The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1916-09-08
HOW WASHINGTON HELPED|NvENTOR
 OF SUBMARINE

New developments and applications |
 of old ideas and inventions sometimes
 mislead us into thinking that modern
 achievements are wholly new when
 they are really old. The idea of the submarine vessel |
 for war or for peace is by no means
 new one, however it may have seem- | ed to most of us. Searching the writ l
 ings of the Father of His Country, II
 found a letter of astonishing contents | that should be of interest to all. How
 many know that Washington financed
 an inventor of a submarine! In Jared Sparks Writings of Wash ington," vol. TX, pages 134 and 1855, is presented a letter that Washington wrote to Thomas Jefferson from Mt. Vernon, September 26, 1785. He was recalling the matter from memory, for some reason not. stated. The boat mentioned was in process of invention and experiment, in 1776, the inven- tor being a man. of the famous New England name of Bushnell. It would
 seem that perhaps Jefferson had asked Washington for some account of the project of Bushnell, and the letter was
 in reply. The world is familiar with Washing ton as the great leader and patriot in freeing the Colonies from British
 rule, as the noble man who refused to
 consider being made king, and as the
 wise first President of the United States; but it must be new phase of the man to know him as aiding an | inventor in this manner. As we read | the letter carefully, we see the mans l character clearly.
 Careful and conservative as he was,
 an insistent on convention in the com'-
 mon relations with others, he was open
 to new ideas and enterprising in try ing. things in a practical way. On his extensive farms, as his letters
 show, he was constantly trying new
 ideas in increasing production and in
 improving the art of agriculture in
 general.
 The idea of boat. that could go un- |
 der water appealed to Washington, | and the possibility of developing the |
 machine as a naval fighter aroused | his interest. Yet he saw the difficult | ties in the practical use of the thing, | and pointed them out. If there had | been at that time such knowledge and | use of gasoline and of electricity as
 we have, the plan would have been as feasible as to-day, and the general would have had abundant returns for his generous help to the inventor of | the craft described in this letter. Per haps the steel construction of this day, employed then, would have been need ed for complete success; but even a wooden boat that could attack a ship under the water would have terrified the British navy of that time.
 We miss, too, in this account the periscope as meeting one requirement that Washington suggests.
 ' The letter reads as follows:
 A Submarine Plan-To Thomas Jeffer-
 son. Mt. Vernon, Sept. 26, 1785.
 I an sorry that cannot give you full information respecting Bushnell's projects for the destruction of ships. No interesting experiments having been made, and my memory being bad, may in some measure be mistaken in what am about to relate. Bushnell is man of great mechanical powers, fertile/in inventions and master of ex- ecrtion. He came to me in 1776, rec commended by Gov. Trumbull and oth- CT respectable characters who were | wanted faith myself, furnished him w..h money and other aids to carry his plan into execution. He labored for some time Intellectually, and, though the advocates for his schemes contin- ued isanguine. he never did succeed One accident or another always inter vened. I then thought, and still think that it was an effort of genius, but that too many things were necessary to he combined to expect much from the issue against an enemy who are always upon guard.
 That he had aNmachine so contrived II as t., carry him under water at any depth he chose, and for a considerable time and distance, with an appendage charged with powder, which he could fasten to a ship and give fire to it in
 time sufficient for his returning, and
 by means thereof destroy it, are facts
 I believe, which admit of little doubt. |
 But then, when it was to operate | against an enemy it was no easy mat l
 ter to get a person hardy enough to encounter the variety of dangers to
 which he would be exposed; first, from he novelty; secondly, from the difficul- tyl of conducting the machine and gov erning it under water, on account of the current. and, thirdly, from the consequent uncertainty of hitting the object devoted to destruction, without rising frequently above water for fresh observations, which, when near ves sel would expose the adventurer to discovery and to almost certain death. l
 To these causes I always ascribed the failure of his plan, as he wanted nOth- ing that I could furnish to insure the success of it. This, to the best of
 my recollection, is true state of the
 case. but Humphreys, if mistake not, being one of his converts, will be able L to give you a more perfect account of it, than I have done. With perfect
 esteem and regard, I have the honor to be, etc.