James Cutbush Part 3

The book was dedicated to Benjamin Smith Barton. No t.i.tle of any kind appears after the author's name, indicating that he had probably by the year 1814 severed his connection with all his educational projects in Philadelphia. In the preface the author speaks of

"Having devoted the greater part of his life to chemical pursuits."

Glancing through these volumes the impression made upon the reader was that the author had read widely in the sciences, but particularly in his favorite science, chemistry. The book is really a popular dictionary of chemical technology. While it is spa.r.s.ely ill.u.s.trated, early forms of chemical gla.s.sware are pictured. From these may be gathered the story of the gradual development of very useful apparatus, for example, such as is used in various kinds of distillation.

That Cutbush had probably ceased his professional duties by the year 1814, as has just been hinted, is further emphasized on noting that he was appointed a.s.sistant Apothecary General in the U. S. Army on the twelfth day of August in the year 1814. What his duties as such may have been has not been discovered. It would not be fair to call it a radical change in position, but it was a change which necessitated Cutbush giving more thought and attention to pharmacy, which in his earlier career was a secondary subject, but in which he was so proficient that he attracted to himself the attention of leading men in medical circles. He was in Philadelphia, prosecuting his duties as late as the year 1819. It is known that during this period he was attached to the Northern Division of the Army.

In 1820 Dr. James Lovell, Surgeon General of the Army, suggested to General Thayer, Superintendent of the Military Academy at West Point, that Cutbush be appointed Chief Medical Officer at the Academy and Post of West Point. In this capacity he served for seventeen months, when he became Acting Professor of Chemistry and Mineralogy in the Academy. The first lecture in his new position was delivered October 9, 1820. In a sense, it marked the beginning of a new career for Cutbush. He resumed teaching duties, but gave himself more particularly to the study, not only of gunpowder, which never ceased to be interesting to him, but to explosives of higher character, and in this latter field he reached his greatest eminence and may confidently be regarded as a pioneer in it.

Just before leaving Philadelphia, in the year 1820, Cutbush wrote Benjamin Silliman at some length on an improvement of the Voltaic electrical lamp. It was an ingenious modification and const.i.tuted the first contribution made by Cutbush to the _American Journal of Science_.

But, returning to his life at West Point, it may be observed that in 1822 he contributed his second article to the _Journal of Science_, which did not appear in print, however, until 1824. This article related to the composition and properties of the Chinese fire and the so-called brilliant fires. It was very interesting. It displayed a thorough and wide knowledge of pyrotechnics with which Cutbush, in previous years, had been gradually familiarizing himself. At one point he said:

"Most if not all the compositions used in fireworks, including military fireworks, were more the result of the labours of the artisan who was neither controlled by fixed principles nor by a knowledge of the effects and properties of bodies and of the systematic experiments of the chemist, and yet in consequence of some fortuitous and repeated trials we find that he has been successful, and moreover has ama.s.sed a body of facts which we may reasonably infer may either be rendered more perfect by knowledge or improved upon by the exact aid of chemical science."

Here is every proof of his purpose to apply his understanding of chemical principles and his own experience to the solution of pyrotechnic problems, for he continues:

"Pyrotechnics is at present considered under two heads, namely, fireworks for exhibition and military fireworks. The latter is undoubtedly the most useful, as it embraces a variety of propositions calculated for attack and defence both for naval and land service."

Almost simultaneously there appeared in the same _Journal of Arts and Science_ another contribution by Cutbush, ent.i.tled

REMARKS CONCERNING THE COMPOSITION AND PROPERTIES OF THE GREEK FIRE

In the light of recent events and the use of all sorts of chemical bodies for warfare and destruction it will not be uninteresting to introduce here a few paragraphs from this remarkable contribution. He says:

"The Greek fire was invented by Callinicus of Heliopolis, a town in Syria, who used it with so much skill and effect during a naval engagement that he destroyed a whole fleet of the enemy, in which were embarked 30,000 men.

"It appears that in the reign of Louis XV, a chemist of Gren.o.ble, Dupre de Mayen, discovered a composition similar in effect to the Greek fire of Callinicus, which was exhibited at Brest, and proved successful, but the preparation was kept secret. The original Greek fire was used in 1291, and also in 1679.... Writers have defined it to be a sort of artificial fire, which burns with increased violence when it mixes with water.... That it was a liquid composition, we may infer from the modes of using it, which were several. It was employed chiefly on board of ships, and thrown on the vessels of the enemy by large engines. It was sometimes kindled in particular vessels, which might be called fire ships, and which were introduced among a hostile fleet. Sometimes it was put into jars and other vessels, and thrown at the enemy by means of projectile machines, and sometimes it was _squirted_ by soldiers from hand engines, or blown through pipes. This fire was also discharged from the _foreparts of ships_ by a machine constructed of copper and iron, the extremity of which is said to have resembled the _open mouth_ and _jaws_ of a lion or other animal. They were painted, and even gilded, and were capable of projecting the liquid fire to a great distance.

"... John Cameniata, speaking of his native city, Thessalonica, which was taken by the Saracens in the year 904, says that the enemy threw fire into the wooden works of the besieged, which was blown into them by means of tubes, and thrown from other vessels.... This proves that the Greeks, in the beginning of the Tenth Century, were no longer the only people acquainted with the art of preparing this fire, the _precursor of our gunpowder_. The Emperor Leo, who about the same period wrote his _Art of War_, recommends such engines, with a metal covering, to be constructed in the foreparts of ships, and he twice afterwards mentions engines for throwing out Greek fire.... For many centuries the method of making this dreadful article of destruction was lost; but it has just been discovered by the librarian of the elector of Bavaria, who has found a very old Latin ma.n.u.script which contains directions for preparing it.

"... On the subject of incendiary and other military fireworks, the French have certainly laid the foundation for the very preparations now used by the British, for the formulae for such preparations may be traced to the French service....

"The Moors were in possession of the secret for preparing the Greek fire in 1432, according to the testimony of Brocquire.

Bertrandon de la Brocquire was in Palestine in 1432 as counsellor to the Duke of Burgundy. He was present at Barrat during one of the Moorish celebrations. 'It began,' he remarks, 'in the evening at sunset. Numerous companies scattered here and there were singing, and uttering loud cries. While this was pa.s.sing, the cannon of the castle was fired, and the people of the town launched into the air "_bein haut et bein loin, une maniere de fue plus gros fellot que je veisse oncques allume_." They told me they made use of such at sea, to set fire to the sails of an enemy's vessel.

It seems to me that it is a thing easy to be made, and at a little expense it may be equally well employed to burn a camp or a thatched village, or in an engagement with cavalry to frighten their horses. Curious to know its composition, I sent the servant of my host to the person who made this fire, and requested him to teach me his method. He returned for answer, that he dare not, for that he should run great danger were it known; but there is nothing a man will not do for money. I offered him a ducat, which quieted his fears, and he taught me all he knew, and even gave me the moulds in wood, with the other ingredients, which I have brought to France.'

... When Constantinople was attacked, the Emperor Leo burnt the vessels or boats, to the number of one thousand eight hundred, by means of the Greek fire.... Its composition was kept secret at Constantinople, pretending that the knowledge of it came from an angel to the first and greatest of the Constantines, with a sacred injunction not to divulge it under any pretext, etc. It ... was kept secret above 400 years ... was stolen by the Mahometans, who employed it against the Crusaders. A knight, it appears, who despised the swords and lances of the Saracens, relates, with heartfelt sincerity, his own fears at the sight and sound of the mischievous engine that discharged a torrent of fire. 'It came flying through the air, like a winged, long-tailed dragon, about the thickness of a hogshead, with a report of thunder, and the velocity of lightning; and the darkness of the night was dispelled by this deadly illumination. The use of the Greek, or as it might now be called the Saracen fire, was continued to the middle of the Fourteenth Century, when the scientific or casual compound of nitre, sulphur and charcoal effected a new revolution in the art of war, and the history of mankind.' ... We do not know of any imitation of the original Greek fire having been used in modern warfare, but have no hesitation in believing that naphtha prepared as already stated would in many cases prove advantageous. It seems to be well calculated for close naval combat, if the object be to destroy the sails and rigging of an enemy's ship. The rapidity and extent of its combustion, added to the circ.u.mstances of its peculiar properties, that of resisting the action of water in particular, contribute altogether to this opinion."

The entire article from which these excerpts have been made is worthy of study, even at this late date. It is suggestive and carries with it many historical references of value. The enthusiasm of Cutbush for pyrotechnic bodies is manifest in every line of this publication.

About a year later (1823) Cutbush discussed the formation of cyanogen in processes not previously noticed. He spoke of the appearance of this gas in the putrefaction of animal and vegetable matter, making the following remarkable and in some respects startling statement:

"I believe it would be found that the compound (carburet of azote) is the basis of the miasmata which produces malignant, bilious diseases.... Marsh miasmata are generally the cause of intermittent fevers. Now under particular circ.u.mstances of action may we not admit the generation of carburet of azote or cyanogen, and if so, as it readily unites with hydrogen, may it not be the miasma which produces malignant bilious fevers, since it is known that hydrocyanic acid is destructive to animal life and a most virulent poison?...

Miasmata of some kind are the cause of yellow fever. For our part we believe it to be carburet of azote, or of some of its combinations, and of these that with hydrogen, from its deleterious character, seems to be the one."

Another observation made in this connection was that cyanogen is produced when charcoal is heated with nitric acid. Cutbush stated that he placed charcoal and nitric acid together in a retort and subjected them to distillation, collecting the product in Woulfe's bottles, after which the resulting solutions were impregnated with potash, and

"common sulphate and persulphate of iron introduced. The colour instantly changed and became more or less blue, proving the existence of the perferrocyanite of iron and, consequently, of cyanogen."

Having never met this method of preparing cyanogen, experiments were made in the writer's laboratory to verify the statement. A blue, or what had the semblance of a blue color, could be obtained at the point given by Cutbush, but just as soon as the solution was acidulated, as is always done, the precipitate disappeared and there was not the slightest indication that Prussian blue had been formed. Even after hours of rest there was not a sign of it.

a.s.sociation on the part of Cutbush with the men of science in Philadelphia during the first decade of the Nineteenth Century led to an extension of his interest in science circles, so that during leisure moments at West Point (1824) he wrote of the following minerals observed by him in and near that place:

"Molybdenite, kaolin, tremolite, schorl, adularia, garnet, actinolite, precious serpentine (remarkably elegant), epidote and diallage."

Recently, attention has been called to a volume by Cutbush ent.i.tled "Lectures on the Adulteration of Food and Culinary Poisons.... With a Means of Discovering Them and Rules for Determining the Purity of Substances." It was published at Newburgh, N. Y., in 1823. The writer has never seen this volume. His search for it has been unsuccessful.

Another publication was "A Synopsis of Chemistry, Arranged Alphabetically, Comprehending the Names, Synonyms, and Definitions in that Science." New York: E. Lewis, 1821. This book is also exceedingly rare.

The real magnum opus of Cutbush resulted in "A System of Pyrotechny"

(1825), which voluminous publication did not appear until after his decease, and then largely through the efforts of his wife and former students in the Cadet Corps, for, in _Silliman's Journal_, this note appeared:

"Mrs. Cutbush, widow of the late Dr. Cutbush, of West Point, proposes to publish by subscription a Treatise on Pyrotechny by her husband, Dr. James Cutbush.... By the reputation which Dr. Cutbush sustained, as well as by the ability which his elaborate treatises on these subjects already published in this journal display, there can be no doubt that this posthumous work will be worthy of the public patronage, which we hope will be liberally bestowed."

Even to-day this publication stands out preeminently and for years has been referred to by artisans and by scientists. Chapters dealing with military fireworks have been seriously studied. In the light of the violent fires, grenades, etc., used in the late war the writings of Cutbush become very fascinating. They show that he truly blazed the way in this field. In the introduction to this splendid volume he wrote:

"On this head, that of the application of chemistry to pyrotechny, we claim so much originality, as, so far as we know, to have been the first, who applied the principles of chemistry.... As this subject, however interesting to the theoretical pyrotechnist, cannot be understood without a knowledge of chemistry, it is obvious that that science is a powerful aid to pyrotechny.... Viewing pyrotechny either as a science or an art, there is undoubtedly required in its prosecution much skill and practice. The mere artificer or fireworker by constant habit may understand, it is true, how to mix minerals, prepare composition, charge cases, etc., ...

but without a knowledge of chemistry he cannot understand the theory.... Indeed, chemistry is indispensable to pyrotechny."

Much time and thought were given by Cutbush in the experimental development of this particular subject in his own laboratory. In reading upon the subject he had collected a vast material which was then put to crucial experimental tests. These, outside of his teaching hours, occupied his whole attention.

An outline of how the work in the chemical department of the United States Military Academy was conducted will not be devoid of interest.

_First Year_

Theory and Experimental Chemistry.

_Second Year_

Application of Chemistry to the Arts, Manufactures and Domestic Economy, const.i.tuting along with Mineralogy the second course.

Pyrotechny naturally was developed quite extensively. Teachers of chemistry will note with pleasure the questions which Cutbush arranged for his student corps, particularly those questions which had to do with pyrotechny:

"What is saltpetre? What is nitric acid? What are the sources of saltpetre, and how it is obtained? How is it formed in nitre beds, extracted, and refined? What circ.u.mstances are necessary to produce nitre, and how does animal matter act in its production? What is the difference between the old and new process for refining saltpetre? What reagents are used to discover the presence of foreign substances in nitre? What are nitre caves? Where do they exist? What are the nitre caves of the western country, and how is nitre extracted from the earth? What proportion of nitre does the saltpetre of the nitrate caves afford? What is the theory of the process for extracting saltpetre from nitrous earth, or nitrate of lime?

What is sulphur? How is it obtained, and how is it purified for the manufacture of gunpowder? Of what use is sulphur in the composition of gunpowder? Does it add to the effective force of gunpowder? What is charcoal? What is the best mode of carbonizing wood for the purpose of gunpowder? What woods are preferred for this purpose? In the charring of wood, what part is converted into coal, and what gas and acid are disengaged? What is the use of charcoal in gunpowder? What is gunpowder? What are considered the best proportions for forming it, and what const.i.tutes the difference between powder for war, for gunning, and for mining? How does the combustion of gunpowder take place? Can you explain why combustion takes place without the presence of a gaseous supporter of combustion, as gunpowder will inflame in vacuo?

What are the products of the combustion of gunpowder? What gases are generated? To what is the force of fired gunpowder owing? What are the experiments of Mr. Robins on the force of gunpowder? How would you separate the component parts of gunpowder so as to determine their proportions? What are gunpowder proofs? What is understood by the comparative force of gunpowder? What are eprouvettes, etc.? In noticing in the same manner the preparations used for fireworks, and for war, as the rocket, for instance, the following questions were propounded; viz., What is a rocket? How is it formed? Is the case always made of paper? What is the war rocket? What is the composition for rockets, and how does it act? What particular care is required in charging a rocket? What is the cause of the ascension of rockets? What is the use of the conical cavity, made in a rocket at the time it is charged, or bored out after it is charged? How do cases charged with composition impart motion to wheels, and other pieces of fireworks? What is understood by the rocket principle? What is the rocket stick and its use? Is the centre of gravity fixed, or is it shifting in the flight of rockets? How are rockets discharged? What is the head of a rocket? What is usually put in the head? Are all rockets furnished with a head? What is understood by the furniture of a rocket? How are the serpents, stars, fire-rain, etc., forming the furniture of a rocket, discharged into the air, when the rocket has terminated its flight, or arrived at its maximum of ascension? What forms the difference between a balloon, in fireworks, and a rocket? As the balloon contains also furniture, and is projected vertically from a mortar, how is fire communicated to it, so as to burst it in the air? Is the fuse used, in this case, the same as that for bombs, howitzers, and grenades? What is the Asiatic rocket? The fougette of the French? In what siege were they employed with success by the native troops of India? What was the nature of their war-rocket? What is the murdering rocket of the French?

Is the conical head hollow, solid, blunt, or pointed? Why is it called the murdering rocket? What is the Congreve rocket?

Is Congreve the inventor or improver of this rocket? What are Congreve rockets loaded or armed with? In what part is the load placed? Is the case made up of paper or sheet-iron? What are the sizes of Congreve rockets?"

In the introduction to "Pyrotechnics" Cutbush remarked that he had consulted many authorities without much advantage, finding the French the most helpful. Of the English he said:

"As respects the turtle torpedo and catamarin submarine machines, it appears that Bushnel claims the originality of the discovery from the date of his invention, although similar contrivances had long ago been suggested. Fulton's improvements, in the torpedo, are deserving of particular attention, but it is plain that the Catamarin of the English is the same in principle and application as Fulton's torpedo and that Fulton deserves the merit of it."

The "System of Pyrotechny" bears the ear-marks of much careful experimental study. It is a most worthy contribution, and is strong proof of the dominating force in the mind of Cutbush, namely, to make his science as widely useful as possible. Chemists may justly take pride in this early contribution in the application of chemical principles.

The life story of Cutbush has now been told. It is really the story of his life activities, for regrettable as it is, there does lack a picture of the man's personality. The parents of James Cutbush were Edward Cutbush and Anne Marriat. The father was a stone-cutter or carver. To these good people were given four children: Edward, born in 1772; Ann, in 1782 (who died in 1798); William, born in 1785, and James in 1788. Edward became prominent as a naval surgeon, while William graduated from West Point in 1812, and attained eminence as an engineer.

Indeed, at an early age, William was a midshipman in the United States Navy, and was taken prisoner by the Algerines at the time the frigate Philadelphia ran aground in the harbor of Tripoli, from which he was released after two years' confinement in prison, and returned to the United States, when he became a cadet in the Military Academy.