GREAT GEORGE STREET,
WESTMINSTER, 25th July, 1857.
DAVID NAPIER, ESQ.

MY DEAR SIR,
I am sorry I had not the pleasure of going over the big ship with you, to have profited by your observations. How do you like the lines? is she sharp enough for you? You say you would make the next ship longer, if this one is long enough to go round the world it might be worth considering whether we should not wait till the world grows bigger before making a longer ship.

JOHN SCOTT RUSSELL."

WORCESTER, 28th July, 1857.

MY DEAR SIR,
Although I could have had more for the land than what you propose, it has been such a favourite hobby of mine for the last twenty years, — magnitude for the ocean, - and being fully convinced that this one will not have made half a dozen voyages till a larger one will be wanted, — with a view of giving every facility for such being done I accept of your offer.

DAVID NAPIER.

JOHN SCOTT RUSSELL, ESQ.

P.S.— I am still amusing myself with the rotary engine, and am now thoroughly convinced that they must, sooner or later, supersede all others. The one I made at Millwall six years ago is going better this year than it did at first, and all the principal parts are perfect as the day they were made. I am going on with another with which I expect to astonish my friends on the Thames and the Clyde."

Napier's prophecy of coming vessels larger than the Great Eastern was not to be realised so soon as he anticipated; her unfortunate career checked the enthusiasm of shipowners and naval architects, but his expectation has been more than fulfilled in the gigantic steam liners of recent years. His further conviction that the rotary type of engine would supersede all others seems also likely to be justified ere long, through the splendid results and increasing use of the marine turbine.

Mr. Napier's later years were spent in London in comparative retirement, his interest in the progress of engineering and steam navigation remaining unabated to the end. He could look back upon an experience wholly unique, — covering the eventful period between the Comet and the Great Eastern, with both of which he had been brought into personal contact. The contrast between these vessels furnished an appropriate and striking illustration of the amazing advance that had taken place in the interval, an advance due to the skill, experience and enterprise of many workers; and of these workers he had not only been one of the earliest, but may justly be regarded as one of the most active, devoted and successful.

Till within a few years of his death Mr. Napier's vigorous constitution stood him in good stead, but a serious illness then left him permanently weakened, and he died at 8 Upper Phillimore Gardens, Kensington, on 23rd November, 1869, in his eightieth year. The tombstone in Kensal Green Cemetery bears the following inscription:

In Memory of
MARION,
wife of David Napier, Esq., of Glenshellish, Argyleshire,
Died 1st February 1867, aged 73 years.
Also of
ALEXINA,
youngest daughter of the above,
Died 25th January 1868, aged 29 years.
DAVID NAPIER,
Died November 23rd, 1869.
Aged 79.

See Also

• David Napier by David Napier and David Bell
• David Napier by David Napier and David Bell: Chapter IV
• David Napier by David Napier and David Bell: Chapter VI