The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-12-10
TO THE PUBLIC.
oErIcE OF THE BALANCE DoeE,

what they have seen tx to call statement OF facts
relative TO the Great Britain having been raise on
the sectional dock, have made such allu' ions 70
ourselves and friends as leave us no alternative but
to reply Without descending to the level Of the
authors OF that communication, in the language they
have employed, we shall fearlessly proceed u de-
monstrale what We have heretofore, and NOW as
serl, that the dock has proved failure in its apple
cation of the floating principe in waning hat rrac
cal power claimed for it by lis owners, and CON-
pared with what its admeasurement indicates, as is
hereafter shown.
We have il from their statement, that, son Sat-
urday, the 18th inst, the Great Britain taken
INTO dock, and after raising her stern so as to enabe
her propeller to be repaired" and while yet work,
and, they would have il understood with the in
tent to raise the ship out Of water, they were in
formed by Captain Hosken that she was high
enough for his purposes, and that she did moi ieh
and !coid not aitoo her 10 be raised any higher" BY
turning to The papers of the day. II will be seen that
a notice was hereupon inserted, that, on Monday
following, the ship would be taken entirely out Of
water. The fact of their having already exhausted
the whole lifting power Of the tanks Of their sec
tons--as We shall show--and the knowledge of
their inability to perform their promise, well an
that if they had the power they would not be allow
ed to exert IT. make IT apparent that the object ,f
calling together the public was that they might pro-
claim the Willingness and ability Of the company TO
do that which they knew was not within their
reach. This deusive pretence is still further per-
sisted in and attempted TO be maintained by the GER
thcate of Capt. Hosken, which we shall hereafter
prove wholly unwarranted by facts, and therefore
unworthy of consideration.
These gentlemen assert that the Great Britain
weighs about . 800 tons. They mean net, un-
doubleday as her weight was stated in the English
papers, when she came out Of Dock 10 be about
1900 tons gross--ships being estimated in gross
They then state the dock consists of seven sections
of 300 tons lifting power each, equal to- % 100 tons
And one section of $50 tons. ........... $50
1t has also I6 end floats Of 40 tons each,
equal ...................... b4O
Making, as claimed by its owners, an err
tire liftiDg-power. ................. .3,l9O
With the most unaccountable simplicity, they
then assert that after lifting about 700 TONS they
sounded and found they had remaining about 600 or
200 TONS Assume the greater amount claimed
700 tons-which, added to l 100 TONS make 2,400
tons-which, deducted from $780, ihe power
claimed,) shows a deficiency of 100 tons. Thus
they demonstrate the truth Of our position, and
achieve victory over their own ignorance. In re-
gard TO this statement, we shall hereafter show they
had neither lifted ZOO tons, nor had they remain
ing 600 or 100 tons, as stated. But it may be true
that, after short pause, and when the water had
found its way back into the tanks, by working
through the pumps, as by them stated, they might
have found the quantity claimed; and we are pre-
pared to prove they exhausted their tanks entirely,
before disseminating their efforts to raise the ships
and that they did not sound until some time after
II is here worthy of remark that Captain Hosken,
in the exuberance of his gratitude for exposing
the ,ohoie of the bottom Of his beautiful ship, after
her social visit among the rocks and shoals of Nan
tucket, cer6es that, after raising the ship u feet,
there remained 800 tons lifting.power unexhausted;
while the owners--who doubtless did not know
much on the subject as hmself-claim but GOO or 700
tons.
We have word more, by-the-by, for Captain
Hosken and his certificate, as well as the use which
ID nrt L. Il.
and so it is given out by the company. The public
are left to understand-and 80 it is, no doubt, in
tended to have them believe--that the ship was
raised feet from end TO end. Now Captain Hos
ken knows and so stated, we prove, that his
ship was raised only feet in the bows and u feet
aft. We here leave the captain to answer in his
own way for this statement obnoxious it is to
this severe criticism.
We now invite attention to the report and opn-
ion Of the commissioners appointed by the Navy
Department to examine, and who did examine, the
sectional dock. These gentlemen, after fully con-
sdering its power, say that 33 per cent. of the
cess Of lifting-power should be given 10 the tanks,
to meet the conditions of which Il ey had been
speaking; in other words, that the dock falls 33a
per cent. short in its effective power of what is
claimed for it, They also then show (what is
known to all naval gentlemen) that all ships in
crease in weight from the stern forward, and that
they are much heavier in the bows than aft which
accounts for the position the ship assumed this
occasion, with an equal power applied to her bottom
from stem to stern. We will now demonstrate
what we have asserted-that this dock has failed 10
sustain its pretensions. The fact is so; and if de-
MED, can be proved, that, by two hours and fifty
minutes continued operation Of the pumps of the
dock, the tanks Of her sections entirely exhaust
ed; that on Saturday, the 18th instant, her pumps
were operated three hours with an intermission of
thirty minutes only intervening; that they then suck
ed, and that the tanks Of the sections exhaust
ed; that of the inventors and part has adj
mtted, we can prove, that the power of the tanks
in the sections was exhausted, on Sunday follow
ing and that the end-foats were one-third under
water; but he contended that the residue of the pow
er in the floats (Which not intended as lifting,
but an equilibrium power) was equal to lifting the
remaining 600 or 700 tons out Of water. The ship
was raised no higher on Sunday than the day pre-
ceding That there may be no misunderstanding
on this subject we state that engineers, builders,
and gentlemen of indisputabe standing, were in at
tendance this dock erery occasion irhen she al
tempted to raise the Great Britain, by whom can
establish, not only the truth of the above statement,
but that they never did raise the ship more than u
feet AFT and feet forward or, at most but shade
towards the dock, and to preclude all doubt, we will
take for granted that the ship was lifted u feet aft
and Al feet forward. Yielding the advantage this
gives in admitting the increased elevation in her
heaviest section, II will then appear the ship was
raised equal to feet from stem to STERN leaving
feet Of her bottom under water. The mean or
average displacement Of these feet, being the feet
next below her waterline when she went into dock.
is, by actual estimation, fraction less than $50
tons net per foot, which, multiplied by 6, makes
the whole weight 800 tons and more liz this
estimation be doubted, let any scientific gentleman
who understands the subject show it erroneous.
And now for the results The tanks of the sections
for which is claimed power of 2 $50 tons, and
one-thrd the power of the end-foats, equal to 200
tons-making in all, 1850 tons--were expended in
lifting less than 800; thus showing deficiency
Of $50 tons-a loss of nearly one.hafher pretended
power and that 335 per cent? as stated by the COM
missioners, is quite within the truth. In support
of the foregoing statement, we will now compare
the performances of the dock in its efforts to raise
the Great Britain, with its power as exhibited in
docking the Henry Clay. That ship measures
1,4OO, but weighs only LOO. The company en-
ployed in their efforts TO raise her out Of the water
four of their sections, estimated at 300 tons EACH
and one Of 450-making 1850 tons-and without
being able to bring the dock to the surface, as we