The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1903-02-13
TIMBY'S REVOLVING TURRET
INTERESTING FACTS IN THIS
CONNECTION
By Thomas Fitch Rowland, Builder Of
the Famous RIOutfor

By Thomas Fitch Rowland, Builder OF
the Famous Monitor.
The following from the New York
Marine Journal is of special interest in
this city. Mr.. Rowland, the writer Of
the letter. being New Haven man:
The Continental Iron Works,
New York Borough. of Brooklyn,
January 10, 1903.
Editor Marine Journal: In answer to
your communication requesting the
facts as to whether one Theodore R.
Timby was the inventor of the "revol-
Wing turret" such as was used on the
original Monitor, as he stated in the
New York Sunday Herald of January
II, under the caption
ASKS CREDIT FOR MONITOR"
Theodore R. Timby Declares He In
vented the Great Destroyer
Il have respectfully to say that this is
an ancient story that I have long been
familiar with, and possess clippings
from several newspapers, published in
different cities, of almost stereotype
sameness, all of which, in my opinion,
lack the essential element of truth.
The gentleman for whom these articles
are constantly claiming credit, did not
first invent the revolving turret, and is
not entitled to the slightest considera-
ton for anything done in bringing into
existence "the original Monitor" 1
very much doubt whether he saw the
Moritor, or knew much about the YES
sci, until after the engagement off For
tress Monroe, March 9, 1862.
AS you know, constructed the Mon
itor at the Continental works at Green
point; was there all the time, and
knew everybody who took interest in
the conception, detailed design and
completion of "the original Monitor"
My duties required me to become so,
and to be there all the time. I never
saw or heard of Mr.. Timby; neither did
Mr.. Warren E. Hill, my. faithful assis
tant throughout all the time of 'the
original Monitors" construction. Mr..
Tfmby was not the inventor of the re-
volving turret, for that method of func-
tioning guns in warfare was we'll
known and utilized centuries before Co.
lunbus discovered America. I do not
remember ever hearing that the late
Captain Ericsson made ony claim to
having been its inventor. I feel sure he
did not. He was too we'll read in the
history Of ancient inventions to have
committed any such error.
The statement accredited to Mr.. Tim
by in the Herald article, viz: "Erics-
son. said Mr.. Tinby, was simply the
engineer (spelled with little initial &c"
only think Of it! This is my COM
ment) who built the Monitor. The
revolving turret and all the devices
that made the Monitor so formidable,
were of my (?) invention" There is
not one word of truth in this state
ment, for not single device Of Mr.
Timby's invention or patents was in
stalled aboard 'sthe original Monitor"
He did obtain three post-mortem pa
tents, issued by the United States Pa
tent office, some. four months subse-.
quently to the Monitor and Merrimac
engagement. One patent No. S5,s46,
dated July s, 1852; one patent No. 35,S47,
dated July 8, 1862; one patent No. 1858,
dated September 80, 1862. See Patent
Office Report of 1862, VVol. No. 1, page
No. ia.
None of the turrets used by the Uni
ted States Navy Department, which
was familiar with land constructed
same eight or ten of tfem) used any
device claimed by Mr.. Timby in the
aforementioned patents, unless it may
l.. 4 4tSe4 40 -
TENDER 30, 1862, was infringed by the
Ericsson syndicate. This claim reads
as follows:
mo. 36,593, T. R. Timby, of Worces-
ter, Mass.-Improvemen in revolving
battery tower. Patent dated Septem-
Der 80, 1852, antedated July 8, 1852.
This invention consists of tower con-
structed entirely Of iron or steel plates,
and made to revolve continuously, or
intermittently, in either direction,
around it's vertical axis at the option Of
the commander. SO that all it's guns
may be brought successfully to bear
upon the same point of defense or at
tack. Claim. A revolving tower for
defense or offensive warfare, whether
placed on land or water. See Patent
Office Report of 1852, Vol. 1, page 592.
Now this claim, which is the founda-
ton of the patent, is for tower for
defense or offensive warfare, without
any proper Specification or detailed
drawing, to show what character Of
tower, it Is intended to protect.
The merest schoolboys know that the
ancients, from time immemorial. pro-
tected themselves in towers, and there
is no difficulty in finding data to prove
las have herenbefore intimately that
these towers revolved, and furthermore,
that some of them were capable of
moving within reasonable limits from
one point of defense to another. There
fore, this claim is too gauzy for the Sc
rious contemplation of constructing en-
gineers. and should have been rejected j
upon sight by the patent office officials,
and. doubtless, would have been, but
for the excitement of the time, and,
perhaps, the influence brought to bear |
upon the matter. For the so-called in |
yention of a revolving cylindrical body, |
caused to be continuously, or intermit- !
tently, revolved in, either direction, at I
the will of the commander, was just no !
invention at all, because such equiva- /
lent mechanism of similar characteris- !
Tics had been in common use in a null |
titude of mill constructions in this |
before and SIEGE the days Of |
The American Revolution.