# The Forth Bridge/Sir John Fowler, K.C.M.G.

Sir John Fowler, K.C.M.G.
The period over which Sir John Fowler's career extends practically coincides with that of the profession of modern engineering. In saying this we do not forget the illustrious men who preceded him, such as Telford, Trevithick, Watt, Smeaton, and Rennie. But these all flourished before the manufacture of iron, and the tools for working it, had so far progressed that it was readily available for every-day use. Many of them executed splendid works in brick and stone, works which will uphold their reputations for centuries, and others of them were capital mechanics. But it was not then practicable to use iron, and particularly wrought iron, for large structural purposes. It is worth while to recall a few instances in exemplification of this fact which is often forgotten. The first flour mill which had iron wheels and shafting was erected by Rennie in 1788. The first iron bridge was designed by French-Italian engineers in 1755, and was attempted to be constructed at Lyons, but the founders proved unable to cast it. In 1777 a cast-iron bridge of 100 ft. span was erected at Coalbrookdale, and this was followed in 1796 by one over the Wear. This latter had been constructed to the directions of the celebrated Tom Paine for a different site. A third bridge was erected by Telford over the Severn about the same date, and he constructed four other cast-iron bridges before the century terminated. Rennie's first iron bridge was opened in 1803 at Boston. It is thus shown that the employment of iron on a large scale during the eighteenth century was practically unknown. In the early part of the nineteenth century, cast-iron was largely used for bridges, for canal aqueducts, for locks, and for dozens of other purposes, only to be supplanted in its turn by wrought iron. When this metal could be obtained cheaply and abundantly, engineering science entered upon a new phase of its existence, and the world commenced to progress at a speed hitherto undreamed of.
It was under conditions such as these that the subject of our sketch entered his professional career. He was born in 1817 at Wadsley Hall, Sheffield, the residence of his father, Mr. John Fowler, and when his general education was completed, the boy, at the age of seventeen, became a pupil of Mr. ​
From a photograph by the London Stereoscopic Company.
​J. T. Leather, the well-known hydraulic engineer. Here he had ample facilities for obtaining a thorough training in several branches of his calling, and in all cases his experience was gained in works of very considerable magnitude. Yorkshire enjoys the advantage of possessing a great number of diverse industries, and it was very early in the field as a manufacturing district. From its coal, iron, steel, and woollen trades, in addition to its farming and shipping pursuits, great wealth was rapidly accumulated after the close of the bad times following the Napoleonic wars. The entire world was then the customer of England, and the shrewd people of the Ridings managed to secure a large share of the trade. The county thus was able to find employment for many engineers, and among them Mr. Leather took a leading position. He executed many works for the supply of water, notably those of Sheffield. The Stockton and Darlington line was opened when Mr. Fowler was only eight years of age, and the Liverpool and Manchester Railway when he was but thirteen. He had not completed his pupilage before the rush, which eventuated in the railway mania, commenced.
When Mr. Fowler left Mr. Leather he went straight into the railway world, finding in the office of Mr. J. U. Rastrick a very wide field. He became his chief assistant in the preparation of the drawings and contracts for several railways; among these was the lino from London to Brighton. To this latter Mr. Fowler gave great attention, and there is scarcely a bridge or viaduct which was not personally worked out by him. After two years spent in London, he returned to Mr. Leather, and became responsible resident engineer of the Stockton and Hartlepool Railway. After it was completed he remained two years as engineer, general manager, and locomotive superintendent of that and the Clarence Railway. It is no wonder that these engineers of the old school can turn from one subject to another with so much versatility when we consider what an education they had. Instead of having professors to fill them with ready digested knowledge, like the young men of the present day, they were moved from one position of responsibility to another, and their intellects were hardened and invigorated by constant work. Every step they took was an experiment on a working scale, and every fact they learned was imprinted on their memories by the toil and trouble it had cost.
On the termination of this engagement, Mr. Fowler visited, at the invitation of Sir John Macneil, several railways in the neighbourhood of Glasgow, and gave evidence before Parliamentary committees regarding them. He commenced an independent career at the age of twenty-six, and as we have already seen, he started with a broad and solid foundation of experience, suitable for the towering reputation which was to be built upon it. Several important railways were then being promoted from Sheffield, such as the Sheffield and Lincolnshire, the Great Grimsby, the New Holland, the East Lincolnshire, and others, and of these Mr. Fowler became the chief engineer, conducting them through Parliament and carrying them out. It was in the year 1843 that this work was commenced, and before it was completed the railway mania attained its full proportions. The history of that movement has often been written; how fortunes were made and ruined in a day; how men lost their reason in a moment both from good and evil tidings, and how the capital subscribed during those years, often for the wildest undertakings, almost rivalled the days of the South Sea Bubble. We have no intention of redrawing the picture, but the following incident will show at what high pressure engineers were expected to work in those days. One night when Mr. Fowler was asleep in his father's house, a carriage and four drove up to the door, and the household was aroused by loud knocking. On descending Mr. Fowler found that a prominent promoter of railways had called with the purpose of inducing him to undertake the engineering of a new railway from Leeds to Glasgow, and that as an earnest he had brought an order for 20,000l, as a preliminary payment on account of the survey expenses. It then only wanted a very few weeks (quite inadequate for the purpose) before the day of depositing the plans. Mr. Fowler had the prudence to decline the offer, and the carriage of the disappointed promoter went thundering away, the occupant little dreaming how many years would elapse before his plan would be carried out.
It was only men of iron constitution that came unscathed through those times, and many an engineer who would have risen to eminence, had he been able to husband his strength, threw away his life in furthering the schemes of the promoters. When the autumn approached, and the fatal thirtieth of November hove in sight, surveys and drawings had to be made at the greatest possible speed. The hours of the night were annexed—sometimes all of them to supplement those of the day, while meals had to be taken when they could, or not at all. The deposit of the plans brought rest to the rank and file, but the chief responsible engineer had then to enter upon the still more trying work of preparing for, and attending, Parliamentary committees. Often he had to appear before three or more committees in one day, pitting his wits against those of half a dozen counsel backed by eminent opposing engineers. The engineer could not imitate the members of the bar and choose in what cases he would appear and which he would neglect, taking his fees for all. Indeed, it is said that Charles Austin, the leader of the bar in the committees of the House of Commons had once been engaged to appear before twenty-two committees in one day, and as it was impossible for him to attend to them all, he showed his impartiality by reading his newspaper and attending to none. The progress of committee work was watched with keenest interest by men who did not know an embankment from a cutting, but who took advantage of every turn of the fight to manipulate the share market. They listened to the evidence of the engineer and sold and bought accordingly. If he tripped in his advocacy of a measure, or was foiled in his attack on a hostile scheme, they hurried to anticipate the effect on the money market. Mr. Fowler once met an acquaintance rushing along the corridor of the House in the wildest excitement, and when he stopped him to learn the cause, the man exclaimed, "Don't detain me! Robert Stephenson has broken down in his attack, and I am off to buy a thousand Great Northerns." Everybody gambled in shares, and like all gamblers their choice was determined by the merest trifles. If a line were fortunate, promoters would endeavour to appropriate as much of its name as they could for other lines, in the hope that their particular venture would gain by the association. As an instance Mr. Fowler's Great Grimsby Railway was at a premium, and consequently the name of Great Grimsby waf brought in quite irrespective of geographical facts. This was done to such an extent that the then chairman of committee (Lord Devon) exclaimed "What ! Great Grimsby again! Go it, Great Grimsby!"
Mr. Fowler had now attained a position which necessitated his permanent residence in the metropolis, and work of all kinds flowed in to him. It is quite beyond the limits of our space to notice, much less to describe, one-half of the matters about which he was consulted or the works he carried out. Amongst them we may mention the following : The Oxford, Worcester, and the Wolverhampton Railways ; the Severn Valley Railway; the London, Tilbury, and Southend Railway (in conjunction with Mr. Bidder); the Liverpool Central Station, the Northern and Western Railway of Ireland, the railways of New South Wales and India, the Sheffield and Glasgow Water Works, the Metropolitan Inner Circle Railway, the St. John's Wood Railway, the Hammersmith Railway, the Highgate and Midland Railway, the Victoria Bridge and Pimlico Railway, the Glasgow Union and City Railway, and St. Enoch's Station, the Millwall Docks, the Channel Ferry, and many others.
Mr. Fowler's reputation with the general public of this generation rests to a great degree on his construction of the Metropolitan Railways. These were so far out of the common that every Londoner, and a great many people out of London, took the greatest interest in them. The most extravagant anticipations were indulged in as to the relief they would afford to the streets if they were ever completed. But the difficulties were so enormous that many, if not most, people imagined that they could not be overcome. The directors were constantly being told that they had embarked their own money and that of the shareholders in an impossible enterprise. Engineers of eminence assured them that they could never make the railway, that if they made it they could not work it, and if they worked it nobody would travel by it. Such a catalogue of impossibilities was enough to appal any man, and often faith in the enterprise fell to a low ebb. At such times they would say to Mr. Fowler, "We depend upon you, and as long as you tell us you have confidence we shall go on." It was an awful load to put on the shoulders of a man who had already sufficient to attend to in combating the physical difficulties of the affair. The troubles with vestries and their engineers and officials, with owners of property and their agents, were for many years during the construction of the first section of the Metropolitan Railway tedious and wearying to the last degree. All these were finally overcome, and the line was opened. So far from there being a difficulty in inducing people to travel by it, the traffic astonished the most experienced railway experts. The general public did not take the view laughingly expressed by Lord Palmerston when asked by Mr. Fowler to perform the opening ceremony, "I intend to keep above ground as long as I can." Of course they grumbled at the ventilation, or rather the want of it, and reproached the engineers for not improving it. Originally, when a junction with other railways was not intended, a special hot-water engine without a live fire, and therefore not passing the products of combustion into the air of the tunnel, was proposed. Experiments were made with an engine so constructed, but before it was perfected it was decided to make a junction with the Great Western Railway, and, therefore, locomotives of ordinary construction had to be admitted on the system.
It was in 1853 that the first Act was obtained for a line 2$^1$⁄$_4$ miles in length from Edgware-road to Battle Bridge, King's Cross. Plans for extensions westward to Paddington, and eastward to the City, were at once prepared, and the financial support of the Great Western Railway was secured. After a severe fight, the Act for the extended railway was obtained, the plans providing for tunnels and stations large enough to accommodate the broad gauge Great Western trains, as well as the narrow gauge local trains which it was designed to run. There was, however, a difficulty in raising the capital, and it was not till the spring of 1860 that the contract was made, and the works commenced. In 1861 powers were obtained for extending the Metropolitan Railway to Moorgate-street; and in 1864, for constructing the eastern and western extensions to Tower Hill and Brompton respectively. In 1863 a Lords' Committee decided that it would be desirable to complete an inner circuit of railway that should abut upon, if it did not actually join, nearly all the principal termini in the metropolis, commencing with the extension in an easterly and southerly direction of the Metropolitan Railway, from Finsbury Circus at the one end, and in a westerly and southerly direction from Paddington at the other, and connecting the extremities of those lines by a line on the north side of the Thames. The inner circle was the direct outcome of this recommendation.
The construction of the so-called Underground Railway was the means of solving a great many problems which at the time presented much difficulty. Questions which are now fully understood, and which would be undertaken by contractors as a mere matter of course, then were of very grave importance, and had not only to be exhaustively discussed, but to be attacked with the greatest caution. It was not then known what precautions were necessary to insure the safety of valuable buildings near to the excavations; how to timber cuttings securely and keep them clear of water without drawing the sand from under the foundations of adjoining houses; how to undermine walls, and, if necessary, to carry the railway under houses and within a few inches of the kitchen floors without pulling anything down; how to drive tunnels; to divert sewers over and under the railway, to keep up the numerous gas and water mains, and to maintain the road traffic when the railway was being carried on underneath; and finally, how to construct the covered way so that buildings of any height and weight might be erected over the railway without risk of subsequent injury from settlement or vibration. All these points Mr. Benjamin Baker declared, in a paper read some five years ago before the Institution of Civil Engineers, received much anxious discussion and criticism before they were decided upon. Such questions as the admissible stresses on brick arches loaded on one haunch only, the extent to which expansion and contraction of iron girders would affect buildings carried by them, the ability of made ground to resist the lateral thrust of arches, and a multitude of similar problems, had to be dealt with tentatively at first, ind with increased boldness as experience was gained. As an instance of the confidence which experience gives we may cite the following: doubts ​entertained by the engineers as to the behaviour of a compound brick and iron structure led to a timber front being put to the Edgware-road Station, where it rested on a 49-ft. span girder; yet in 1865, when the extension to Moorgate was executed, no hesitation was felt in trusting an elaborate brick and ashlar face wall, weighing 1300 tons, to a continuous girder 135 ft. in length.
It would be tedious and unprofitable to attempt to give a detailed account of the construction of the Inner Circle line, since the lessons taught by it have long ago been incorporated into the routine of engineering practice. It will ever remain a monument to the skill of the engineers concerned in its construction. Of these Mr. Fowler is responsible for the greater part, as shown by the annexed Table, which gives the lengths and percentages due to each.
Inner Circle Railways :
| | Length Executed | Length Executed | Percentages |
| | miles. | ch. | Percentages |
| Mr John Fowler, engineer | 11 | 20 | 86 |
| Mr Edwawrd Wilson,,, | 0 | 27 | 2½ |
| Mr Francis Brady, ,, | 0 | 28 | 2½ |
| Mr. Joseph Tomlinson, Jun. | 0 | 27 | 3½ |
| Messers. Hawkshaw and Barry | 0 | 58 | 5½ |
| | 13 | 8 | 100 |
The main lines of the Metropolitan and Metropolitan District Railways being complete, Mr. Fowler carried out the lines in connection with them, including the St. John's Wood Railway, the Hammersmith line, the West Brompton line, and others. His original plan, brought before the Parliamentary Committee, included an outer circle as well as an inner circle. Unfortunately, the Committee was induced to reject the outer circle on the faith of certain promises made by another line. These promises have not been practically fulfilled, and the immense advantage of being able to conduct all through passenger, goods and mineral traffic by a perfect and comprehensive scheme around London was lost for ever.
Although somewhat out of chronological order, we may here refer to another underground railway, of which Mr. J. H. Greathead is the engineer. This railway—the City and Southwark Subway—is not opened at the time of writing, but it is rapidly approaching completion, and great hopes are entertained that it will be the pioneer of a new system of railways which will prove as great a convenience as those already in existence in the metropolis. The ventilation difficulty is avoided entirely by the device of using electric power for the propulsion of trains, while the expensive work of diverting sewers and pipes, underpinning buildings, disappropriating tenants, and buying property, is evaded by keeping the tunnels at a very low level. As the line follows, for the most part, the streets, there is little to pay for land, and the chief expense is that of construction. A Bill now before Parliament contemplates the creation of a second railway of this kind from Bayswater to King William-street, B.C., Sir John Fowler, Mr. B. Baker, and Mr. J. H. Greathead being the engineers. If it is made it will prove the greatest advantage to Londoners.
Mr. Fowler was elected President of the Institution of Civil Engineers for the year 1866, and took the chair for the first time in that capacity on January 9. His presidential address was devoted to the subject of the education of an engineer, and was so important and valuable that it has been reprinted and distributed extensively, notably by the Government of India to the engineers in its employment. He began by calling attention to the fact that the exclusive position hitherto held by the English engineers was not likely to continue, since both in France and Germany great efforts were being made to educate young men both theoretically and practically for this profession. Hence, although this was greatly to the advantage of engineering science, it behoved the Institution to see that the distinguished and leading position which had been so well maintained by their great predecessors, should not be lowered by those who came after them. After a short enumeration of the nature of the works and duties which fell to the lot of a civil engineer, he proceeded to enforce the necessity of a full comprehension of the nature and qualities of materials, and the proper adaptation of the design to the materials in which it was to be carried out. He asserted his conviction that it was most important that the early preparation and subsequent study of an engineer should be as extensive as possible, and should embrace every branch of professional practice. The sound knowledge and experience thus acquired would add greatly to his efficiency and value in any special branch. For the railway engineer there was required a thorough knowledge of surveying and earthworks, the capacity to design bridges, earthworks, and tunnels, and a knowledge of the effect of floods and drainage. To this should be added some knowledge of architecture, and a taste for appropriate decoration. The dock and harbour engineer required, he said, much of the general knowledge of the railway engineer, with a vast amount of special knowledge. This included the laws which govern the tide, the set and speed of currents, their scour and silting; also questions relating to the trade to be accommodated, and the methods of dealing with the goods. He would also be required to be cognisant of such matters as harbours of refuge, piers, landing stages, lighthouses, forts, and hydraulic appliances. The water works engineer, in addition to his general qualifications, had to be familiar with the means of collecting information about rainfall, the method of gauging streams, the excavation of reservoirs, conduits, weirs, tunnels, and aqueducts. He must also be competent to superintend and design sewerage works. The mechanical engineer, the speaker continued, dealt with the most varied and numerous subjects of all the branches of engineering. He must understand the laws of motion, of heat, of liquids, and gases; he must be familiar with the strength of materials and the friction of surfaces. On railways he was responsible for the machine tools, engines, and locomotives. For docks he had to design the machinery for working the gates, the sluices, and the cranes. For water works he produced the pumping engines, sluices, valves, stop-cocks, &c. And so on through the entire series of works in which mechanism is employed. The mining engineer needed, in addition to a knowledge of railway and mechanical engineering, the information requisite for sinking shafts, draining workings, excavating and raising minerals, and preparing them for market.
Mr. Fowler then turned to the preparation required by a civil engineer to enable him to perform his work efficiently. This he classed under four heads: (1) General instruction, or a liberal education; (2) special education as a preparation for technical knowledge; (3) technical knowledge; (4) preparation for conducting practical works. He supposed a boy to start at fourteen years of age with a strong constitution, considerable energy and perseverance, and a fair education, together with a mechanical bias. The period from fourteen to eighteen should be devoted, he said, to a special education, including mathematics, natural philosophy, surveying, drawing, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, strength of materials, mechanical motions, and the principles of hydraulics. To these must be added considerable progress in French and German, even at the sacrifice of classical studies and pure mathematics. At the age of eighteen, assuming the boy to have fair abilities and more than average perseverance, three courses were open. He might be placed with a civil engineer for four or five years' pupilage, or in a mechanical workshop, or he might be sent to one of the universities. The choice would depend on the taste of the boy, the means of his parents, and other circumstances. If he followed either of the first two courses it would be necessary for him to continue his studies in mathematics, science, and foreign languages at the same time. If the latter course were adopted, the drudgery of learning to survey, to draw, and the like, must be passed through first. With a clever hard-working boy the most advantageous course might be to send him, from seventeen to eighteen, into a good workshop, then for three years for a university course, and finally into an engineer's office for his pupilage. This, of course, would require a boy of special ability and determination to render it a successful course. The office chosen for the pupilage to be passed in ought to be well organised and not too large; the engineer should be a comparatively young and rising man, and be accustomed to take pupils, who should be few in number, and bear some proportion to the number and extent of the works in usual course of construction under the engineer's direction. Here the pupil ceased to be a boy, and his future success or failure could no longer be directed by others, but depended upon his own abilities and industry.
Mr. Fowler also laid stress on the fact that the whole duties of the engineer were not comprised in the mere accomplishing of the objects entertained by his employers. It was his duty, he held, to advise those who consulted him whether the undertaking was one that would repay the expenditure which must be made upon it. The engineer was not merely a man of technical skill engaged to bridge the difficulties of capitalists, as a servant carries out the orders of his master; on the contrary, he was a member of an honourable and noble profession which could not lend itself to enterprises which did not give fair promise of being beneficial to the world, and to the advancement of civilisation.
In 1870 Mr. Fowler took part in a commission sent to Norway to examine the railways there. As is well known Norway has built a great length of railway which was constructed at a very small cost and is worked very cheaply. Now, at the date mentioned the Indian government were undecided whether to adhere to the broad gauge of 5 ft. 6 in., which had been adopted for the trunk lines, or to introduce a narrower gauge for the less important railways. A commission composed of General Strachey, Colonel Dickens, Mr. Rendel (now Sir A. Meadows Rendel), and Mr. Fowler, was, therefore, sent to Norway, for the purpose of acquiring information as to what gauge should be adopted in India, assuming that it was decided that a narrow gauge should in certain cases be laid down. The commission was received and accompanied by Mr. Carl Pihil, the experienced engineer of the Government, who had carried out all the railways in Norway. They travelled over the Dovre Fjld by carriole, passing over the ground on which a railway has since been constructed, and were thus able to see the nature of the works which would have to be carried out. The Norwegian lines are 3 ft. 6 in. gauge, and the rails and engines are both very light, the speed being usually quite slow. Mr. Fowler considered this gauge narrow enough, and the engines too light for economy. His colleagues, however, took a different view, and recommended 2 ft. 9 in. as the proper gauge for India.
Two reports, therefore, were made, one by Mr. Fowler recommending 3 ft. 6 in. gauge, and one by the other members of the commission, recommending 2 ft. 9 in. The final decision of Government was between the two, but much nearer Mr. Fowler's opinion, viz.—a metre, or 3 ft. 3+$^1$⁄$_2$ in.
It was understood that the question referred to the Commissioners was not whether narrow-gauge railways should be adopted in India or not, but, supposing a narrow gauge to be adopted, what gauge should it be. Mr. Fowler, from his long experience of the evil on the Great Western Railway, had very strong objections to breaks of gauge except when unavoidable. He would never permit an exceptional gauge in a link, or a possible link line, nor for short branches where exceptional plant would neutralise all saving. He considered that an exceptional gauge should be confined to a district of country where break of gauge is unimportant by reason of non-interchange of traffic, and even then he preferred to adopt a light railway on the standard gauge, except under very peculiar circumstances, which must be very rare indeed, when the narrow gauge would have some special advantages.
Last winter (1888-89) Sir John Fowler had the opportunity of verifying by actual inspection on the spot, the opinion he had formed as to the railway policy of India, and it is well known that he has expressed himself as having had his former conclusions strongly confirmed by his Indian visit.
Sir John visited Darjeeling to see the working of the 2 ft. 6 in. gauge mountain railway, ascending 8000 ft. by gradients of 1 in 27. This curious little railway has been laid on the fine road made to Darjeeling, and, being saved all expenses except that of permanent way, it is not surprising that a good dividend is earned, notwithstanding the fact that the engines can only draw less than twice their own weight up the incline. In this case the gauge and everything else are suited to the traffic, but unless the same circumstances were found the system could not be applied elsewhere with advantage.
Sir John was naturally much consulted, both professionally and otherwise, in India by the authorities on the subject of railways, docks, and water works, and was received everywhere with great distinction. His general impressions of India and its resources were of the most favourable character.
​One of the most interesting chapters in Mr. Fowler's career is that connected with Egypt. He went there, in the first instance, in search of health; and the connection thus accidentally formed lasted as long as Ismail Pacha remained in power. As is well known, that enterprising Sovereign threw himself heart and soul into the material improvement of the country. He had unlimited credit in the money markets of western Europe, and he aimed at restoring Egypt to its ancient position as one of the chief producing countries of the world. He brought about a wide extension of the irrigating system of the Delta, in order that crops might follow each other independently of the season of the year; he introduced sugar plantations and factories in Upper Egypt on a most extensive scale; he built several railways, and projected one southwards to Khartoum, which, if completed, would have been the key to Central Africa. He entered upon every scheme with the greatest ardour, and no sooner were the plans completed than he urged the giving out of the contracts and the commencement of the work. In Mr. Fowler the Khedive found the very man he wanted—one whose ability was only equalled by his rectitude. National prosperity, however, is not to be founded by railways, docks and canals alone. Its basis lies in good government and the just administration of wise laws; but it is not our business to go into the politics of Egypt further than to explain the condition of affairs when Mr. Fowler came in contact with them.
He landed in Egypt at the close of 1868. At this time the Suez Canal was within a year of its completion, and it was natural that Mr. Fowler should hurry to see it, even before fulfilling the avowed object of his visit of exploring the antiquities of the country. The trip was made under very favourable circumstances, the party including M. de Lesseps, M. Voisin, the Duke of Sutherland, Sir Richard Owen, General Marshall, the Marquis of Stafford, Mr. W. H. Russell, and others. The works from Ismailia to Port Said, and the harbour works at Port Said, were well advanced, but between Ismailia and Suez nearly one-third, or twenty-five million cubic yards of excavation, remained to be executed. The survey occupied three days, and included the whole length of the canal, everything being explained by M. de Lesseps with the greatest kindness, and the various points being discussed without reserve. At the request of the editor of the Times Mr. Fowler addressed a long letter to that journal giving a full account of the state of the works and criticising the prospects of the company. This letter appeared on February 18, 1869, and was made the text of a leading article which pronounced it to be a fair and final summary of the subject by an English engineer of the highest eminence and repute.
In the spring of 1869 the Prince and Princess of Wales visited Egypt. When about to make the journey up the Nile the Prince invited Mr. Fowler and Professor Owen to join the party, which was embarked on five steamers and dahabeahs. Nothing could be pleasanter than to make the excursion under such conditions, as every arrangement was made for the Royal party to see the objects of interest in the country, both ancient and modern. Of course Mr. Fowler had to pay the usual penalty of fame, and to be prepared to suggest the probable methods employed by the Egyptians in raising large stones for the pyramids and temples, and in cutting and polishing the greenstone and diorite statues. At Thebes his engineering resources were severely tried by the Prince's cross-examination as to the manner in which the colossal statue of Rameses II., weighing 888 tons, was brought from the quarry near Assouan to its present position at Memnonium on the plain of Thebes. The excursion proved to be most enjoyable.
Before Mr. Fowler returned home he had several interviews with the Khedive, explaining to him his views concerning the Suez Canal, the irrigation schemes, and many other matters in which Ismail Pacha was interested. The outcome of this was that he accepted the position of consulting engineer to the Khedive and the Egyptian Government, a post which he held for eight years—that is, until the abdication of that ruler. The office involved yearly journeys to Egypt, the first being in the latter part of 1871, and required Mr. Fowler to personally investigate all the great undertakings then in hand. The most important matter presented to him for solution was the projected Soudan Railway. It is needless to say that, although commenced, and 150 miles constructed, it was never carried out, or recent Egyptian history would have been greatly changed, while thousands of British soldiers and millions of money would have been saved.
Mr. Fowler, before deciding between the two possible routes by the Nile Valley and by Souakim-Berber, had long interviews with General Gordon, and also with the governors and other persons acquainted with the country to be traversed. The Nile Valley was ultimately chosen, and the decision ratified by the Khedive and his ministers. The surveys were commenced at once, and when completed the Khedive, with characteristic promptitude, instructed Mr. Fowler to obtain a contract for the work. This was accordingly done, and on February 11, 1875, the works were commenced at Wady Halfa with great ceremony in the presence of Mr. Fowler, the governor of the province, the Cadi, and other notables, bullocks being slaughtered as part of the religious observances. The abandonment of the railway, and all the disasters which followed it were keenly felt by Mr. Fowler, who fully believed that had Khartoum been thus connected with Cairo the turbulent native tribes could have been overawed, and a great economy would have been effected in the long run. Unfortunately it is not given to man to read the future, and when matters went wrong in Egypt the expense of the railway seemed too great for the resources of the country
Although this railway was not completed, and has passed for the moment out of public notice, yet it is a matter of certainty that, sooner or later it will be constructed. The eyes of nearly all European nations are concentrated on Africa, and many are striving to secure a firmer foothold on the continent with a view to gaining a share of the future trade which is anticipated. It is certain that when Egypt attains the position which is sure to follow upon a few years of good government, there will be a revival of the old ambitions, and she will turn her attention southward, with that craving for extended sovereignty which is the characteristic of all healthy communities. It will, therefore, be interesting to give a few facts regarding the route, length, and cost of the line which must be made if the flood of Arab invasion is to be permanently dammed. Sir John Fowler always held the opinion that our difficulties in the Soudan came from the undecided attitude we took up. The native tribes could not be neutral; they were obliged to side either with the English or the Mahdi. But the former declared that they had not come to stay; they came to rescue Gordon, and when that was done they would retire, and leave the entire population "to stew in their own juice." This promised to be so highly flavoured with Mahometan vengeance that the tribes were obliged to cast in their lot with the successor of the Prophet, and fight against the invaders. In the days of Ismail Pacha the Soudan was ruled by the shadow of the authority which existed at Cairo, and Sir John Fowler holds that the same conditions would recur if the railway were completed.
The southern terminus of the line was to be at Metammeh, on the left bank of the Nile, immediately opposite Shendy, 16 deg. 14 min. N. latitude, and 32 deg. 25 min. E. longitude. Shendy is equidistant between Berber and Khartoum, and about 99+$^1$⁄$_2$ miles from each. It is moreover the converging locality for the camel routes from Khartoum and the White Nile district, from Hamdal, Souakim, and the Red Sea, and from Aboo Kharraz and the Blue Nile. There is good navigation between Berber and Khartoum for ten months in the year, and the obstructions which exist in the low-water channel would not be difficult to remove or lessen. The northern or Egyptian end of the lino was fixed at Wady Haifa, at the second cataract. Commencing at the foot of the cataract on the right bank of the river, the line followed the general course of the stream as far as Kobe, this side being chosen to avoid the drift sand from the Nubian desert. At Kobe the line crossed the Nile, and then followed the right bank as far as Dabbe. Here the Nile makes a long detour, and consequently the projected line struck across the Bahiuda desert to its terminus.
The following are the lengths:
| | miles |
| Wady Halfa to Kohé | 160 |
| Kohé to Ambukol | 216 |
| Ambukol to Shendy | 176 |
| | 552 |
The line was one of easy construction, with no works of magnitude except the Nile crossing. When practicable it kept to the villages and cultivated lands on the banks, but sometimes it took an inland course amongst the mountains to avoid expensive works, and sometimes it traversed deserts to cut off bends of the river. The gauge was fixed at 3 ft. 6 in., the same as the Norwegian railways, but with a heavier rail of 50 Ib. to the yard; the maximum gradient was 1 in 50, and the minimum radius of curvature 500 ft. The cost, including stations, sidings, quays or landing places, rolling stock, workshops, and all expenses required to complete the line ready for traffic, was estimated at four millions sterling, or 7240l. a mile. Of this amount five-eighths would have been spent abroad and three-eighths in Egypt.
It will be noticed that the railway was to start at the second cataract, some 550 miles, as the crow flies, from Cairo. The Nile forms a natural roadway between the two for the entire distance, except for some three miles at Assouan, where the first cataract occurs. To enable steamers and dahabeahs to pass from the lower to the upper level of this cataract, Mr. Fowler conceived the idea of a ship incline, and in company with Sir William (now Lord) Armstrong and Mr. Rendel he went to the site. The necessary surveys, examinations, and estimates were made, and on the return to Cairo Sir W. Armstrong offered to undertake the work, and his proposals were approved. But like many other projects of that time in Egypt, the plan was frustrated by the interference of jealous foreign rivals, and nothing was done.
The plan contemplated the construction on the right bank of the canal of a ship railway 3 kilometres in length, commencing at the bottom of the cataract in the river channel, about 5 kilometres south of Assouan, and terminating at the top of the cataract in the harbour of Shellal. The boats to be transferred were to be floated upon a cradle constructed to run upon the railway, and to be hauled over land by hydraulic engines of 400 horse-power, placed near the centre of the railway. The water to work the engines was to be pumped at a high pressure by a pair of large stream wheels carried upon pontoons, and driven by one of the smaller rapids at the lower end of the cataract. The total length to be traversed over land by the boats was 2950 metres at low Nile, and 2300 metres at high Nile. The estimate of the cost of the incline with machinery, workshops, wharves, and all expenses required to complete it ready for traffic, was 200,000l.
One of the first matters claiming Mr. Fowler's attention on undertaking the duties of consulting engineer was the organisation of the existing railways, and to this he devoted much time on his first official visit in 1871. As a preliminary he employed Mr. D. K. Clark to obtain for him full details of the rolling stock and plant. With this information before him, Mr. Fowler was able to advise great changes in the direction of simplicity and economy, most of which were carried out.
The management had previously been of a most unsatisfactory condition. In the year 1869 the expenses per train mile amounted to 7s., of which the locomotive power figured for 3s. 5d. Many other items were needlessly high, and were increased by the practice of keeping duplicate sets of accounts, more or less imperfect, in French and Arabic. Mr. Fowler considered that the expenses could be well cut down to 4s. 6d. per mile, or 36 per cent, of the earnings. This small percentage was due to the very high traffic charges, particularly on the transit railway which conveyed the P. and O. Company's passengers across the isthmus ; on this line first-class passengers were charged 4+$^3$⁄$_4$d. per mile, and second-class 2+$^1$⁄$_2$d.; accelerated goods were charged 4+$^1$⁄$_2$d. per ton, and unaccelerated 1d. per ton per mile.
In the same year visits were made to Upper Egypt to examine irrigation works and sluices, and to Suez to determine matters connected with the docks there. M. Duport, on Mr. Fowler's recommendation, was appointed engineer in charge of the new Alexandra Docks, a post which he filled in a highly satisfactory manner till the completion of the works.
In the following year, 1872, the most important matter for consideration was the sugar plantations and factories of the Khedive. Already several millions sterling had been spent upon them with but poor returns, and the time had come when some alteration in working must be decided upon. ​To aid him in forming his judgment, Mr. Fowler secured the valuable assistance of Mr. (now Sir Frederick) Bramwell and Dr. Letheby. The result was that reports of the most exhaustive character were presented to the Khedive, and formed a valuable guide for all future operators. The Khedive, however, was too sanguine, and the works were established too rapidly and on too extensive a scale. Possibly the climate was also not quite suitable for sugar cultivation. The broad result was a very serious loss of money to the Government.
During the course of the investigation into the conditions of the sugar estates, several interesting facts, worthy of being placed on permanent record, were demonstrated. It was found that the soil of Egypt, which, of course, is entirely Nile deposit, consists of a large amount of fine sand, mixed with an unctuous clay, in the form of minutely divided double silicates of alumina and iron, together with fine oxides of iron, alumina, potash, alkaline silicates, soluble silica, and a fair proportion of carbonates of lime and magnesia. The soil is in such a minute state of subdivision that it readily yields its most important constituents (silica, phosphoric acid, and potash) to the growing crops. For the cultivation of sugar it is necessary to equalise the excess of potash by the application to the land of more phosphoric acid, and to make up for the deficiency of nitrogen by the addition of ammonia. Analyses were also made on another occasion of the Nile water to determine whether it had, when used for irrigation purposes, any manurial value beyond that due to the suspended mud. The samples were taken about the middle of the months of June, July, August, September, and October. It was found that in each case the water contained a considerable quantity of nitrogenous matter in the form of actual ammonia, as well as ammonia derivable from organic matter. The proportion of actual ammonia was largest in July and smallest in August. The organic ammonia was smallest in the August sample and largest in September. Taking the whole of the ammonia derivable from 100,000 parts of water, the quantity ranged from .0114 parts in the August sample to .0271 in the sample collected in June. These are remarkably large proportions when we consider that the Nile does not receive anything in the nature of sewage or ordinary town drainage, for they are largely in excess of the proportions found in the River Thames at Hampton. The properties of soluble saline matters in the Nile water range from 13.443 parts per 100,000 in October to 18.8 parts in June. The chief ingredients in these saline matters are the carbonates and sulphates of lime and magnesia, but there is also a notable quantity of soda and potassa, as well as a trace of phosphoric acid. The sedimentary matters in the several samples taken amounted to 6.915 parts per 100,000 of water in June, and to 149.157 parts in August; and the proportions of organic matter in the deposit ranged from .829 parts to 18.414 parts. The results show that the water of the Nile is remarkably rich in fertilising matters, for not only does the water contain in solution a notable quantity of ammonia, nitrogenous organic matter, and the soluble silicates of potassa and soda, as well as a trace of phosphoric and nitric acids, but it also contains in suspension a large amount of sedimentary matters which are charged with phosphates and alkaline silicates.
The most important Egyptian question submitted to Mr. Fowler was that of irrigation. Upon this depends to a great extent the fertility of Lower Egypt, for although the annual inundations can be depended upon to give the land one thorough watering, there are many crops that need to be watered several times and at different seasons of the year from that at which the flood comes. Immense irrigation works were constructed by Mehemet Ali, with canals running through the delta and the land on either side of it. For a considerable part of the year these canals served their purpose fairly well, but at the period of low Nile many of them became useless because they were at too high a level. This does not arise from any error of the designers, but from the fact that the barrage, which was built to maintain a minimum depth of water in the river, did not prove capable of resisting the required head. Hence it was necessary to allow the river to fall below the proposed level. Under these conditions Mr. Fowler was instructed (1) to prepare alternative plans for placing all the cultivated and cultivable lands of Lower Egypt in a position to be irrigated at any time of the year without pumping; (2) to devise an improved means of introducing flood water several times during high Nile upon any required lands on the left bank of the Nile, and of discharging it at pleasure without interference with other lands; (3) to prepare a scheme for the construction of a ship canal between Alexandria and Cairo. Mr. Fowler proposed as alternative projects under the first head; (1) a high level canal on the right bank of the Nile; (2) a high level canal on the left bank of the canal; (3) the completion of the present barrage or the construction of a new one. None of these proposals were then carried out, but during the past few years, under the superintendence of Colonel Sir Scott Moncrieff, the barrage has been repaired to such an extent that it will hold the water up to 3 metres, instead of 4. 5 metres, as contemplated by Mr. Fowler. The methods employed in the repair of the barrage followed the lines laid down by Mr. Fowler, but were on a less extensive scale, as the pressure to be resisted was less, and there was greater difficulty in obtaining money than during Ismail Pacha's time. The deficiency of head is made good by pumping into the higher canals.
The second undertaking required a canal starting very high up the Nile, and following the course of the Bahr Yousuf, but it presented no features of special engineering interest, and was not attempted. The third, the ship canal, was a subject in which Ismail Pacha took the greatest interest. He found that the effect of the Suez Canal was to divert the traffic from the capital, and to take the stream of passengers through the country without adding anything to its wealth or importance. He, therefore, conceived the idea of making Cairo into a sea-port, with easy access to the Mediterranean. Mr. Fowler worked out a combined irrigation and ship canal from the Mediterranean to the Bed Sea, by way of Cairo. This canal would have been a formidable rival to the Suez Canal, in so much as the dues derivable from the irrigation water would have enabled the tolls on ships to have been reduced to a very low figure. In the negotiations which subsequently took place with the Suez Canal Company, the possibility of the second canal being made, served as a powerful lever in the hands of the English party.
Although so many of Mr. Fowler's Egyptian schemes were not carried out, we must not regard them as wasted effort. For thousands of years Egypt has been the prey of conquerors of many races and creeds. Probably for the first time in her history she is in the hands of a power which has no selfish aims, and thinks solely of the good of the inhabitants. Under such conditions she must prosper, and the time is certain to come when many of the ambitious schemes of her late ruler will become possible of realisation. At that moment the reports and drawings of Mr. Fowler will be turned to as the key of the plans to be adopted.
Space does not permit us to particularise all the great works in Egypt with which Mr. Fowler was concerned, such as the construction of steamers for the Khedive, surveys for a railway to Harrar, and many others. For nine years he made periodical visits to the country, and became greatly interested in its fortunes. The connection was broken, however, when Ismail Pacha was made to abdicate, and a new era of economy was introduced. Egyptian credit was almost exhausted, and what little was left was destroyed by the revolt of Arabi Pacha. A few years later (1885) the Queen, on the recommendation of the Marquis of Salisbury, created Mr. Fowler Knight Commander of the Order of St. Michael and St. George "for important services and guidance to Her Majesty's Government in connection with Egypt."
A curious example of the way that the engineer may be useful in averting political troubles is found in one of the incidents of Mr. Fowler's career. The Italian premier, M. Minghetti, had disagreed with Garibaldi on the question of the rectification of the Tiber. The popular patriot was powerful at the time in Italy, and wielded an influence which the Government did not care to have exercised against themselves. At the same time they did not feel able to accept his views on the particular question before them. Mr. Fowler was at that time at Cairo on one of his Egyptian visits, and it was decided to submit the matter to him. He was accordingly summoned to Rome, and was fortunately able to reconcile the differences of the two parties, to the great relief of the Government.
We now come to the Forth Bridge, the best known of all the works with which Sir John Fowler has been associated, and one which at the present moment is engaging the attention both of the general public and of engineering experts in all parts of the world. Sir John lays no claim to be the sole author of the design which was the joint outcome of four minds, all bent on discovering the best and cheapest means for carrying a railway over the Firth of Forth. Most people will remember that when the Tay Bridge was destroyed, preparations were being made, and were actually commenced. for bridging the Forth. Sir Thomas Bouch had designed a suspension bridge for the purpose, and an Act of Parliament had been obtained authorising its construction. The failure at the Tay at once threw doubts upon the safety of the most ambitious project, and the works were stopped. Subsequent investigation showed that the proposed bridge could not have been a satisfactory one.
A bridge across the Forth offered so much advantage to the railway companies forming the east coast route to Scotland that, after two years, the idea was revived. On February 18, 1881, the four great railway companies concerned, the Great Northern, the North-Eastern, the Midland, and the North British, wrote to their consulting engineers—Mr. T. Harrison, Mr. W. H. Barlow, and Mr. John Fowler, associated with Mr. B. Baker—propounding two questions for their joint opinions. They were asked to consider the feasibility of building a bridge for railway purposes across the Forth, and, assuming the feasibility to be proved, what description of bridge would be most desirable to adopt. The matter involved so large an expenditure and contained so many novel issues that it needed to be approached with the greatest possible care. It was fairly well known how many types of bridge there were to select from for such a site;—these were (1) Mr. Bouch's original design; (2) a stiffened suspension bridge; (3) a second form of stiffened suspension bridge; (4) a cantilever bridge. Calculations of weight and cost were made for each type of bridge and were discussed by Messrs. Harrison, Barlow, Fowler, and Baker, with the general result that the cantilever type was chosen. A report was made to the railway companies on May 4, 1881, embodying the result of the deliberations, and pointing out that the cantilever principle offered a cheaper and better solution of the problem than any other. The report did not enter into the details of construction; indeed it could not be said to give even the broad features, other than those which are involved in the use of the cantilever. These still remained to be elaborated in council, and it was only by united discussion that the original plan developed into the final design. Although the type of the bridge is very ancient there were many features in it which were open to consideration, and to differences of opinion, and at each meeting of the engineers new ideas were propounded, and novel methods of overcoming difficulties were mooted. After most elaborate investigations and calculations the structure gradually, by a process of evolution or development, assumed its present form.
The design being settled and the execution decided upon by the associated railway companies, the carrying out of the work was entrusted to Mr. Fowler, in conjunction with his partner, Mr. Benjamin Baker.
The Parliamentary fight had been exceedingly stubborn, for great interests were at stake. Hitherto the London and North-Western and the Caledonian companies have enjoyed a great advantage in carrying the Scotch traffic to Perth and the Highlands, in consequence of the east coast traffic having to traverse the circuit from Edinburgh viâ Larbert and Stirling to Perth. But when the bridge is opened this advantage will disappear. A very strong hybrid semi-public committee was appointed, with Lord Stanley, of Preston, the present Governor of Canada, as the chairman. Engineering evidence was brought forward to condemn the structure, and every possible description of hostile evidence for shipping interests was adduced against it, and made the most of by eminent counsel, who both in speeches and cross-examination strove to the utmost to prejudice the undertaking. But at the close of the case the committee were unanimous in favour of the Bill, only stipulating that the Board of Trade should maintain a general inspection of the works during construction. It was finally arranged at the suggestion of Mr. Fowler that the inspectors should report to Parliament every three months as to the progress of the bridge, and the quality of the materials and ​
From a photograph by Bassano.
​workmanship. These reports, made by General Hutchinson and Major Marindin, have appeared regularly in our columns, and all have spoken in the highest praise of the way in which the undertaking was being carried out.
Sir John Fowler and Mr. Baker have kept a personal and continuous control over the entire operation of building the bridge, and have superintended the series of processes, from the rolling of the plates to the closing of the rivets. They have further employed several distinct staffs of assistants for the purposes of (1) surveying and foundation work; (2) for working drawings; (3) for inspecting plates at the mills; (4) for inspecting the rivetting; and (5) for the fitting and erecting. Mr. Alan Stewart was chief of the staff in Westminster, where all the detailed drawings and calculations were made. The resident engineer was Mr. Cooper, who entered Mr. Fowler's office in 1863, and has remained there ever since. Mr. Tuit, Mr. Lilliquist, and Mr. Carey, and other engineers of exceptional ability were also on the engineers' staff. The contractors were selected on account of their previous experience. Mr. Phillips had had great experience in bridge building; Sir Thomas Tancred and Mr. Falkiner in large contracts and the organisation of labour; and Mr. Arrol had shown on previous occasions remarkable ability and resources. In the early days Mr. Phillips took an active part, but in the preparation and erection of the steel Mr. Arrol took the leading position, and he was ably seconded by Mr. Biggart, Mr. Moir, Mr. Westhofen, Mr. Harris, Mr. Scott, Mr. Bakewell, and others.
Having brought this series of sketches of incidents in the career of Sir John Fowler up to the commencement of the Forth Bridge, we do not propose to carry it further. In the columns of this issue will be found full details of the design and construction of that magnificent work. The bridge, however, has not monopolised the whole of Sir John Fowler's time and attention; he has been connected with many other important works in the meantime, besides fulfilling his standing engagements. Sir John became consulting engineer, on the death of Mr. Brunei, to the Great Western Railway, and besides this and many smaller undertakings, he is consulting engineer to the Great Northern, the Brighton, and Highland railways.