A Mill-Wright Miscellany
The one person that I knew that was the leading authority on mills and milling of late 1700's was the late John Blake Campbell (1890-1987). Besides meeting Mr. Campbell on one of mill expeditions in the early 1970's, and over the years acquiring some of his books and catalogs. (1) I have recently lived in Mr. Campbell's hometown of Roanoke, Virginia. when John B. Campbell had a falling out with John Fitz and the Fitz Water Wheel Company and before Mr. Campbell when to Philadelphia to start his Campbell Water Wheel Company, he returned to Roanoke for a time. There he studied the mills of the area, and I too have spent the last several years studying and working on some of those mills in the Roanoke area. So at some future date I plan of writing on some of my mill projects in that area. The following work came about because a blacksmith asked me to write for a newsletter the interconnections between the millwright and the blacksmith. The miller and the blacksmith was much more public person than the private millwright. (2) I had worked for the National Park Service (3) for a number of years at several NPS sites. One of the Park Rangers I worked with always said to me if you are going to say anything to visitors I want you to show me the source. Years ago, it seemed this time period of 200 years ago was very clear and understood. In recent times much misinformation has surfaced about Oliver Evans, his automated milling system and mill restoration of today. One thing I have always intended to be is strictly practical and correct in what I had to say on the origin and progress of flour making. I've learned that even the historian fails with the details of that kind. I have read far too many histories of mills that get the technical information incorrect. Restoring mills so that they win restoration awards seems to have taken precedence over historical correctness. Mills were never constructed with the same degree of refinement found in church architecture.
The common practice in New England was to establish milling facilities by granting of mill seats and adjoining lands with water rights to create a monopoly of milling. This meant during the colonial period a person with such rights would hold an exemption from taxation and an exemption from military service. (4) Colonial agencies back in Great Britain became aware of the critical role of grain milling for successful planning of settlements. According to a paper by Cameron MacLeod, the pre-revolutionary deeded water rights wherever early settlers had found then, were first mapped out and denoted as power sites or "mill seats" long before the settlers arrived. When the ships first landed on the east coast, surveyors and mapmakers headed inland to discover natural resources along future mill streams. (5) In New England to construct grist mills and saw mills because of the English inexperience with such things as saw mills, Dutch workers familiar with the art of saw milling was sent to construct saw mills. In Virginia the Virginia Company instructed the governor to build water mills and blockhouses on every plantation. A request was sent to England that millwrights be sent along with mill irons, millstones among the other essential supplies. Wind and tidal mills were introduced along the tidewater. In Maryland laws were passed to promote the erection of water mills on mill sites. (6) The tramp millwright traveled like the tramp blacksmith or the itinerant millstone dresser. (7) Itinerant millwrights was developed when regular millwright's work was in short supply and sometimes the millwright became a carpenter or blacksmith. (8) This is much like the traditional stories of the shipwrights, when work was slow, they built and worked on windmills. These stories come from New England and the tidewater area, and that even ship wrights incorporated ship building techniques into the windmill that they built. Operating a windmill is much like operating a sailing ship. The modern restoration of the Spokott Windmill, Lloyds, Maryland, was done by a ship wright named James Richardson. Millwrights built timber frame barns and shipwrights built timber frame houses. A broadside from August 1804, advertises a millwrights services for 65 kinds of mill-wright good or tasks performed. (9) Building a mill took weeks or even months of planning and labor. Oliver Evans characterized the millwright as the typical American engineer of the time. "[He] could handle the axe, hammer, and plane, with equal skill and precision; he could turn, bore, or forge.........He could calculate the velocities, strength, and power of machines, he could.......construct buildings, conduits and water courses." (10) No machinery or standardized parts were available, only human strength and ingenuity. Except for a few (metal) parts the blacksmith might forge, everything had to be made from wood and stone. The millwright was called in for the job. (11) A millwright was a person capable of designing, assembling and adjusting new machinery. A person who could make it work commercially without excessive breakdowns. Generally unschooled, apprenticed and self-taught (12) the millwright knew the architecture and the layout of different size and types of mills. Sometimes the millwright learned his trade by coping existing mills. He could built a mill for the owner, often containing one pair of French millstones and one pair of "county" stones, this being a pair of ordinary domestic millstones. The millwright knew good millstones from bad ones. He often reused old millstones from defunct mills again in new mills. (13) Millwrights traditionally did not dress millstones or have the knowledge to grind grain once the mill was constructed. (14)
The big question being that, when did the millwright enter the realm of popular culture? The miller did because of Geoffrey Chaucer's "The Canterbury Tales." The dishonest miller with his thumb of gold and its own ability to make money for its master. (15) Before the term "milling" was used the word "millering," was used to describe the work or trade of the miller. Then before that, the term "mealing," was used to describe the process of "milling"or producing "meal." Sir William Fairbain discovered that millwright craft was a second rate trade, so he abolished trade of the millwright and introduced the mechanical engineer. (16) The millwright was different from the engineer, who had a scientific education, were the millwright had a mechanical and hydraulic engineering background. (17)
The millwright found a good site. Foundation walls were erected. Logs were cut and fashioned into beams, boards, and shingles. Pillars were constructed to support the water wheel shaft. The millwright located a white oak tree for the water wheel shaft. Only the millwright had the knowledge of what woods were best used for various mill parts. The water wheel, gears, and bearings made. Some times stone or wood was used for bearings. Stones bearings were lubricated with either water or tallow. Wooden bearings were lubricated with tallow. A dam, mill race and or a sluice box was constructed. Finally the mill was ready to be set into operation. The first grain was ground and the mill was tested. No one dared ask the millwright about his work, he went about it in silence, few people were lucky to watch him work, he safe guarded his knowledge and the secrets of his craft. No one dared ask him questions, what he was doing or why, because it is a well know fact that a millwrights spit could kill a toad.
Sometimes a mills also included a blacksmith shop. As customers would come to the mill to have their grains ground into flour and meal. The blacksmith worked on their wagons and shoed their horses and mules. The Blacksmith was always needed by the millstone dresser to draw out and temper mill picks or mill bills. The blacksmith kept his secrets of how he tempered the mill picks and the millstone dresser would always disagree with the blacksmiths work. (18) It was not until later, in the late 19th century were the blacksmith's formulas for tempering mill picks published in blacksmith manuals. The blacksmith worked with the miller and millstone dresser to repair metal bands on millstones. Later many millers learned to dress millstones, learning only the basic knowledge how to do it and make the millstones grind, but without the skills once only done by master millstone dressers. It is the idea, anyone can do it, you put marks on the millstone and it will grind, but only the master millstone dresser knew the complete knowledge of how the millstones actually grind and what happens between the millstones. The miller who dresses his own millstones for the most part, could care less of the bran is removed in the proper shape and flake size. He just wants to grind grain for his customers. The blacksmith first fabricated metal parts for the millwright, and later worked with the millwright again or miller to repair mill machinery. The blacksmith worked on mills when water wheels, gears, shafts were primarily made of wood, with metal parts fashioned by the blacksmith. Later, when the millwright no longer completely fashioned everything with in the mill, the blacksmiths work became less important. Metal replaced water wheel shafts, gears and bearings. Originally the millstones adjustment of tentering device the lighter staff and bottle weight were made by the millwright. Then the blacksmith made metal tentering rods and wrenches. The blacksmith could not fashioned the proof staff used by the millstone dresser. These were made in foundries. They were used to check a straight edge or paint staff, used to check the dishing of the millstones. The blacksmith rebabbitted metal bearings if the miller did not learn how to do it. The technology of making mill parts of metal took over the work of the millwright and blacksmith, when metal parts could be fashioned and cast beyond the abilities of their handy work.
Originally all of the machinery located in a mill was operated by wooden gears, including millstones, bolters (flour sifters). Then rope drive was used, and later leather belts were used. White leather was first used for elevator belts to hold elevator cups, later to be replaced by canvas belting. Elevator cups were either made of wood, or fashioned out of tin by the tin smith. The miller learned to lace leather belts with leather lacing. In the beginning of the 20th century metal belt lacing came into use. Wooden pulleys became made of metal, and more and more machinery became belt driven within the mill, even the millstones them selves. Later then metal replaced water wheels, gears, bearings, shafts and even the millstones with the introduction of the roller mill. The millwrights no longer required the skills of the blacksmith. His metal work was done by a machinist in a machine shop. When the millstone dresser or the miller no longer dressed the millstones, the machinist became the one who regrooved the break rollers in the break roller mills, once every several years. I have spent many years building a library of work exclusively devoted to the art of building mill building and milling. For man years I have studied the improvements of Oliver Evans. In doing so I have also studied the condition of the art previous to the advent of automated flour milling system. For many generations and several centuries flour milling had apparently remained about the same, with little or no progress or improvement of any kind. Oliver Evans was probably the first man to become awake any great amount of possibilities in the matter. To Oliver Evans belongs all the credit for arousing the simple basic solutions that had lain dormant for so many centuries. Many millwrights simply reproduced Evans machinery exactly as it was found in the plans and drawings of the Miller's Guide. (19) His improvements as he referred to them as and his book that has become the millers and millwrights bible even to the present time. Restoring a mill to the Oliver Evans' system is still in vogue. The problem is that his plans, ideas, are not carried out in detail, they are modified by miss interpretation, and a mill built after Evans' most approved plan and just as he would have built it in his time often much different today. Many of the improvements now used in flour milling were unknown in Oliver Evans time, but what is not be so apparent is that there still is a number his improvements still in use today.
Years ago after reading the wonderful book on mills of Perry County Pennsylvania, the late Charlie Howell (1926-1993) and I went on one of our mill trips to visit as many mills in Perry County that we could find standing. You could not tell it after reading the wonderful book by the late ex-miller Ron Elby until you visited these mills. The majority of mills were built prior to the inventions of Oliver Evans. You find a similar mill here or there in another states like Maryland, Virginia or West Virginia from time to time. But this was a huge collection of pre-Evans mills with lighter staffs and bottle weights; warning bells on millstone hoppers (like the one in Stephen Kindig's mill working of the main vertical shaft and other types on sack hoists, and even barrel fillers); windlass sack hoists of all types and descriptions with and without cutoffs; built-in bunk beds in miller's offices, and just wonderful pre-Oliver Evans mills. It was like the world and time forgot about telling these people about Oliver Evans. Perhaps Oliver Evans' brother Joseph missed this county in his travels promoting Evans improvements. These mills did not see an changes or improvements until the roller system. So there were all of these wonderful old 1700's mills standing with later roller milling systems added, they just skipped a stage in the development of flour milling. There was several still standing at that time that never had the roller systems added later, and still had their wonderful old wooden gears and wooden water wheels. The millwright, in Oliver Evans' time, was supreme master of the situation. The millwright did not depend much on mill furnishers and machinists. He was his own furnisher for the most part. As for the millwright's machinists, the nearest country blacksmith filled the bill admirably. Almost everything was made of wood, and the millwright made it. For millwrights of this time period they were just what their name implies literally mill-builders. If a shaft was needed you could not go to town to locate a machine shop and await the proprietor locate or order one. If there was any saw-mills convenient, material for a shaft would soon be forthcoming. If there were no saw-mills in the area, an adjacent woods or piece of timber would answer the purpose just as well. The millwrights would carry his axe over his shoulder, select his tree, fell it, cut it off the length required, have it hauled to the mill, where he would proceed to form it into a shaft; after which he would go to his machinist (the blacksmith) and have his gudgeons made. If there were no blacksmiths the millwright would become his own blacksmith. Square gudgeons for small shafts were mostly used in this time. These were driven into auger holes bored in the ends of the shaft and wedged and banded to hold tight. A wooden shaft would not be round, but six, eight or twelve-square, just as the conveyor shafts were made. Pulley, or a gear wheel of any other kind was procured in much the same way as the shaft made by the millwright. The pulley would be made solid of heavy plank or sandwiched layers made round. Then a huge mortise, the shape of the shaft, would be cut through the center of it, and large enough to slip very loosely on and allow for "hanging," which meant to fix it on the shaft, and driven from each side of the pulley alternately held in place with wedges. "Hanging" a pulley or gear wheel the millwright would give it a general "trueing" up all around, tighten up the keys a little, and then proceed to do it exactly. Not every may who pretended to be a mechanic was not entrusted to hang a wheel in a mill. Only the experts or best of the crew were given such important a task. It was no always an easy tasks for the most expert to hang a pulley or gear wheel exactly true, it required time and patience to place exactly.
Millwrights as a rule are fairly good mechanics perhaps better than today. One reason is that they went about to learn the trade when they were young as apprentice, and remained at it. Today very few people makes a good fair millwright. I've heard it said many times only of so-and-so were alive he would know how to do it right. Even the best millwrights generally required repeated efforts, a long time and a great deal of caution and patience to bring about the desired result. The milling and millwrighting business was quite different in the late 1800's. Then the millwright did not make his own shafts, he simply puts it up; nor does he make his gear wheels; they all are furnished from the foundry and machine shop ready to go up. The millwright bought is bears ready made and slips the wheels on the shaft, slipping it into place, and the job is finished. At one time everything made of wood was done by the millwright at the mill. The millwright built the water-wheel, he constructed the dam, millrace sluice box; made his pulleys, wheels and shafts. The shafts made of wood, as mentioned, but almost everything else was made of wood. Little iron was used, none used for any purpose that wood could be used as well. Leather belts were a rare luxury, very few being used for any real purpose in mills at the time. (20) Most secondary machinery was operated with wooden cog wheels or rope drive. The methods of mill construction in the late 1700's and early 1800's was different from mill the late 1800's. In the late 1700's a distinction may be made between different millwrights. Was he an "American millwright" separate from the Loyalist or English Millwrights, who learned millwrighting in America. (21) Often the English or European millwrights came to America only with the knowledge they acquired in Europe. If all they know was the construction of undershot water wheels they built undershot water wheels here even if there was a 40 fall available. In the end of the 18th century water wheel designs were influenced by scientific analysis and testing rather than following the traditional millwright craft precepts. (22) The first appearance of the concept of efficiency came from John Smeaton's experiments. (23) John Smeaton's mid-eighteenth century experiments were conducted with small scale models and well as the book written by John Banks in 1795 Treatise on Mills. In John Smeaton he believed that undershot type water wheels were the least efficient, while Oliver Evans emphasized that tub wheel had the lowest useful efficiency. (24) It was not until decade of 1830-40 did the Franklin Institute conduct experiments on water wheels to aid millwrights and water wheel builders. (25) Hungarian millwright constructed boat or floating mills on the rivers in Ohio. (26) Either a German millwright or English millwright, one they picked up a copy of "The Young Mill-Wright and Miller's Guide," and began installing the Oliver Evans system of automated milling in mills they became "American" millwrights. Later in the 1820's two Germans realizing the flood of finer-whiter-more constant American flour into the European market; would travel to America to gain access; learn the secrets of steam powered automated flour milling; steal the process and return the "American" system to Europe. (27) Their work and even the much later works like Friedrich Kick's "Flour Manufacture," published in 1888, Oliver Evans name became lost and it was only referred to as "American." Originally the roller system as it was developed in Europe and Hungary was like the traditional system of milling back breaking labor of physically moving material from each separate each stage, and not interconnected. It was not until much later when the integration between the roller system as it was originally developed and the true automated system of flour milling become one.
"The Young Mill-Wright & Miller's Guide by Oliver Evans was a useful to millwrights, and the growing professions of engineer both civil and mechanical. It advanced hydraulic engineering into a necessary industry or profession. It was the first practical text book that both the millwright and miller could practically use. The "Miller's Guide," declined the traditional technology only communicated by example and oral tradition. Until it was first published in 1795 it freed millwrights from the dependence upon the traditional practices, lore, misconceptions and errors learned in apprenticeship. At the time of its appearance all the American millers had for knowledge was the two centuries of moral certainty of mill building that came from the old country. (28) The "Miller's Guide," shows both Evans and Ellicott planning, designs of water mills from an engineering view. It reveals their preoccupation with medium to large scale merchant flour milling. A shift from small primitive mills to water milling and water power. (29) It became known as the millwright's bible, however, it did not deal with the capital outlay of constructing, maintenance, and repair of mills. I have always been one who believed in the saying: "there are mill (that have been restored) wrong, and mills (that have been restored) right." Originally in mill restoration the idea was to restore a mill to when it was first constructed. Later it became vogue to restore the mill to some other time period, some date in its operation or when it stopped being an operating mill. Why loose all of that machinery and history to interpret. It seems as I get older, I see more mill-wrongs than mill-rights. One example is a mill that I won't mention the location or its name. I first saw the mill some years ago, before it was restored. I have photos of both the inside and outside of the mill. Recently, I have also came across a good photo of the wooden water wheel outside of the mill. Inside of the mill there was four pairs of millstones, and outside a wooden water wheel. When the mill was restored: it had a wooden water wheel inside of the mill; two pairs of millstones; a different system of gearing, and several floors empty of machinery. The decision was made to install historical period gearing from another nearby mill that was of the same time period and same general area. This mill being restored had a different system of gearing and twice as many pairs of millstones. The remains of interesting machinery like: a hopper-boy, cleaners, sifters, elevators, walls of the miller's office had been busted up and removed. Wake up and smell the roses! Every mill is different is some way, I've heard it before, lets go look at other mills in the area and see what they are like. No two mill were ever constructed alike even by the same millwright, something is different, not two mill sites are even the same. Once you travel 20 to 30 miles from a mill a lot can change. You may be getting away from the supply of grain that may have been either canal or railroad, the seaport, the mills may be no longer merchant mills but smaller grist mills. Mills one constructed 4 to 5 stories of stones in 20 or 30 miles can become small local custom mills much cruder constructed of wood frame, that may be also carding wool and or saw mills constructed to met that areas needs. It maybe fine if the restoration agreement says it must be restored to multiple use, but we are not living in the land of make believe. The that have survived from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries must not be taken at face value as a typical of their time, since their crude counterparts have almost certainly disappeared from the scene in a short time. (30) The more suffocated mills also may have disappeared from the scene over the years. The basic problem with mills being: they are built in flood plans; the climate in some areas is hard on wood frame structures; mills tend to catch fire and blow up; they are changes from one owner-operator or as technology changed their appearance machinery and power source may have also changed drastically. Mills were commonplace and who bother to record or document the commonplace. It seems like we all need to take a hard look at what we are calling historical restoration and living history and perhaps rethink or redefine what we are doing.
The following is based upon page chart on page 17 of "Waterwheels in the Service of British Columbia's Pioneers," by Wallace L. Liddicoat Wallace Liddicoat, Keremeos, BC, 1996. A mill constructed in the late 1800's or into the 1900's would have a different list of trade categories connected with the mill. Some of these later trades or specialists workers would be: oilers, packers, roller men, sweepers, warehouse workers, mechanics, machinists, etc. Like the early mills were people just dressed millstones later some people only tended the roller mills or just maintained the screens on the sifters. The wheel or circle turns, the once "jack-of-all-trades," after a hundred years or so of change and change again, now may be the "jack-of-all-trades" once more. An early work that is available in an S.I.A. reprint is "The Panorama of Professions & Trades, or Every Man's Book," by Edward Hazen, 2 volumes, Uriah Hunt, Philadelphia, 1836.
1. See Chapter on the Millwright in Garber, D.W., Waterwheels and Millstones, A History of Ohio Gristmills and Milling, Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, 1971. Listed are books like Halliwell, W., Technics of Flour Milling, London, 1904, a handbook for millers and other books for millwrights. 2. page 204, "for the miller, like the blacksmith, was generally an independent spirit." They don't like to be told what to do. page 196, Volume 2, Watermills and Windmills, London, 1898, History of Corn Milling, by Richard Bennett and John Elton, 4 volumes, reprint Burt Franklin, New York, 1964, Research and Source Works Series #74. 3. In 1986 it took a NPS course entitled, "Our Colonial Experience," were we traveled to various colonial sites in Maryland and Virginia. One of the instructors at a Maryland site told us the story of an early Maryland settlement. It took some time to convince an intelligent person to come to the colonies like a millwright. Before he could assemble the materials and construct a mill he died. So they were forced to order a windmill from England, in the form of kit. It was built in England and all the parts were numbered, taken apart, stuffed into a ship and assembled here like a jigsaw puzzle. 4. Page 28, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 5. Ultra-Low Head Hydro, by Cameron MacLeod, paper, no date. Mr. MacLeod builds Francis and propelier type water turbines in Glenmore, Pennsylvania. 6. Page 29, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 7. page 14, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 8. Page 91-94, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 9. Mill-Wrighting, Bill of Rates for Mil-Wrighting Unanimously agreed upon by the Subscribers of this list, 8th day of August 1804. Gives costs in dollars and cents of about 65 kinds of mill--wrights good or task performed. "For making double geared Grist Mill with one pair of Stones, and a common Boulting Chest and Gears -$200......; For making open Bucket waterwheel per foot -$100.....; framing Forebays per hundred feet running measure $2.20.....; Putting up & hewing rabbit 1 dot. making halve & hanging hammer 1 do - #2.00...; Stock for Fulling Mill, under frame chair hammers, Jimmers and tapped arms included - $40...etc., etc., States also that "For a days work, where the work does not come within the descriptions in this bill, master workmen to have D1 50cents, and on every journeyman 25 cents exclusive of his wages...." Signed in type by 14 persons. [Broadside 7 1/2 X 12"] 10. Engines of Change, by S. Lubar, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 1986. 11. From pages 44-46 Virginia: A New Look at the Old Dominion, by Marshall W. Fishwick, Harper & Row, publishers, 1959. 12. Page 92, Chapter 2, The Millwright's Craft, pages 91-94, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 13. From Millwrights and Mill Supplies, pages 27-29, Grist and Flour Mills in Ontario From Millstones to Roller Mills, 1780's-1880's, by Felicity L Leung, Department of Canadian Heritage, Parks Canada, 1976, reprinted SPOOM 1997. 14. From the late Charlie Howell and Robert A. Howard. They were going to do a book titled, "Grist Mills, How It Works," similar to Bob's book, "Water Power, How it Works," published by the Hagley Museum. 15. pages 143-7, Volume 3, Feudal Laws and Customs, London, 1900, History of Corn Milling, by Richard Bennett and John Elton, 4 volumes, reprint Burt Franklin, New York, 1964, Research and Source Works Series #74. 16 . Page 458n, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 17. Page 292n, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 18. Hughes, William Carter, The American Miller and Millwright's Assistant, Detroit, Harsha and Hart, 1850. 19. The classic illustration from "The Young Millwright was intended by Evans not as a plan of any particular mill, but simply as a diagram showing at one view the combinations and process of his machines in what he regarded as an ideal mill." page 196, Volume 2, Watermills and Windmills,London, 1898, History of Corn Milling, by Richard Bennett and John Elton, 4 volumes, reprint Burt Franklin, New York, 1964, Research and Source Works Series #74. 20. Abernathey, R. James, Practical Hints On Mill Building, Moline, Ill, London: William Dunham, 1880. 21. From Millwrights and Mill Supplies, pages 27-29, Grist and Flour Mills in Ontario From Millstones to Roller Mills, 1780's-1880's, by Felicity L Leung, Department of Canadian Heritage, Parks Canada, 1976, reprinted SPOOM 1997. 22. Anon, Memoire sur les roues a augets et sur le moyenne de les perfectionner, no date but circa 1796, a scientific analysis of a 24 foot diameter mid-breast shot water wheel and a 32 foot diameter high-breast shot water wheel comparing the performance with a conventional overshot water wheel and giving calculations to prove the increased power and efficiency of water wheels done in the early 1780's. 23. Oliver Evans' Miller's Guide, Articles 67, 68, 59 includes excerpts from John Smeaton's report. 24 Chapter 2, The Traditional Technology, page 86, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 25. In his book Arthur Morin, Experiences sur les roues hydrauliques a aubes planes, et sur les roues hydrauliques a augets, Metz, Thiel, 1836, publishes results of the first experiments ever made on full-size working vertical water wheels, between 1828 and 1835. Nine water wheels were tested ranging in diameter from 2 meters to 9 meters, being undershot, breast shot wheels, and over shot. It is claimed that these ground breaking experiments on actual water wheels superseded all the studies before using small scale models because of the invention of the dynamometer by Prony in 1821. A dynamometer is an instrument used for measuring force or power. 26. Garber, D.W., Waterwheels and Millstones, A History of Ohio Gristmills and Milling, Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, 1971. 27. Ferguson, Eugene S., Oliver Evans, Inventive Genius of the American Industrial Revolution, Greenville, Delaware, Hagley Museum, 1980. 28. Pages 94-105, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 29. Page 102, Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. 30. Page 8, "In Small Things Forgotten, An Archaeology of Early American Life, by James Deetz, Anchor Books Doubleday, New York, 1977, revised and expanded edition 1996. Footnoted from page 110, "The Reshaping of Everyday Life 1790-1840," by Jack Larkin, Harper & Row, New York, 1988. 31. I have a friend who made it a goal to locate and buy every book listed in "For Further Reading," because Charlie Howell's book was the best book on milling they ever read, and so he thought he would have the best milling library one could ever assemble if he had all the books Charlie recommended. Perhaps he was right, one of the books listed, "Windmills and Millwrighting," by Stanley Freese, afterwards you would have enough knowledge to construct and operate a windmill. 32. This book is based upon "Colonial Watermills," an essay by Charles Howell, in "America's Wooden Age: Aspects of Its Early Technology," edited by Brooke Hindle, Sleepy Hollow Restorations, Tarrytown, New York, 1975. 33. Page 27, Leung, Felicity L., Grist and Flour Mills in Ontario: From Millstones to Rollers, 1780's-1880's, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage, Parks Canada, Ministry of Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa, 1976, reprint SPOOM, 1997, uses the term, "Much more the Mill Wright." Referring to an individual as being both a miller and millwright. 34. Page 245, Footnote #3, Some Problems Establishing Early Mills, Leung, Felicity L., Grist and Flour Mills in Ontario: From Millstones to Rollers, 1780's-1880's, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage, Parks Canada, Ministry of Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa, 1976, reprint SPOOM, 1997. 35. Page 330,Economic Role of English, Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups, Stephan Thernstorm, editor, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, 1980. 36 .Page 15, "Early Engineers- The ancient builder of mills was the first mechanical engineer on record. In time he was called the "millwright." The millwright even down to comparatively modern times was the only person capable of designing, building and placing machinery and planning buildings for its accommodations, not only in flour mills, but in factories or wherever machinery was employed." Chapter 1, Principles, History and Progress, Practical Milling, by B.W. Dedrick, National Miller, Chicago, 1924, reprinted SPOOM 1989. 37. Page 2, Introduction, The Originators, Scott, J.H., Development of Grain Milling Machines, Audio Typing Limited, Edinburgh, 1972, "Millers were craftsmen, usually with little technical training or scientific knowledge of the problems involved. Nevertheless the profound awareness and understanding by such craftsman let to intuitive insights and ingenious inventive ideas for novel process and machines which after much patient experimentation and modification operation with acceptable efficiency and proved commercially successful." 38. Page 14, "A journeyman miller is one who has served a thorough apprenticeship in a flour mill. An apprentice is often spoken of as a "cub miller," Chapter 1, Principles, History and Progress, Practical Milling, by B.W. Dedrick, National Miller, Chicago, 1924, reprinted SPOOM 1989. 39. Page 14, "In former times, with many mills of very small capacities, the miller was in most instances both owner and operative, or, to put it more correctly, master and miller. He might have an assistant or attendant, who was a miller or an apprentice or two. These worked under his orders or direction. He was not only owner or master of the mill but a journeyman miller as well. Hence he was in time called the "master miller," also the boss miller........the term miller has come to be applied in general to both the owner or master and his workmen, that is journeymen millers. But when it became necessary to make a distinction between the two it became the fashion to designate the millers, the men who actually grind and operate the mills as "operative" or "practical" millers in contradistinction to the master millers or owners of the mill." Chapter 1, Principles, History and Progress, Practical Milling, by B.W. Dedrick, National Miller, Chicago, 1924, reprinted SPOOM 1989.
Two interesting books for casual reading is Jean Gimpel, "The Medieval Machine, New York, 1976, in it he makes connections between economics incentives for creation or need for invention. And the "Cathedral, Forge & Waterwheel, Technology and Invention in the Middle Age," by Frances and Joseph Giles, Harper Collins, New York, 1994. It mentions that the Armenian horizontal water wheel was developed before the Greeks. However, it fails to make the connection with the Persian wind mills as a source of invention. It discusses that Romans failed to realize the potential of the water wheel because of mass slavery during the medieval millennium. Then the shift to wind, tidal and water powered mills. The peasants carried grain to the lord's mill. So the grist mill became a visitable symbol of the lord's wide oppression because of soke rights. Soke rights is well defined in Volume 3, Feudal Laws and Customs, London, 1900, History of Corn Milling, by Richard Bennett and John Elton, 4 volumes, reprint Burt Franklin, New York, 1964, Research and Source Works Series #74, reprinted in 4 volumes in the United Kingdon, by Simpkin Marshall, 1989. Abernathey, R. James, Practical Hints on Mill Building, R. James Abernathey, Moline, Illinois, 1880. Bathe, Greville and Dorothy Bathe, Oliver Evans, A Chronicle of Early American Engineering, Pennsylvania State Historical Society, 1935, reprint Arno Press, New York, 1972, and reprinted by Ayer Press, Salem, New Hampshire, 1984. An Engineer's Miscellany, by Bathe, Greville, Patterson & White Company, Philadelphia, 1938. Brown, R.C., The New Process Milling, or Practical Suggestions on the Reconstruction of Mills, S.L. Taylor, Elgin, Illinois, 1877. Cornell University 1879, A Course In Water Wheels Taken From Weisback's lehrbuch Der Ingenieu Und Washinenmechanik, written by hand in English and Published by The Senior Class in Civil Engineering, includes drawings. Craik, David, The Practical American Millwright and Miller, Henry Carey Baird, Philadelphia, 1871, 1882. Dedrick, B.W., Practical Milling, National Miller, Chicago, 1924, reprinted SPOOM 1989. Evans, Oliver, The Young Mill-Wright & Miller's Guide, first edition 1795 Philadelphia, Lea & Blanchard to 15th edition 1860 Henry Carey Baird, Philadelphia, reprint first edition - 1795 by University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan and Oliver Evans Press, Wallingford, Pennsylvania, 1990 (available from SPOOM above), reprint of 13th edition 1850 edition by Arno Press, New York, 1972, and reprinted by Ayer Press, Salem, New Hampshire, 1984. Freese, Stanley, Windmills and Millwrighting, A.S. Barnes & Co., Cranbury, New Jersey, 1972. Garber, D.W., Waterwheels and Millstones, A History of Ohio Gristmills and Milling, Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, 1971. Gray, Andrew, The Experienced Millwright, Archibald Constable, Edinburgh, 1804. Hughes, William C., The American Miller and Millwright's Assistant, Henry Carey Baird, Philadelphia, 1855. Hunter Louis C., A History of Industrial Power in the United States, 1780-1930, Volume One: Waterpower in the Century of the Steam Engine, Eleutherian Mills-Hagley Foundation, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1979. Kozmin, Peter A., Flour Milling, Van Nostrand, New York, 1920. Leung, Felicity L., Grist and Flour Mills in Ontario: From Millstones to Rollers, 1780's-1880's, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage, Parks Canada, Ministry of Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa, 1976, reprint SPOOM, 1997. Nicholson, John, The Operative Mechanic, Carey and Lea, Philadelphia, 2 volumes, 1826. Pallett, Henry, The Miller's Guide, Hanna and Phillips, Chester, Illinois, 1853, The Miller's, Millwright's & Engineer's Guide, 1867. Oliver, Charles E., The Milling Engineer & Miller, Illinois, 1913, enlarged 1919. Reynolds, Terry S, Stronger than Hundred Men, A History of the Vertical Water Wheel, John Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1983. Scott, J.H., Development of Grain Milling Machines, Audio Typing Limited, Edinburgh, 1972. Storck, John and Teague, Walter D., Flour for Man's Bread, University of Minneapolis Press, Minneapolis, 1952. Stoyel, Alan, Perfect Pitch: The Millwright's Goal, An aid in the interpretation and dating of the working parts of watermills and windmills, The Fourth Rex Wailes Memorial Lecture, Presented at the Art Workers Guild, London, 20th September 1995, Wind and Water Section SPAB, KS Press Limited, Sherborne, Dorset, no date. Vince, John, Mills and Millwrighting, Shire Album number 33, Shire Publications Limited, C.I. Thomas & Sons, Haverfordwest, 1978. Weiss, Harry B. and Sim, Robert J., The Early Grist and Flouring Mills of New Jersey, New Jersey Agriculture Society, Trenton, New Jersey, 1956.
Return to Home Page mailto:trhazen@hotmail.com
