The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1838-08-29
From The National Mtelligencer.
EXPLOSIONS.


From The National Iateligeneer.
EXPLOSIONS,
Messrs EprroRs: If an opinion is good, It is no
disparagement TO weigh 1t. Allow me 10 weigh the
opinion Of Lieut.. LYNCH in his letter English
steam machinery &c. against the opinion Of DR.
THos p JONES, Professor HARE, Professor SILL
MAN, and Professor PEARsALL.
Lieut.. LYNCH states, in the letter referred to, "a
simultaneous movement of the passengers from side
to side or any other circumstance causes the water
within the boiler 10 run against the inensely-heat-
ed metal, when gas more porerfid than steam tfseB
Is iasamtaneoasy erored, and an explosion immedi-
ately ensues" II,
Among the published documents accompanying
the memorial of Mr. A. B. QUiNBY, presented to
Congress last winter, is the following correspon-
dence:
WASHINGTON, December Q, 1887.
My DEAR Sir MIR Davis, Of the Senate. mention
ed that he thinks entertain the opinion that
explosions Of steam-boilers occasioned by gas,
which supposed generated IN the steam chamber oil
the boiler He suggested that it would be well TO pro-
cure statement from you in writing, on this matter
lst Whether you think il is fact that explosions
are occasioned BY some gas which is formed in the
boiler!
ad yNh.shsr You believe sny person, suitably quail
fed to form correct opinion the subject OF steam
boiler explosions the view that any dangerous
gas is generated in the boiler OF steam engine!
In the business have in contemplation, am party
| interested and statement from myself would not be
so suitable be received by those whose duty 1t will be
to decide. An early to the inquiries above will
very much oblige your friend and obedent servant
A. b. QUINBY.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 10, 1887.
| DEAR SIR: In answer to tho inquiries contained in
YOUR letter OF yesterday, relating to the question whe
Their explosions in steam-boers Is not sometimes occa-
stoned by the ignition Of some gas generated within
them, have the honor to offer the following remarks
and replies:
You ask, LIST, "Wheiher think it is fact that
plosons occasioned by gas which formed in
the boer!" To this question most unhesitangly
ply in the negative. The subject is to which |
have given much attention, and all my nqeiries have
invariably conducted me TO the same result. My first
published opinion relating to it will be found in the
number Of the Journal Of the Franklin Institute for
January, 1928, vol. iii p. II, from which make the
following quotations: In second volume p. lat,
there is letter the editor from Professor Hare in
which he has examined this subject, and drawn the
conclusion that the production Of explosive gases is
contrary to the weestabsbed principles Of chemistry
| For ourselves we have never. for moment, enter
tanned such an opinion and although we have found
among its advocates some persons not unacquanted
with chemistry, we have met WITH been able
to elicit any admissible rationale Of the formation Of
such mixture" The opinion thus expressed by me
nine years ago has only been firmly established by
| all subsequent observations.
To your second question, whether / believe any
person, suitably qualified to form correc, opinion
the subject OF steamboller explosions enterans the
view that any dangerous gas generated in the boiler
of steam engine I" answer, that, although have
kncsPn, and do know, several very intelligent men who
suppose that such must be tho fact because they do
think the mere pressure OF steam sufficient account
for the effects sometimes produced do not know,
have ever known, who had devoted himself to
the subject Of chemistry who has been the advocate Of
this opinion The late report Of the Franklin Institute
on the subject OF such explosions is FULL clear and de-
cidcd on this point the conclusions arrived at have
been the results Of numerous experiments, well con-
ceved and carefully performed by individuals fully equal
| TO the undertaking
| On the inquest held at Hull in Yorkshire. England,
the subject of the fatal explosion Of the pack
ct Union, Professor Pearsall, who had formerly been
the pupil Of and assistant to, Mr. Farraday.
smned, and gave his views fully upon the generation Of
hydrogen gas in boiler, and considered its production
there absolutely impossible He says. 81 know not
single instance of one particle Of evidence Of the
| presence OF hydrogen in boiler" See Magazine Of
Popular Science for July last, p. All.
II would be easy to multiply testimony to the same
effect with the foegou but presume that this is not
either necessary or desired
THOMAS P. JONES.
Mr.. A, B. Quincy.
In the report Of Professor Siman on the explo-
sion Of the steamboat New England there are the
following remarks:
l. IS supposed By some, that the explosion pro-
duc,d by gus
On this superstition may remark, that upon our ar
rival at the Of the disaster found this to be
avorite hypothesis with a number Of sensible and re-
hectlng men, who so strongly impressed with the
energy Of the force requisite produce powerful an
explosion, that they disposed look for some ex-
trsordnary cause. We cannot, however, see grounds
for adopting this view. Even in the case Of iron boil.
crs heated red hot, believe that the production Of
hydrogen gas IN any such quantity to cause the
plosion Of boiler has yet been proved although
II is undoubtedly true that iron thus heated has tn,
power oil decomposlng water and evolving hydrogen
gas and the gas, when thus liberated, would. indeed
act as force auxiliary to the steam; but the decompo
sition, and the consequent production Of hydrogen
would have It's limits from the oxidation and cooling Of
the Hon Steam has never been decomposed by heat
alone Water yields up its elements oxygen and hy-
drogen TO electricity, especially to gavanic electricity
but not to the simple temperature, however high Heat
requires to be aided by the Of substances
which VIII remove the oxygen and thus lbcrste the by