Remarks on a Pamphlet Lately published by the Rev. Mr. Maskelyne, Under the Authority of the Board of Longitude — Themes and Context

(7 User reviews)   1436
In Category - Inventions Industry
Harrison, John, 1693-1776 Project Gutenberg 2011
Maskelyne, Nevil, 1732-1811. Account of the going of Mr. John Harrison's watch; Longitude -- Early works to 1800; Chronometers -- Early works to 1800 Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words: 12,035
Reading time: 53 min
Text sections: 2
John Harrison's 1767 rebuttal to Nevil Maskelyne's pamphlet, defending his longitude timekeeper against factual suppression and misrepresentation, with a structured argument for public scrutiny.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.5/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

Edition quality

Read the Text

Now ’tis obvious that while the Air surrounding the Thermometer might be very temperate, there might, if the Sun shone upon it, be a heat in the Box, superior to what was ever felt in the open Air in any Part of the World; and perhaps greater than any human being could subsist in, and consequently improper, or at least unnecessary for this experiment.

Mr. _Maskelyne_ next tells us of an irregularity which he says happened in cold Weather, and says, “However, it seems in general that the Frost must have been the cause of these irregularities, as well as of the Watch’s going so much slower in the Month of _January_, than it had gone before.” Mr. _Maskelyne_ ought along with this, to have published what I told him when I explained it; that the Provision against the effects of Heat and Cold was not _in this Machine_ extended to all Degrees; that I never had tryed it so low as the freezing Point, which according to the best Informations I have been able to procure is a Degree of Cold _that never did exist between the Decks of a Ship at Sea_, in any Climate yet explored by Mankind.

Mr. _Maskelyne_ then comes to the Rate of its going in different Positions; and says, “It is obvious, these last-mentioned Trials of the Watch in a vertical Position could not be designed to shew how near it would go at Sea, where it can never obtain these Positions: the Intent of them is to prove how near Mr. _Harrison_’s Execution of his Watch comes up to his Principles, with respect to the making all the Arcs described by the balance, whether large or small, to be performed in the same Time, as Mr. _Harrison_ asserts them to be.” Mr. _Maskelyne_ here also might have had Candour enough to inform the Public, as I did him, that although the Watch was quite sufficient to answer the Purposes required of it in Navigation, and to fulfil what was prescribed by the Act of Queen _Anne_, yet it was far from being in a state of Perfection, _as an universal exact Time-Keeper for every Purpose_: I shew’d him and the rest of the Gentlemen the Reasons why the Machine then before them, would not go at the same Rate in such different Positions _into which the Motion of a Ship could never put it_; and whilst I explained to them those Imperfections in the particular Machine we were examining, I also in the clearest Manner I was able, pointed out the means of remedying them with certainty in others, which the Gentlemen skill’d in Mechanics seem’d perfectly to comprehend, and to be satisfied of the Truth which I again assert, that Watches made on my Principles will endure a much greater Motion and change of Position than they can ever be subject to in a Ship; and that they will not be affected by any Degree of Heat or Cold, in which a Man can live.

If any Thing was meant to be concluded with respect to me by this Experiment, either in Point of Property or of Reputation, common Justice would have required that I should have had an Opportunity of seeing the Facts ascertained; and when such a Trial was directed as put the Result in the absolute Power of a single Person, that I should have been satisfied of his Integrity, Disinterestedness and Ability for the purpose. I would not be understood to attack Mr. _Maskelyne_’s Knowledge of the Theory of Astronomy; as for any Thing I know to the contrary, it may be of the very first Rate, especially as the Commissioners have thought proper to entrust him with the Execution of their commands; and which he has ever been as ready to undertake: But alas! as to his skill in Mechanics, he knows little or nothing of the matter he has ventur’d to take in Hand.

I think it more consistent with the respect I owe to the Public, and myself, to speak out plainly, than to have recourse to _Insinuations_, on a Subject of this nature: I therefore declare, that I am not satisfied with the Truth of his reporting other Observations relative to the Longitude, as I do maintain that in both his Voyages the Observations which he said he made the Land by, were not calculated till after he had seen the Land; and I am certain those he has given, in the Publication now before us, are not genuine, for he pretends to find each Observation of the Transit of the Sun to the hundredth part of a Second of Time,—a Degree of exactness about twenty Times beyond what any other Observer has hitherto found practicable: Moreover I know him to be deeply interested in the Lunar Tables, a Scheme set up some Years ago for the Reward in Competition with my Invention, and for which large Sums of Money have already been paid by the Public.

Although I flatter myself the Reader is already in Possession of very sufficient Reasons for rejecting the whole Pamphlet as partial and inconclusive, yet I entreat his patient Attention whilst I advance one step farther, and shew, that although Mr. _Maskelyne_ has presented us with a set of Observations which _according to his mode of Calculation_, prove what he advances, yet those very Observations when rightly reasoned upon _prove the contrary_; and that in each of the Periods he refers to, except those of the severe Frost and improper Positions (against which Mr. _Maskelyne_ ought to have informed the World I never warranted this particular Watch) it kept Time with sufficient correctness to determine the Longitude within the limits of the Act of Queen _Anne_.

The Reader by this Time knows enough of the Subject to see, that in order to try whether the Watch would or would not keep Time with sufficient Exactness to determine the Longitude, Mr. _Maskelyne_’s first Operation, after receiving it, should have been to ascertain _the Rate of its going_. But no such Thing happened: he knew it had not gone exactly correspondent to mean Time, during the Voyage to _Barbadoes_; it had been publickly enough declared that its Rate of going had been since altered; and, if he had not received that Information, he might nay must have discovered it in the first 24 Hours Tryal; however, without once attending to this _essential Circumstance_, he goes to work, comparing the first Period of six Weeks (which he observes is generally reckoned the Term of a West-India Voyage) when it was in an horizontal Position, with _mean Time_, instead of _the corrected Time_, and each succeeding Period with that immediately preceeding it! Who can hesitate in pronouncing that his Conclusions must be all erroneous? He should first have ascertained the Rate of its going by a Length of Observations of the Sun or Stars, or by a perfect Pendulum Clock if he had such a one, and then have corrected the Time shewn by the Watch accordingly. However, supposing for a Moment his _Facts_ to be genuine, I will deduce the _real Result_ in the best Manner the Observations will admit, rejecting those made while the Watch was in improper Positions, and those during the Frost, for the same Reasons that Mr. _Maskelyne_ lays no Stress upon them, and for those I have already stated. I shall therefore (pursuing his Idea of six Weeks) take it during the first tranquil six Weeks that it had, viz. from _July_ the 6th, to _August_ the 17th, in which Time it gained in all 11 Minutes, 50 Seconds, or 16-9/10 Seconds per Day which I will assume as the Rate of its going, or if Mr. _Maskelyne_ pleases I will take the Average of his whole Time of Examination, from the 6th of _July_ to the 3d of _January_ and from the 9th of _January_ to the 4th of _March_, which will come out at the Rate of 16-8/10 Seconds per Day fast, and I say that according to either of those Rates of going, the Watch kept the Longitude within the Limits of the Act of Queen _Anne_, during any Period of six Weeks that can be pointed out, excepting those of extreme Cold, and improper Position which have already been explained. I do not trouble the Reader with the Calculations: If I assert an Untruth, I shall hardly escape Contradiction.

There is another Inaccuracy, which tho’ of less Consequence, ought not to escape notice. One would naturally suppose when Mr. _Maskelyne_ found the Watch went at this Rate of gaining on Mean Time, he would have been very exact in his Time of comparing it with his Clock; but on the contrary we find he was so irregular as to vary his Comparisons on succeeding Days from half an Hour to four Hours and 48 Minutes, and this not for a Time or two, but for one third of the whole Time he had it.

Mr. _Maskelyne_ having shewn from the Result of his Calculation (which I have here proved to be false) that the Watch is not to be depended upon to determine the Longitude in a Voyage of six Weeks, then says, “these Considerations are sufficient to explain the Motives which might have actuated Mr. _Harrison_, as a Man of Prudence, in desiring to send his Watch two Voyages to the West Indies, upon his Idea that he should be intitled to the large Rewards prescribed in the Act of the 12th of Queen _Anne_, in Case his Watch kept Time within the Limits there mentioned, whether the Method itself was or could be rendered generally useful and practicable, or not;” this Insinuation _(published under the Authority of the Commissioners of Longitude)_ that I had contrived a Trial which I knew the Watch would fulfil, whilst I was conscious that it would not answer the general Purposes of the Act of Queen _Anne_, and consequently that I had formed a villainous Scheme to rob the Publick of the Reward without really and effectually performing the Conditions, strikes me as a Charge of so atrocious a Nature, that I think myself not only _justified_ in publishing to the World what has been done with respect to Trials of the Merit of my Invention, but even _indispensably obliged_ so to do. I well know what I hazard thereby, and if the rest of my Reward cannot be obtained on Principles of _National Faith_ and _Publick Spirit_, I am contented to forego it, but I will not descend into the Grave loaded with that Dishonour which my Enemies, availing themselves of their Rank or Offices, have, in various Ways, attempted to throw upon me.

In the first Place I must remark, that the Trial referred to was not fixed _by me_, but by _an Act of Parliament_ passed so long ago as the Year 1714, which (after vesting certain discretionary Powers in Commissioners to judge what Methods are likely to prove practicable, and authorizing them to issue smaller Sums of Money) goes on to fix the last grand Test of the Merit of any such Invention, and enacts “that when a Ship, under the Appointment of the said Commissioners, shall thereby actually sail from _Great Britain_ to the _West Indies_ without losing her Longitude beyond certain Limits, the Inventor shall be intitled to certain Rewards.” Having from the Year 1726, employed myself in adapting those Principles which I had _at that Time_ executed in a Pendulum Clock, to an Instrument or Time-Keeper so constructed as to endure the Motion of a Ship at Sea, and having made a Voyage to _Lisbon_ and done sundry other Things during a Course of Years, mostly under the Direction of the Commissioners of Longitude, by way of preparatory Experiments, I thought the Invention sufficiently perfect about the latter End of the Year 1760, to go upon the ultimate Trial, which I accordingly applied for. My Son, after being sent to _Portsmouth_ with the third Time-keeper (the fourth or Watch being to be sent to him) was kept there five Months, waiting for Orders; which having by returning to _London_ at Length obtained, he went to _Jamaica_ in the _Deptford_ Man of War, and returned in the _Merlin_ Sloop of War, having fulfilled every Instruction of the Commissioners. It remained to compute from the Astronomical Observations made at _Portsmouth_ and _Jamaica_, whether the Watch had or had not kept the Longitude within the prescribed Limits; and as my Title to 20,000_l._ was to be determined thereby, I thought it but reasonable that I should name some Person to check the Computations, _which was refused_. The Commissioners appointed three Gentlemen for that Purpose, and on receiving their Report were pleased to declare _that the Watch had not kept its Longitude within the above mentioned Limits_.[3] Thoroughly convinced of the contrary (for I had the same Materials they had to calculate from) I required a Copy of the Computations _which was also refused me_; nor could I ever obtain a Sight of them either officially or through private Favour, ’till three Years afterwards, when they were ordered to be laid before the House of Commons; and it then appeared that two of the three Computations were absolutely inconclusive, proving nothing, and the third decided in my Favour. Further Proof of the Watch having succeeded in this Voyage may be found in the Journals of the House of Commons, Vol. XXIX. P. 546, in the Evidence of _George Lewis Scott_ Esq; and Mr. _James Short_.

The Reader will easily believe I did not feel perfectly easy under this Treatment of an Invention to the perfecting of which (encouraged by the long continued Patronage of a _Graham_, a _Halley_, a _Folkes_, &c. &c.——learned Friends to Society, and Publick Good, whose Minds were too enlarged, and Spirits too liberal to admit that _little_ Jealousy of inferior Artists, which since their Death I have been exposed to) I gloried in sacrificing every Prospect of Advantage from other Pursuits, and had willingly submitted to lead a Life of Labour and Dependence. However ’twas too late to retreat; and I had only one Means of Success left which was to follow the Commissioners in their own Way. Accordingly after many Difficulties (with a Relation of which I will not tire the Reader, as it is by no Means my Intention to meddle with any Subjects of Complaint, except such as are material to the forming a right Judgment of the Trials made and proposed) a second Voyage to the _West Indies_ was agreed to in the latter End of the Year 1762, which Agreement was afterwards well nigh overset by the Commissioners insisting on such Astronomical Observations being previously made, as were next to impracticable in this Climate, and could be put into the Instructions for no other Reason that I could conceive, but to throw insuperable Difficulties in my Way, as they were not at all material to the Determination of the Matter in Question. However the Commissioners at Length gave up this Point on my Opinion of the Impracticability being confirmed by that of an Officer of the Navy distinguished for his Abilities and Skill in Matters of Astronomy. To take away all Possibility (as I thought) of this Voyage being rendered fruitless like the last, I then desired to have inserted at the End of the Instructions some few Words to this Purpose, “that provided the Experiment answered, the Commissioners present were of Opinion I should _without further Trouble_ receive my Reward;” but my Son attending the Board with this Proposition was told by Lord _Sandwich_ at that Time President, that it would be mere Tautology, for that their giving Instructions implyed the same Thing, and that if the Watch kept its Time within the Limits of the Act there could be no Doubt of my being entitled to and receiving the Reward, and nobody could take if from me. Upon the Faith of this, my Son went the Voyage to _Barbadoes_, in which the Watch kept its Time “considerably within the nearest Limits of the Act of Queen _Anne_,” as certified, even by the Commissioners themselves.

On the Success of this Trial being known, and after having employed near forty Years of my Life on the Faith of an Act of Parliament, was a Doctrine broached to me (as I solemnly declare _for the first Time_) that the Commissioners were invested with a discretionary Power of ordering other Trials and the fulfilling of other Conditions than those specially annexed by Act of Parliament to the Reward;[4] An Exposition of the Law, which I ever did and ever shall (until it is supported by legal Authority) totally reject and refuse Obedience to; for I do maintain, that before passing the last Act of Parliament I had as full and perfect a _Right_ to the Reward of 20,000_l._ as any Free-holder in _Britain_ has to his Estate; and I never would have desired nor ever will desire any better Satisfaction than a judicial Determination of that Point; which however it was very soon thought proper to preclude me from, by a new Law, passed at the Instance of the Commissioners of Longitude, placing me _too certainly_ under the Discretion of the Commissioners and totally changing the Terms on which the Reward was to be given me, enacting that I should have half of it when I had disclosed the Principles and Construction of the Machine, and assigned over for the Use of the Publick the last made Timekeeper, together with the three others which were not so perfect as the last; and the other half when I should have made more Watches, _without determining how many_, and proved them to the Satisfaction of the Commissioners, _without defining the Mode of Trial_.

I frankly confess that from thenceforward I considered the second Moiety of the Reward as lost for ever. The first Moiety I obtained, tho’ it was with great Difficulty, as the Act required me to explain my Invention upon Oath, and the Commissioners were pleased to put into that Oath, Words of an indeterminate and unlimited Meaning, and refused to explain them, or even permit me or my Son to ask what was meant by them. We at length agreed to take it (finding we should never get any Thing if we did not, such was now the Power of the Commissioners) and they declared that themselves and the Gentlemen appointed by them to whom we were to explain it, would be _upon Honour_ not to disclose it, that I might have an Opportunity of obtaining the Reward promised by foreign Powers; however, in less than a Month an Account of it appeared in the public News-Papers, signed by the Rev. Mr. _Ludlam_, one of the six Gentlemen named by the Commissioners to receive the Discovery, and therefore, I make no doubt, by Leave of the Board. Nor did they stop here, for they have since published all my Drawings without giving me the last Moiety of the Reward, or even paying me and my Son for our Time at the Rate of common Mechanicks; a Discouragement to the Improvement of Arts and Sciences, and an Instance of such Cruelty and Injustice as I believe never existed in a learned and civilized Nation before.

I have already had Occasion to mention, that at the Time I receiv’d the Certificate for the first Moiety of the Reward, the Watch was delivered up; it remained six Months locked up at the Admiralty, and was then removed to Greenwich, to be the Subject of those Experiments concerning which I now trouble the Public. The other three Machines, were (by Order of the Commissioners) soon after demanded of me by Mr. _Maskelyne_. One of them which had been going more than thirty Years, was broke to Pieces _under his careful and ingenious management_, before it got out of my House; and the other two were so far abused in the Carriage by Land to _Greenwich_, as to be rendered quite incorrect, and as far as I can learn, incapable of being repaired without having some essential Parts made anew: Thus perished the first Essays of this long-wished for Invention!

John Harrison opens his 1767 pamphlet with a direct accusation: the Reverend Mr. Maskelyne, under the Board of Longitude's authority, has published a pamphlet that suppresses facts and misrepresents others to damage Harrison's invention. Harrison immediately positions himself as a corrective voice, claiming Maskelyne's work is so cluttered with "unnecessary Repetitions, and voluminous Tables" that only experts can trace the facts. He promises to avoid technical jargon and includes a brief explanation of longitude—a gesture he admits is unnecessary for most readers, signaling his intended audience as the "impartial Publick" rather than specialists.

A Pamphlet of Confusion and Contradiction

Harrison's central charge is that Maskelyne's pamphlet is deliberately confusing. He writes that it is "rendered so confused by unnecessary Repetitions, and voluminous Tables" that a reader must be "pretty conversant in these Matters" to check the conclusions. This is not a mere complaint about style; it is a strategic accusation that Maskelyne exploits complexity to make his claims appear authoritative. Harrison counters by simplifying the science: he explains that the Earth's 360 degrees of longitude correspond to four minutes of time each, and that a timekeeper's accuracy is the key to determining longitude at sea. By doing so, he reclaims the narrative from technical obscurity and invites the general reader to judge the facts.

The Unfair Trial and the Demand for Assurance

Harrison recounts that the Board of Longitude proposed a ten-month trial of his watches under Maskelyne's supervision, followed by two months aboard a ship—all without any guarantee that a successful result would lead to payment. He objects that this would consume a year of his or his son's time, yet prove only that he can replicate his own machine. The phrase "without the least Shadow of Assurance on their Part" captures his frustration: the Board demands proof of general practicability while refusing to commit to accepting the evidence. Harrison argues that the real dispute is not about his watch's performance but about the Board's shifting requirements.

Three Objections to General Practicability

Harrison structures his defense around three possible objections to his invention's general use: that a timekeeper is insufficient for longitude, that he has not provided enough information for others to replicate it, or that the cost will be prohibitive. He dismisses the first by noting that the Board's own orders and instructions have already endorsed the method. Against the second, he cites evidence given to the House of Commons, including the publication of his drawings and the testimony of watchmaker Mr. Mudge, who declared he could make the watches. On cost, Harrison argues that prices will fall once multiple workmen are trained to produce parts—a practical, not theoretical, rebuttal.

Appealing to Authority and the Public Record

Harrison bolsters his case by invoking eminent figures: Sir Isaac Newton, Martin Folkes, Dr. Halley, Dr. Smith, and Mr. Graham, whose opinions were recorded in the House of Commons journals. He cites specific volume and page numbers, treating the public record as a weapon against Maskelyne's pamphlet. This move shifts the debate from technical detail to documented testimony. Harrison also offers to provide future instruction under oath, conditional on receiving the remainder of his reward. His tone is that of a wronged inventor who has spent "near Half a Century" perfecting his invention, only to face bureaucratic obstruction masked as scientific inquiry.

Harrison's pamphlet is best read as a legal brief aimed at a public jury. The excerpts show a man who believes the facts are on his side but that the process is rigged. Readers should note how Harrison alternates between technical explanation and personal grievance, and how he uses the structure of Maskelyne's own pamphlet as a foil. The work is not a neutral technical report but a polemic that demands the reader take sides—and Harrison provides all the evidence he thinks necessary to choose his.

Emma Wilson
2 weeks ago

Noah Campbell
1 week ago

Grace Clark
1 week ago

Evelyn Roberts
5 days ago

Victoria Rodriguez
2 weeks ago

5
5 out of 5 (7 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
  • ...
    Christopher Rogers - 4 weeks ago
    As a niche historical document, this pamphlet provides interesting insights into the dispute over longitude measurement. The arguments are logical, but the context is challenging for modern readers unfamiliar with the details. It's a short read, but the language is dense and requires careful attention. Recommended for historians and enthusiasts, though not for casual reading.

  • ...
    Katherine Daniels - 1 week ago
    This obscure pamphlet is nearly incomprehensible without extensive background knowledge. The author's arguments are convoluted and rely heavily on personal attacks rather than substantive scientific discussion. The content is extremely narrow, and the style is pretentious. Unless you're a dedicated scholar of this specific historical feud, this pamphlet will bore and frustrate. Not worth the effort for the average reader.

  • ...
    Brianna Marissa Olson - 5 days ago
    This historical pamphlet offers a fascinating glimpse into early 19th-century scientific controversy. The author's response to Maskelyne's pamphlet is well-reasoned and elegantly written, shedding light on the intersection of science, politics, and personal rivalry. For scholars of the history of astronomy and nautical navigation, this is a valuable primary source that reveals the human side of scientific debate.


Reader reflection

What was your reading experience?

Capture what you thought, learned, and would like to remember.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

Where are you in your reading?

2

How much did you enjoy the reading experience?

3

How likely are you to recommend this book?

4

Did the language feel accessible?

Related eBooks