on the subject, which was published in the xivth vol. p. $19, of the Monthly Magazine. In that letter I boldly asserted the right of Mr. Would have to claim the honour of that invention, and invited Mr. Greathead to shew, if he could, that I had treated him unfairly. Mr. Greathead, however, did not think fit to take any notice of the papers which appeared about that time on the subject, but contented himself with a few puffs in the newspapers now and then, in which, by the assistance of the editors, he was heid out to public view as the inventor. As I considered the method he took to establish his claim to be at once unfair and pitiful, I determined to assert the clan of Mr. Wouldhave in a manner that should force him either to answer me, or be considered as a pretender to what was not his own. I accordingly put myself to the trouble and expence of printing "The Enquiry concerning the Invention of the Life Boat, &c." whereby I have given to the public an opportunity of judging how far his claim is capable of being substantiated. Mr. G. has not vet thought proper to make any reply. Unknown to me, a gentleman, who frequently favours Messrs. Nichols and Son with communications for their periodical work, wrote a letter on the subject of the Life-Boat, in which he recommended my pamphlet. His letter was published in the Gent. Mag. for May, 1806, and is signed W. N. C. In the Gent. Mag. for July appeared a short letter, signed Y. R. in which the invention is claimed for Mr. L. Lukin, coachmaker, Long Acre, London, and Mr. Wouldhave and Mr. Greathead challenged to prove the contrary. To this letter I replied in August, and, according to my manner, gave my name. In the Mag. for September I had my performance severely criticised, and all my improprieties and puerile expressions pointed out with Johnsonian dogmatism, but none of my arguments touched. The gentleman at first alluded to, and who gave rise to the present controversy, bad, in his letter, called my pamphlet a well written one, and Mr. Lakin, harping on the words "weil written pamphlet," gave me reaSin to suppose that he considered W. N C. and W. A. Hails as the same person, under different signatures. As I wrote the pamphlet with no other view than to do justice to an ingenious, and, in my opinion, injured man, I had no thing of my own at stake, and can truly say that no advantage was sought on my part which truth did not offer. I was 4 therefore unwilling that any one should be led to think I had been putting under a borrowed signature to bring my little work into notice, or even that there was an understanding between W. N. C. and the writer of that pamphlet; and though Messrs. Nichols must be well assured that we are two distinct persons, yet I desired them, in my answer to Mr. Lukin's letter, to assure the public that I did not even know who was the writer of the letter signed W. N. C. till nearly a month after its appearance in their work. As Mr. Lakin, in his letter, had made a great parade of his candour and liberality of sentiment, I did not expect that I should have those things kept back which I desired particularly to have pub lished. In this, however, I was inistaken, for my notice on the above circumstance was not published; and another, of far greater consequence, namely, that M. Bernieres, director of bridges, causeways, &c. in France, invented au unimmergible boat long before the date of Mr. Lukin's patent, upon which a number of trials was made at the gate of the Invalids in Paris, which demonstrated it to be as completely formed for safety as either the Life Boat, or Mr. Lukin's with projecting gunwales. The experi ments were made in the presence of vast numbers of people, August 1st, 1777. This my answer, divested of the above notices, was published in the Gent. Mag. for October, and Mr. Lukin's reply delayed till his pamphlet was published in December. I soon perceived that the editor and he acted in concert; and though Messrs. Nichols had not declared their intention not to publish any thing farther on the subject, I was pretty sure such was their determination. I, however, wrote another letter, which they neither published nor noticed. I have since read Mr. Lukin's pamphlet, and shall, with your leave, offer a few remarks on that performance. This I shall do as briefly as I am able; nor shall I, unless in one particular, advert in the least to that candour and liberality of sentiment for which Messrs. Lukin and Nichols are 60 eminent. I shall, in the first place, shew that Mr. Lukin's invention, and that of the Life Boat are not the same: and secondly, that the method of proof he himself has offered in his triumphant note, p. p. 27, 23, will prove that neither Mr. Wouldhave, Mr. Greathead, nor Mr. Lukin, is the inventor. In p. 10 of his pamphlet he says "The principles upon which i proceeded were: 1st. To give the vessel such a power of buoyancy buoyancy in its upper part, as to render the specific gravity of the whole vessel and its contents, less than the specific gravity of the body of water it would displace in sinking. And 2ndly; To give it a weight or ballast under the keel, sufficient to keep it in an upright position; or to give it the power of regaining, in a fluid inedium, that position, when thrown out of it by the violence of the winds or waves. The first, he says, be effected by a projecting gunwale of cork; the second by a false keel of cast iron, bolted to the common one." That the Life-Boat is secured from sinking by the application of cork, and that the principles in this respect are alike, I have never once attempted to deny, since I saw the specification of Mr. Lukin's patent. It is the method common sense must point out to every person who turns his thoughts to the subject; but there is no necessity for placing the buoyant matter in the upper part of the boat, unless to help the vessel to preserve the proper position of flotation. In the Life-Boat a considerable quantity is placed in the bottom of the beat, and decked over; and though Mr. Lukin would have me to believe the LifeBoat to be secured from oversetting by projecting gunwales, he will allow me to say, that the cork, externally applied below the gunwale of the Life-Boat, is rather intended as a defence from blows, when along side of a vessel in distress, than what his fertile imagination turns it into; and he must have grossly miscalculated the buoyant power of the cork, to suppose that, when he found it necessary to give a projection of 9 inches to his Norway yawl, a projection of four or five inches was sufficient for a vessel so large as the Life-Boat. With respect to his second principle, he will give me leave to say, that to give a weight or ballast under the keel, is not the method whereby the proper position of floating is secured in the Life-Boat. But this is a subject to which I have in vain desired Mr. Lukin to attend; I, however, inform him once more, that there is no false keel of cast iron to effect this in the Life-Boat. Its form secures it from the possibility of being over set, while, from its internal shallowness, it will not contain a quantity of the fluid, sufficient to increase its specific gravity so as to occasion the least danger of its sinking. In Mr. Lukin's invention, the situation of the cork is an essential circumstance, and the form undefined. But in the Life-Boat the form is defined and essential, and the situation of the cork of no consequence; its quantity is alone to be considered. Mr. Lukin only does me justice when he says, in p. 27, that he supposes me not to have heard of his patent. I first saw the specification of his patent in August, 1806; but with respect to the great and general discussion it introduced, I am yet to be informed. And as to the argument which he thinks most completely and undeniably to confirm his opinion, I doubt it will be found to prove too much; for if the two properties of the Life-Boat, viz. superior buoyancy, and capacity of retaining the proper position in the sca, are to deter mine to whom the merit of the invention belongs, without taking into the account the particular method of securing these properties, then the merit is undeniably M. Bernieres', and not Mr. Lukin's, unless the latter gentleman will undertake to prove that 1785 is prior to 1777. I cannot help noticing a most ungenerous and pitiful method Mr. Lukin has taken of quoting my pamphlet. I surely may venture to ask that candid gentleman why the 13th and 14th lines of the 28th page are not marked with inverted commas, as well as the rest, both above and below them, which he has quoted? Is it not to make Mr. H. be read Mr. Hails, whereas he knows I mention Mr. Hinderwell? This could not be done by chance; and it is a bad cause where people raise dust to blind their readers. I thank God I have always accustomed myself to speak the truth. If I had not been well assured of Wouldhave's right to claim the merit of the invention, no consideration whatever should have prevailed on me to assert his claim. I am sorry I have been able to do him so little service, for I consider his ingenuity as worthy of public notice: but the moment has passed, the public do not seem to take an interest in the invention; and as Mr. Greathead has received the rewards, they are quite careless as to who invented the boat. How far Mr. Lukin's application to his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales will be successful, I neither know nor care; but think it rather a forlorn hope, that after he and his revival of Mons. Berniere's invention have been so overlooked by the great naval characters, to whom he has had the honour of stating his schemes, he should be noticed with any peculiar mark of favour by his Royal Highness, who is a landsman. Newcastle on Tyne, Feb. 16, 1807. Your's, &c. W. A. HAILS. For For the Monthly Magazine On the STATE of the EDUCATION of the DEAF and DUMB throughout EUROPE.- -Concluded from p. 415, of I Tol. 23. WAS present at another examination held at the particular desire of Lucien Bonaparte, during the time that personage was Minister of the Interior. The minister examined several of the junior scholars himself; and the progress they had made in writing and arithmetic was such, as not only satisfied him extremely, but excited the unanimous approbation of the rest of the company in the hall. Massieu was in attendance as regulator of the less advanced pupils, and the minister at length wished to put a question to him also. The young man mounted the stage and made his obeisance. His countenance, without being either handsome or expressive of any thing exalted, is very intelligent. It bears the character of some deficiency, but it is only the deficiency of deafness; and it is evidently a sensible face, although it does not be speak abilities above the general level. The minister spoke, and the Abbé communicated the question by signs to Massieu, who wrote it down instanter, then turning round with an anxious and respectful look, he fixed his eyes upon the minister, to know from him, whether he had been happy enough to state the question as it was delivered? On Lucien Bonaparte nodding approbation, our deaf and dumb metaphysician proceeded with expedition to write the answer underneath the question as follows: "Qu'est ce que la paresse?" "C'est le dégout du travail, le nondesir de rien faire, d'ou resultent le besoin, la malpropreté, et la misère, la maladie du corps et le mépris des autres." "What is Laziness?” (or “Idleness.") "It is a disgust for useful occupation, and a lack of inclination to do any thing. From this vice spring want, filthiness, and misery, disease of body, aud contempt of others." In writing this, the gestures and looks of the young man were in perfect concordance with the ideas that might be supposed to exist within him and the words he wrote. When he had finished the last word, he turned round; and then his whole person, his countenance and his eyes exhibited one of the justest pantomimic representations of laziness that it is possible to conceive; from which, after he had a moment dwelt upon the personification his fancy had suggested to him, he made an expressive transition to MONTHLY MAG. No. 160. the looks and manners of a man filled with the dread that the idea of laziness should ever inspire. It is to be regretted that this young man, who has evinced much capacity for attaining to difficult acquirenients, did not, in the course of his instruction by others, meet with any person capable of teaching him the art of speaking. The Abbé de l'Epée, in the infancy of the establishment of the Parisian school, corresponded with Mr. Thomas Braidwood, then I believe of Edinburgh, with a view to acquire some precise information on the method followed in Great Britain, for teaching deaf-dumb persons to speak, and that practised by Mr. Braidwood himself in particular. Some letters passed between the two professors, in the course of which the Abbé received an apology from the other gentleman, couched in the terms of an assurance, that Mr. Braidwood did not conceive it possible nor could he by any device or ingenuity contrive to express any material part of his method in writing, and that it was only to be made known practically to persons who were in a situation to become his pupils. The Abbé, in reply lamented that it was impossible for him to undertake the voyage, otherwise he would willingly come to take lessons from Mr. Braidwood in person. Here the correspondence ended, and the Abbé, in consequence of the formidable difficulty pointed out, gave up every attempt to become master of the theory of teaching the dumb to speak. The difficulty did not consist in finding a way to describe the method, if Mr. Braidwood's ideas were clear and definite upon that head, and if he, as undoubtedly he must have, understood it rightly; for the method is capable of such a simple explanation, that mothers might be instructed in writing how to teach their infant children to a certain degree: but the difficulty lay in the reasonable repugnance that Mr. Braidwood, as a man who had his own private interest to consult, could not but have felt, upon that score, to parting with a secret upon which he had founded his prospects for a livelihood. For myself however I deprecate such a principle, it would be unfair not to allow more toleration to others, whose peculiar circumstances or manner of thinking might have been differently moulded from mine, and I am willing to admit of any hypothesis rather than attribute a want of ability to a person who has given many remarkable proofs of the contrary. The Abbé enjoyed a sufficient C income income of his own, as well as a pension from his first pupil, a young nobleman, and another from the king: he was consequently well enabled to give scope to his benevolence, and pursue the love of fame. Mr. Braidwood was a man who had a family to maintain, he had his fortune to make; and the experience of the world unfortunately proves, that the exercise of benevolence is not always, any more than the love of fame, the surest road to riches. It most generally happens that when philanthropy takes possession of an ingenious mind in narrow circumstances, it rivets the chains closer and closer. Mr. Braidwood's hopes in life were fixed upon the profits to be derived from such pupils as his superior reputation might induce parents to send to him; while the expenses attending the education of the pupils admitted into the Abbé's institution, were defrayed by the paternal bounty of the governinent of his country, which granted him a liberal recompence besides. I have not heard that any compensation or recompence was offered to Mr. Braidwood. In such circumstances, as the case might be thus viewed, there was certainly some other excuse for Mr. Braidwood, besides taking the terms of his refusal as a proof of any thing derogatory to his ability. Common life furnishes us with daily instances of similar denials. It is only to be regretted that here the sufferers were the destitute whom the God of Mercies has in an especial manner pointed out to the humane as fit objects, in whose persons his unbought bounties are to be repaid. The art of teaching the deaf-dumb to speak remained a secret confined to a few in England, until after a lapse of several years repeated experiments in various countries enabled some persons to form a theory, which perhaps transcends even that of Mr. Braidwood. The Abbé de l'Epée, wanting information which he deemed necessary, informed that the subject was encumbered with difficulties almost insuperable, and perhaps not strenuously attempting original invention in a field which had been already successfully trodden by another, perhaps might have confined himself to the arts of expressing thought by writing and dumb shew; relative to the latter of which it is but justice to the memory of this celebrated professor, and to the living reputation of his successor, to declare, that they seem to have adapted the language of gesture to all the possible ramilications of metaphysics, and the most abstruse of human notions, a speculation that demanded combinations within the reach of genius alone to realize in the manner they have done. There is another good school in France, for deaf and dumb children, a branch of the former, at Bourdeaux. This was founded by the good offices of the ci-devant Archbishop of Bourdeaux, with the present government (Monseig neur the present archbishop of Aix, M. Cicé), and M. Sicard superintended its first catablishment. This institution (for they are all called institutions upon the continent) is under the direction of Monsieur de Saint Servin, who is very highly spoken of, as are all the other masters of the school. The number of pupils here is about thirty. They enjoy the benefit/ of an excellent education, and are likely to become both useful and honourable members of society. One of the boys educated here has made such a remarkable proficiency in this silent method of learning languages, that he carries on the foreign correspondence in his father's counting-house, who is one of the most eminent merchants in Bourdeaux. I should have taken notice in its place, of another school for the deaf and dumb in France, of which I have heard a very favourable account. This is a private one, and is kept by a lady in Paris. I have never had the satisfaction of seeing the lady myself; I regret that I do not even know her name: but I am induced to think very highly of her talents, from what Mr. Holcroft has mentioned to me, who conceives her to be superior in many points to the Abbé Sicard, though the latter, being at the head of an establishment that is supported by government, engrosses all the celebrity. This lady, I am told, teaches her scholars to speak. The institutions for the instruction of the deaf and dumb in the states of Austria rival, if they will not be allowed to surpass, those of France. The school at Vienna, under Mr. May, a scholar of the Abbé de l'Epee, ranks among the first in Europe. The general outline of instruction embraces the principles of religion and morality, natural history, drawing, geography, national and universal history and accounts; and where the pupils shew a predilection or remarkable ta lent for any particular art or employment, they meet with every assistance to attain the requisite instruction to succeed in it. Some of them make very good composi tors in printing-offices; and others are in business as tailors, shoemakers, carpen tera, ters, gardeners, cabinet-makers, &c. Some pupils from this institution are employed to copy writings in the government offices, and some hold situations in merchants' counting houses. Their regufarity and patience are equally objects of approbation, in all the situations wherein they are placed. The pupils of this institution succeed remarkably well in drawing, seal-cutting and engraving, and some of them show a strong talent for sculpture. All the specimens that have gone abroad among the public are extremely promising. The greater part of these young people speak, and some of them very distinctly and intelligibly. Dr. Gall, the celebrated Craniologist, remarked during his residence at Vienna, when he was particularly fond of visiting the school for the deaf and dumb, that since the time they began to exercise their vocal organs, the complaints of the chest which were very frequent among them before have occured much seldomer. There are sixty free scholarships belonging to this establishment. Those above that number are paid for by their parents or friends. None of the free scholars are entitled to remain in the school more than five years; if during that time they have not made progress suficient to be fit to put out to something useful, they are sent home to their native parish to be provided for in a workhouse. The school at Waitzin in Hungary, which was founded by the present emperor. Francis the Second, is richly endowed by the Hungarian nobility. The subscriptions in three months alone amounted to above ten thousand pounds sterling. The plan for this school was drawn, and its first exercises superintended by the Count von Almazy, a learned and patriotic nobleman. He chose for the site of its establiment, one of the most salobrious and charming situations imaginable, on the ground of an ancient monastery, opposite the island of St. Andreas on the Danube, to the north of the city of Pesth. The head master of the school Mr. Semon, a pupil of Mr. May of Vienna. The third in order in the Austrian dominions, is the school at Prague in Bohemia; a private establishment supported by the talents of the reverend Father Dominic Stoehr, a man whose name is highly deserving of notice in the annals of good deeds. This good ecclesiastic has about twenty boarders, whose improve ment is attended to with the most zealous cate. Father Dominic's pupils are par ticularly well versed in arithmetic; the greater number speak, and one of them, a Master Weisbach, who has been entirely deaf from his birth, pronounced long oration with scarcely a defect at one of the public examinations which Father Dominic is in the habit of holding, to gratify the learned, to excite the emula tion of his boys, and give satisfaction to their friends. At Munich in Bavaria, the deaf and dumb have the benefit of a public institution under the patronage, and at the expense of the king. The title of ma jesty is but new to this sovereign, but the world must allow that such instances of paternal regard for the improvement of the condition of his subjects are truly monarch-like. The institution at Munich is a colony from that of Vienna. In Saxony, there is at Leipzig a private school for the instruction of the deaf and dumb, which is one of the oldest in Europe. This is the school originally set up by Mr. Heinecke, whose name is pretty well known in some parts of Europe, from the dispute which he had on the subject of his way of teaching with the Abbé de l'Epée. It is now kept by the widow of Mr. Heinecke, and a Mr. Petschke, of whom those who visit the school speak favourably. The number of pupils at this school amounts to twenty, all of whom speak, many tolerably, and read by the motions of the face what is said to them. In all the states belonging to the kingdom of Prussia, there is but one school for the instruction of the Deaf and Dumb. That is at Berlin the capital. It is a private one, aud is kept by a Mr. Eschke, who by some persons is extolled above all other professors of the art, whilst others again place him among the very lowest. The criticisms which have been levelled at this gentleman, do not all seem to be perfectly void of argument, although certainly a great share of their acrimony must be placed to the account of a certain unlucky quarrel he has had with the partisans of Galvanism. The latter desired to try some experiments upon Mr. Eschke's pupils, with a view to ascertain if it were possible by means of the Galvanic shock to afford relief in confirmed cases of deafness; which having obtained leave to do, and those experiments failing, they thought themselves justified from something they observed or imagined they observed, to accuse Mr. Eschke of having contributed to the non-success of their attempts from motives personal to himself. Whether the experimentors or Mr. Eschke have the advantage C2. |