The life of Isambard Kingdom Brunel, Civil Engineer Part 53

The first point to be considered is, his relations with the Companies which employed him as their engineer, and with the Directors who formed the governing body.

Mr. Brunel conceived that he was, by virtue of his appointment as engineer, the sole and confidential adviser of the Company in all matters relating to the construction and mechanical working of the undertaking. He did not permit any one to be a.s.sociated with him in the supreme control over those matters which were in his department; and the moment he thought that confidence was no longer placed in him, he was prepared at every sacrifice to resign his office. But, as long as he was supported by the Directors, he thoroughly identified himself with their cause, and he never allowed considerations of health or convenience or pecuniary advantage to interfere with the performance of any service which he could render them. The fearless independence of his position, combined with his absolute devotion to the interests of his employers, was no doubt the secret of the immense influence he acquired, and of the affectionate esteem with which he was regarded by those whom he served.

_On the Direction of Railway Works._

March 4, 1845.

I have well considered the communication which you did me the honour of making on the part of the Government of His Majesty the King of Sardinia with reference to my undertaking the direction of the works of the proposed railway from Genoa to Alessandria, about to be executed by the Government itself....

In the first place I a.s.sume that if the direction of the works be confided to me as the engineer, the same degree of confidence will be placed in me, and the same authority will result from that confidence, as would be the case in England--that is to say, I should be the confidential adviser of the Government in all engineering questions connected with this railway, my communications would in all matters be made direct with the Government, and as long as I continued to be responsible for the direction of the works no other engineer would be consulted or allowed to interfere. Of course I claim no right to direct anything but that which has the sanction of the Government; but I should claim to be their sole adviser on all engineering points (connected with the construction of the railway), and to possess their entire confidence; and also that, if any portion of that full confidence were at any time withdrawn, the fact should be immediately communicated to me; when, after making every possible arrangement to prevent inconvenience to the Government, I might withdraw from the direction of the work. This is the position which an engineer of any standing occupies in this country, whether acting for the Government or for individuals; and I believe it to be as fully essential for the success of the proposed undertaking, and as necessary for the interests of His Majesty's Government as for my satisfaction, that I should be placed in a similar position.

The circ.u.mstance of my being a foreigner, of my being rarely present to meet objections, if any are raised, of the unavoidable frequency of real as well as apparent failures in works of such variety and so numerous as those which occur on this line, of the difficulties which always attend the introduction of novelties and everything connected with a railway, the rapid mode of its construction, the necessity which experience has proved of frequently adopting apparently hasty and hazardous methods to prevent the evil consequences of protracted delays,--all this will be novelty with you as it was a few years ago in England, all these circ.u.mstances combine to render it peculiarly essential to the satisfactory progress of the undertaking that it should be well known to all parties that full and entire confidence is placed in me by the Government.

It will of course also be necessary that all parties acting under me in the direction of the works should feel that their appointment or dismissal depends entirely upon me.

In return for the confidence thus placed in me and the authority given to me, I should of course know no interest but that of the Government. If the Government is willing to appoint me engineer according to this definition of my position, I shall feel pride in the appointment, and I shall devote my best energies to the accomplishment of one of the finest and most interesting works of the day....

_On the Position of Joint Engineer._

October 16, 1843.

The contents of your letter of yesterday take me quite by surprise; the expression you use of joint-engineership implies a view of our relative position diametrically opposed to the views which I have plainly and unequivocally expressed to you and to the Directors when such a thing as joint-engineership was proposed to and rejected by me....

You wind up your letter by saying 'we have accepted the duty of joint-engineers,' &c., and you add a postscript requesting me to lay your letter before the Directors: this I should have been obliged to do without any such request. I never accepted the duty of joint-engineer; I have always refused to do so. I thought I had made this very clear both to you and the Directors on several occasions; indeed I often feared that I expressed myself too strongly instead of leaving it capable of misapprehension....

_On the Position of Consulting Engineer._

December 30, 1851.

I shall be happy to act in any capacity (subject to the exception I will further explain) which can be useful to your Company; ... but the exception I have to make is one which perhaps resolves itself merely into a question of _name_. The term 'Consulting Engineer' is a very vague one, and in practice has been too much used to mean a man who for a consideration sells his name, but nothing more. Now I never connect myself with an engineering work except as the Directing Engineer, who, under the Directors, has the sole responsibility and control of the engineering, and is therefore 'The Engineer;' and I have always objected to the term 'Consulting Engineer.' ...

In a railway the only works to be constructed are engineering works, and there can really be only one engineer; and in your case especially, where, as I apprehend, the contractor is part of the company, and has to be treated with consideration, and perhaps less vigorously, at all events differently from an ordinary contractor, considerable management and discretion will be required of your engineer, and a degree of responsibility which I would only undertake if sole engineer. Possibly this is what you meant, and that I alone see the distinction, but it is an important one with which you may not be so familiar as I am.

_On the Position of the Engineer in Relation to the Contractors._

May 26, 1854.

I have in due course taken steps to prepare a report for the Directors on the state of the work, but you must not apply to the contractors for such reports. In the first place, it would lead to ridiculous contradictions, inasmuch as most likely my reports would differ materially from theirs; and also it would reverse the whole order of things. I must alone, so long at least as I am the professional adviser of the Company, be the medium of communication with contractors in all matters which the terms of the contract refer to me. I am very particular about the regularity of all these forms, because, although, while all goes smooth, they are of no consequence, yet if, unfortunately, any little difficulties arise, then it is unpleasant and difficult to alter a previous course.

I would ask, then, that all official communications with the contractors should be made through me, and that, even as regards these, we should confer together before any formal resolution should at any time be pa.s.sed, so as to be sure that it is properly worded, and that no awkward precedent is established.

You may have seen that a great appeal case before the Lords, affecting claims of some hundreds of thousands, has just been finally decided in favour of the Great Western Railway Company after fourteen years of litigation;[190] and this favourable decision was entirely obtained by carefully prepared specifications, and by my not having departed in any single case, in years of correspondence, from the letter and spirit of the contract, and particularly from the fact--strongly commented upon by Lords Cranworth and Brougham--that I had maintained my position of umpire between the Company and contractor. It is, then, as essential to the Company as to the contractor and to me that I should maintain that position.

_On the Relations between the Engineer and the Directors._

I.

April 15, 1850.

You will remember that on the 2nd of November last I addressed you a letter on the subject of my acting as umpire in several cases of reference between the Company and contractors, who were raising heavy claims against the Company, in which I expressed my readiness to act in a very responsible, laborious, and thankless position....

I am also still acting, so far as my services can be useful, as your engineer; and in arranging with contractors, &c., there is even now much remaining to be done. As long as I enjoy your full confidence, it would be a great pleasure to me, although the profit might for the present be small, to continue your engineer, looking forward, as I do, at no distant period to the completion of the works; but the changes that have lately taken place in the Board, and the excitement which has been displayed by some of your proprietors in effecting those changes--such excitement as is too apt frequently to lead men to form most unjust and erroneous opinions of the trustworthiness of those who have been long engaged in their service--very naturally causes anxiety. I, and you who have been acting with me for so long, know that I have always advised you honestly, and I hope generally wisely, on such matters as I have been consulted upon, notwithstanding my known connection with other and sometimes conflicting interests. But new men may not have the same confidence in me, and I cannot afford to run the risk of any doubts being entertained upon the subject.

I must therefore beg of you to bring the matter before the Board formally, and if it is desired that I should continue to act as your engineer, that I may have it clearly understood that I do so with the full concurrence of the Board as now const.i.tuted, and particularly of the new Directors; and that to render the expression of their confidence clear, I wish them to understand that I am quite ready to tender them my resignation if they do not feel that confidence, and that such resignation cannot prejudice any of the cases under arbitration before me, as I undertook them upon the express understanding that it was as agreed umpire, and not as engineer to the Company.

I shall only add that by being engineer to a Company, I mean acting in perfect confidence with the Directors on matters generally, as I have been in the habit of doing.

II.

December 6, 1851.

I really cannot consent to forego in this case the rule I lay down for myself in my professional business, which is to yield as far as I comfortably can to the mere wishes of Directors in the mode in which I direct the works they may order, but not beyond this point--and if the Directors of any body claim the right to control the staff which I think necessary to carry on my work, I concede the right at once, and resign the direction of that staff. The staff for constructing engineering works is not a permanent establishment, which can be extended or restricted just as a Board of Directors may determine; it is much more of the character of a personal staff attached to the engineer-in-chief, and by means of which he is enabled to take great responsibility upon himself, both in respect of the works which he executes, and the settlement of large amounts of payments, in which settlement both the company and the contractors are very much at his mercy. It is the duty of an engineer of course to study economy as well as efficiency in his staff, and to pay attention to the wishes of the Directors so far as he can; but he must be the ultimate judge of the number and the persons of that staff. At least, that is my rule, and I cannot depart from it in this case. I should wish to state this as respectfully as possible to the Board, but at the same time to state it clearly.

III.

January 22, 1857.

...I have replied very fully to the observations of the Directors, but having done so I must again place my resignation in the hands of the Directors. A Board of Directors has a perfect right to dispense with the services of an engineer, or to lay down any rules of conduct they may think fit, and to engineer the works themselves, either as a body or by appointing one of their members, if they think fit; but if they desire to have the advice and responsibility of any respectable engineer--at all events, if they wish to have mine--they must place the usual amount of confidence in me; and as long as I am engineer they must leave me to conduct the engineering, and must act as if they a.s.sumed that I was more able to advise the Board upon all the usual practical questions of engineering than any one of the Directors. Admitting as I do the full right of a Board of Directors to determine whether they will have an engineer or not, if they have one they must trust him to do his own work.

As a mere question of time it would be impossible that I could be constantly entering into long explanations of the most trifling character upon points on which I must be by far the most competent judge--and in fact the competent and responsible judge, expressly employed, and paid professionally because I am so. If individual Directors are more competent than their engineer, let them a.s.sume the office and the responsibility; but do not have a divided responsibility. I am most happy at all times to receive any hints or suggestions from any body whether Directors or not, but I cannot undertake the labour of replying to them all, neither can I act as engineer to a Board of Directors who, either as a body or by one or two of their members, make a practice of taking upon themselves to judge of those details of which I must be a.s.sumed to be the competent judge, and thereby interfering with my proper duties. If the engineer is not a.s.sumed to be worthy of trust both in respect of zeal in the interests of the Company, and very superior to any one of the Directors as regards experience, and ability to carry out what the Directors may determine upon, he is not fit to be the engineer; but if he is so, he must be left to carry out those details of his department of the business. These are the general principles upon which alone I can act.

It is, from the nature of the case, impossible by any extracts from Mr.

Brunel's correspondence to give an adequate idea of the position which he occupied in relation to his a.s.sistants. There was so much personal intercourse between them that letter writing was but little resorted to.

His relations with them were of the most affectionate and intimate kind, and were maintained without any ostentation or outward show. He was in the habit of placing entire confidence in his subordinates as long as he considered that they deserved it; and, while he preserved his own proper position, he was always ready to shield them from the interference of others. The letters which are printed below are evidence of this. When, on the other hand, anything occurred to displease him in the conduct of his a.s.sistants, he was eager to give the offender a chance of retrieving his position; and he was always ready to help them in any difficulties.

_On Interference of Directors with the a.s.sistant Engineers._

I.

January 19, 1842.

While I am upon the subject, and as I have referred to the impolicy of Directors taking notice of little things, and as I speak freely to you, I will mention that I have observed with pain on some occasions this tendency; and I will give one instance of what I must call most unwise interference. It was lately, and unfortunately at the same moment as this complaint, intimated that a pair of boxing gloves had been seen in one of the Company's offices, and that _the Directors had observed it_. Now I really do not know why a gentlemanly and industrious young man like ---- should be subject to have his trifling actions remarked upon more than I myself, unless the observer gave him credit for a much more gentle temper than I possess; because I confess, if any man had taken upon himself to remark upon my having gone to the pantomime, which I always do at Christmas, no respect for Directors or any other officer would have restrained me. I will do my best to keep my team in order; but I cannot do it if my master sits by me, and amuses himself by touching them up with the whip.

II.

January 28, 1842.