to be mentioned. In 1819, David Gordon obtained a patent for malleable iron and copper vessels of great strength, fitted with valves of a peculiar kind, and ingeniously constructed so as to regulate the emission of the gas. The vessels were made sufficiently strong to allow thirty volumes of the gas to be compressed into the space commonly occupied by one. Gordon's inventions led to the formation of 'The Portable Gas Company.' 'The gas,' says Matthews, writing in 1827, 'is condensed in globes, urns, and other vessels of various forms as well as capacities, and some of their contrivances for its use are elegant, and withal so convenient as to be easily conveyed from one room to another. In the metropolis, the operations of this company have been carried to a considerable extent, and the scheme has given rise to some similar establishments in other places.' It was soon found, however, that the scheme would not answer, and the Company was broken up.

The pioneers of Gas-lighting did not find that their strenuous efforts led to any great pecuniary reward. Everything connected with the manufacture of gas was at first enormously dear, and the skilled labour so essential to success could not be obtained at any price.' Again, new companies were constantly cropping up, and hence ensued ruinous competition. 'When,' writes Mr. Richards, 'we look back and consider the facts, we are at a loss to assign any reason for such extraordinary proceedings; inasmuch as for many years there were but few companies that paid their expenses, whilst many were on the brink of ruin, yet this did not deter the formation of other similar enterprises. Take as an example the metropolis : the Imperial Company from the date of its formation for years never realised one shilling profit. The same observations apply to the Phoenix and the City of London, which were all in operation before 1819; and only one, the Chartered, earned very moderate profits. Still, in the face of these facts, the London, Equitable, and South Metropolitan Companies were all established about the same period to oppose existing enterprises, with, during many years, the worst results; inasmuch as

Gas and the Electric-Light.

361 the two first-mentioned undertakings struggled for nearly twenty years without earning a dividend, and only at the end of seven years after it commenced operations was the South Metropolitan remunerative.

By 1822, Gas-lighting had made such rapid progress in London, that in that year it was found that the capital invested in the gas-works of the metropolis amounted to about a million sterling; while the pipes, connected with the various establishments, embraced an extent of upwards of a hundred and fifty miles. Its extension to all the larger towns of the kingdom soon followed, and by-and-by the smaller ones also received the benefit of the new mode of illumination. On the continent, Gas-lighting did not at first make such rapid progress as in this country, Paris, however, was lighted by gas in 1820, to the great admiration of all beholders. Ere long gas made its way into all the chief towns of Europe; then America adopted the improvement; and at length even the principal cities of Australia followed suit. By 1845, gas may be said to have practically driven all other modes of illumination out of the field.

Whether gas in its turn will have to give way to the electric light is a question on which it is perhaps premature to speculate as yet. Most people are of opinion that electric-lighting, though it may be for an uncertain time delayed, is sure to be eventually adopted, at any rate so far as streets and public buildings are concerned. Its whiter and more daylight colour, and its coolness, give it considerable advantages over gas. But the gas companies need not despair, though in the course of the next fifty years, gas as a means of illumination be entirely superseded. At a conference of gas managers held at Birmingham, Dr. C. W. Siemens, on June 14, 1881, read a paper on 'Gas Supply, both for Heating and Illuminating Purposes.' Referring to the fact that the lighting of the City of London and of public halls and works furnished proof that the electric light was not an imaginary but a real competitor with gas as an illuminant, he said that he presented himself before the con

ference both as a rival and a friend—as a rival, because he was one of the promoters of electric illumination, and as a friend, because he had advocated the use of gas for heating purposes for the last twenty years, and was not disposed to relinquish his advocacy of gas both as an illuminating and as a heating agent. 'Speaking as a gas-engineer,' he went on to observe, 'I should be disposed to regard the electric light as an incentive to fresh exertion, confidently anticipating achievements by the use of gas which would probably have been long postponed under the continued régime of a monopoly. Already we observe, thanks chiefly to Mr. Sugg, both in our thoroughfares and in our apartments, gas-burners producing a brighter light than was to be seen previously; and although gas will have to yield to the electric light the illumination of our lighthouses, halls, and great thoroughfares, it will be in a position, I believe, to hold its own as a domestic illuminant, owing to its convenience of usage, and the facility with which it can be subdivided and regulated. The loss which it is likely to sustain in large applications as an illuminant, would be more than compensated by its use as a heating agent, to which the attention of both the producer and the consumer has lately been largely directed.' It appears that the gas yielded at the beginning and at the close of the distillation of coal is of low illuminating but of high heating power, while that yielded in the intermediate period is of low heating but of high illuminating power. Dr. Siemens therefore proposes that the gas produced at the beginning and the end of the distillation be turned into one receptacle, and the gas produced in the intermediate period into another, the former to be used solely for heating, the latter solely for illuminating purposes. 'The public,' he says, 'could well afford to pay an increased price for a gas of greatly increased illuminating power, and the increase of revenue thus produced would enable the gas companies to supply heating-gas at a proportionately reduced rate. The question may be asked whether a demand would be likely to arise for heating-gas similar in amount to that for illuminating-gas; and I am of opinion that,

1

Gas for Heating.

363

although the present amount of gas supplied for illuminating purposes exceeds that for heating, the diminution in price for the latter would very soon indeed reverse the proportions. Already gas is used in rapidly-increasing quantities for kitcheners, for gas-engines, and for fire-grates. As regards the latter application, I may here mention that an arrangement for using gas and coke jointly in an open fire-place, combined with a simple contrivance for effecting the combustion of the gas by heated air, has found favour with many of the leading gratebuilders and with the public.'

'If a man were to propose to convey us regularly to Edinburgh in coaches in seven days, and bring us back in seven more, should we not vote him to Bedlam? Or if another were to assert he would sail to the East Indies in six months, should we not punish him for practising on our credulity?'

These words were spoken in the House of Commons by a certain worthy member, Sir Henry Herbert, in 1671. What would he have thought if he had been told that within 160 years, the journey from London to Edinburgh, instead of occupying seven days, would not occupy much more than seven hours; and that, within the same period, a voyage from this country to India which occupied six months would be reckoned unconscionably tedious? In Herbert's time, the chance of the means of locomotion becoming so rapid certainly appeared very remote, and his incredulity was doubtless amply justified by the facts before him. There is not, however, the same excuse for the early opponents of the railway system, some of whose utterances appear very strange when read in the light of subsequent events. In 1825, the Quarterly Review wrote: 'The gross exaggeration of the powers of the locomotive steam-engine, or, to speak more plainly, the steam-carriage, may delude for a time, but must end in the mortification of those concerned.