 |
||
| ||
Regardless of what the underlying motivations were for the enactment
of the law of April 14, 1818, Hassler once again found himself without
a job as the result of actions of the Government. This blow was somewhat
softened by President Monroe offering him the position of the United States
surveyor of the Northeastern Boundary Line on April 21. Hassler accepted
and found himself commencing the survey of the 45th Parallel across northern
Vermont and New York to its junction with the St. Lawrence River.
During this survey he and the British surveyor, Dr. John Louis Tiarks,
ascertained that the 45th Parallel was located approximately a mile farther
south than previously believed, decreasing United States territory and
adding to British territory. For this, Hassler was accused of disloyalty
by a man named Clarke, who wrote to John Calhoun in 1821 that he suspected
that Hassler had been corrupted during the survey. John Quincy Adams, then
Secretary of State, informed Calhoun that he had heard this charge in 1819
but "found that it was mere unwarranted suspicion.... But Hassler, so far
from favoring the British side, had first started the claim of determining
the latitude geocentrically, with allowance for the difference between
the polar and equatorial diameters of the earth."(1)
The argument advanced by Hassler was that the "geocentric latitude"
(defined as the angle between the equatorial plane and the line from a
point on the Earth's surface to the center of the ellipsoid) was as valid
a method of defining the boundary as the "geographic latitude" (defined
as the angle between the equatorial plane and a line drawn through a point
on the Earth's surface normal to the ellipsoid.) The "geographic latitude"
was determined by astronomic means and differs little from what is today
called the "geodetic latitude". However, the difference between "geographic
latitude" and "geocentric latitude" amounts to approximately thirteen statute
miles at Latitude 45 degrees North. These thirteen miles were to the north
and favorable to the United States.
This argument threw the boundary negotiations into confusion, and it
was not until the Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842 that a final resolution
was made which was slightly more favorable to the United States than the
original survey based on "geographic latitude." Cajori says of Hassler's
role in the final determination: "Hassler's connection with the attempts
to determine the boundary with Canada offers a good illustration of the
value to the nation of a scientific man of high rank. It was Hassler who
secured for the United States the best instruments made by the most skillful
and renowned instrument makers of that time in the world. It was Hassler
who had a firm and comprehensive grasp of the new results of the scientific
measurement of the earth which enabled him to place at the disposal of
the American diplomats the two different definitions of latitude and their
practical bearing."(2)
Although Hassler had a huge impact on the final determination of the
boundary, his employment with the Boundary Commission came to an abrupt
halt after thirteen months on the job. He quit after a disagreement over
salary with the Boundary Commissioner, Cornelius P. Van Ness. Van Ness
stated that Hassler was terminated "because I would not comply with his
exorbitant demands for salary and expenses and because he could not be
indulged in all his whims."(3) Hassler responded
that "His manner of stating to me that I must submit to a reduction, from
what had been my nominal compensation in the coast survey &c. occasioned
me to say to him, that I did not care for the money part (a reduction
of $500), but for the manner, that the way he proposed it was such
as to deprive me of an honourable standing, to which I considered
myself authorised. He answered: 'That is just the aim of it.'"(4)
In late May 1819, Hassler once again found himself no longer employed by
the United States Government.
Following Hassler's resignation as surveyor for the Boundary Commission,
he wrote what could be considered the defining document for the Survey
of the Coast. All through his life, he seemed unable to anticipate attacks
upon his character and his work. But once attacked, he was able to defend
himself in a manner that left him in a stronger moral and political position.
He seized his right to freedom of speech following his leaving Government
service and used the press as a vehicle to advance himself, his beliefs,
and the Survey of the Coast.
The most influential document that he produced during his lifetime was
the first he produced after resigning from the Boundary Commission. On
March 3, 1820, he sent to the American Philosophical Society "Papers on
Various Subjects connected with the Survey of the Coast of the United States."
Encompassed within these papers were copies of historical documents dealing
with the origin of the Survey; detailed descriptions of the design, construction,
and operation of the principal instruments used on the Survey; a detailed
description of the establishment of standardized measuring bars for use
in measuring baselines; descriptions of field procedures in excruciating
detail; and, most importantly, Hassler's philosophy and vision of what
the Survey of the Coast should be. As the American Philosophical Society
was without funds at the time of the submission of the "Papers," they were
finally published in Transactions of the American Philosophical Society,
Volume 2, New Series, Philadelphia, 1825.(5)
This delay was probably for the best, as adequate time had passed to evaluate
the arguments of Chaplain Felch as compared to Hassler's methods and vision.
The "Papers," at first glance, is a somewhat rambling and occasionally
repetitive document. However, within its nearly 200 pages and 10 plates
are the seeds of four great national scientific institutions: 1) the Survey
of the Coast [many elements of today's National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration]; 2) the Office of Weights and Measures [today's National
Institute of Standards and Technology]; 3) a national astronomic observatory
[today's United States Naval Observatory]; and 4) a national topographic
mapping program [today's National Mapping Division of the United States
Geological Survey.]
In Hassler's vision, these institutions were meant to be part of an
integrated whole. In the section titled "Plan for putting into operation
the Survey of the Coast of the United States," Hassler's first sentence
was: "In my general plan of operation for the survey, I mentioned that
the establishment of two observatories would be necessary; and I thought
it proper to procure the instruments, destined for them, of such a quality
and size, as to be suitable for a permanent national institution." (6)
He did procure instruments for an observatory during his stay in England,
which because they were not authorized, contributed to his overspending.
He goes on to say: "These observatories form the fixed points, to which
the survey, and particularly the naval part of it, is referred .... To
procure the greatest advantage for the survey, their positions should be
as far north-east and south-west as the very favourable position of the
United States admits. The same location also affords the greatest scientific
advantages. Supposing one in the District of Maine and the other in Lower
Louisiana, nearly every celestial phenomenon observable from the tropic
to the arctic circle, and within about two hundred degrees of difference
of longitude, could be observed at one or other of them. The comparison
of their distance and position, as determined astronomically and geodesically,
would offer the most rigorous proof of the survey." In one of Hassler's
rare moments of considering the realities of politics, he suggests that
"...various considerations might occasion and favour the desire of placing
one of these observatories in the city of Washington, as observatories
are placed in the principal capitals of Europe, as a national object, a
scientific ornament, and a means of nourishing an interest for science
in general."(7)
Although the construction of an observatory did not come to fruition
under the Survey of the Coast, Hassler's next envisioned task was to construct
a great triangulation network. This network would serve to control all
of the nautical surveys conducted as well as all national land surveys.
The first step in conducting this work was the establishment of a standardized
measuring device which would be used for determining the lengths of baselines.
Hassler states: "It may be easily conceived that the most minute care is
required to determine the fundamental unit length of a bar or chain to
be used in the measurement of a base, from the standard unit of length
measure, and that the standard unit employed in it must be well authenticated."(8)
Hassler fortunately had access to an original iron meter "standarded by
Committee of Weights and Measures in 1799, which being of the same authenticity,
in all respects, with any of these measures in the possession of the respective
governments, and with the platina metre of Paris, places the accuracy of
my unit measure beyond all possible doubt."(9)
He used this meter as the basis for forming "bars of eight metres in length"
which he "considered as the longest that would be manageable in the actual
measurement of a base line."(10) In constructing
this bar, he displayed remarkable talents as a mechanical engineer, laboratory
physicist, metallurgist, and metrologist. But what Hassler wanted in the
realm of standards was not to merely duplicate the work of Europe. He wanted
to use his great chains of triangles not only as control for nautical and
land surveys, but "to make a number of determinations of the length of
degrees of longitude and latitude. From its extent and position, it would
have had particular interest, and might have served as the foundation of
a system of weights and measures for this country."(11)
The fourth great endeavor that Hassler envisioned was the establishment
of a national mapping organization. It was Hassler who introduced plane
table mapping for topography to the United States; a description of the
plane table and alidade and their use is included in the "Papers." Hassler's
belief concerning topographic mapping was that: "... all the data should
be collected, to enable the government to judge with propriety of the plan
of any public undertaking or service, such as roads, canals, means of defence
of the country, &c. That the survey of the coast was to contain all
these data, besides the mere outlines of the coast, and that they were
as necessary as the soundings outside of the line of the coast, appeared
to me too evident to admit of any doubt, and I would have considered the
full aim of the work missed without them."(12)
The twin themes of standards and accuracy permeate the "Papers." The
word "standard" is used as either noun or verb over 60 times in the sections
dealing with "A Catalogue of Instruments and Books..., Comparison of the
French and English Standard Measures of Length, and Regulation of the Bars
for the Base Line Apparatus....," and "Description of the Apparatus for
measuring Base Lines."(13) The word "accurate"
or its derivative forms have over 120 occurrences throughout the document.
These simple words, combined with the inherent integrity of Ferdinand Hassler,
were the foundation of the Survey of the Coast and of all of the scientific
agencies in the Government today that can trace their lineage to Hassler's
vision.
The establishment of standards, and in particular establishing beyond
a doubt that a correct standard of length had been determined as a basis
for the Survey of the Coast, was reflected in the description of the excruciating
pains that Hassler took in producing the meter bars for his base line measurement
apparatus. Although he relied primarily on the French iron meter for comparisons,
he also used a French brass meter, and an English brass scale approximately
82 inches in length for his work. As the true lengths of the various scales
were determined at different standard temperatures, this required that
Hassler determine accurate coefficients of expansion for brass and iron.
Once establishing these values, he then chose to standard all bars at 32
degrees Fahrenheit. He worked in the middle of winter and related that:
"To prevent the heat of my body from having any influence on the scale
and apparatus, a large sheet of paper was nailed to the work bench near
the microscopes, and I worked with gloves on.... No fire was kept in the
room while the comparisons were making; and for some time before, the windows
were left open day and night, to keep the different parts of the room in
an equal temperature, being that of the surrounding atmosphere."(14)
He took care to cut his measuring bars slightly longer than his standard
bars because he was cognizant "that all copies of metres tend to be shorter
than the original from which they are taken." This is because, that when
they are being filed or rubbed to bring then to the desired length, "they
acquire unavoidably a certain degree of heat occasioning an expansion which
does not subside fully, before the comparisons which direct the standarding
are finished."(15) When Hassler had completed
the manufacture of the measuring bars for his base line measurement apparatus,
he had produced the most advanced measuring instrument that the world had
yet seen.
Hassler addressed the concept of accuracy in the "Papers" with many
practical examples of means to eliminate or reduce error and thus increase
the accuracy of the final results of observation and measurement. But he
made a philosophical leap, and presupposed the pragmatism of Charles Sanders
Peirce, when he stated: "Absolute mathematical accuracy exists only in
the mind of man. All practical applications are mere approximations, more
or less successful. And when all has been done that science and art can
unite in practice, the supposition of some defects in the instruments will
always be prudent. It becomes therefore the duty of an observer to combine
and invent, upon theoretical principals, methods of systematical observations,
by which the influence of any error of his instruments may be neutralised,
either by direct means, or more generally by compensation."(16)
The observer must also counteract those errors "to which he himself is
liable in making his observations. Without such a method, and a regular
system in his observations, his mean results will be under the influence
of hazard, and may even be rendered useless by adding an observation, which
would repeat an error already included in another observation."(17)(18)
Two surprisingly modern concepts that Hassler addressed and their effect on accuracy is the effect of personal bias in the observation of physical phenomena and the effect of personal comfort upon the observer's results. In establishing his standards of length, his "method had the advantage of removing every prejudice from the mind of the observer in regard to the readings, in as much as the combination of the different measures and the different influence of
temperature occasioned a variation which completely precluded previous
estimates."(19) In the reading of verniers
associated with the observation of angles with his theodolite, Hassler
always set his micrometer at the 0 degree point in the middle of his field
of vision and relates: "I used them therefore always in this position,
in which they remained perfectly steady, and which gave besides a kind
of moral advantage, from the circumstance, that as the readings became
thus different in minutes and seconds for each microscope, the observer
remains entirely unprejudiced as to what he should read at each microscope,
and each reading becomes thereby equally independent and impartial."(20)
Regarding the modern science of ergonomics, Hassler noted: "... an inconvenient
position of the body must always prevent the accurate pointing of the instrument
and reading of the arcs. The ease and comfort of the observer are therefore
not luxuries, but are necessary to the accuracy of the observations."(21)
He makes further reference to the well-being of the observer in his description
of a day's survey work. After being set up and ready to begin observations
approximately an hour before dawn, the observer would go through a daily
regimen of observations on signals at first light followed by numerous
sun observations for azimuths, noon sighting for latitude, more sun observations
in the afternoon, and then, as the sun was sinking low on the horizon,
additional observations of the signals. Upon completion of these observations,
the observer would copy all the results of the day's work into a journal
and "examine and compare them, in order to see what degree of accuracy
has been obtained hitherto...."(22) By
this time it would be well past dark and the time most advantageous "to
observe circummeridian zenith distances of stars in the night, particularly
to the north, to compensate the influence of the instrument upon the observations
taken to the south with the sun..." Hassler regretted not being able to
accomplish this as he was "obliged to reserve his strength for the work
of the next day, as his observations would lose much of their accuracy,
if he should be overfatigued."(23)
FIELD PROCEDURES AND TECHNIQUES
The "Papers" was also a field manual offering cookbook procedures for attaining accurate results as well as providing common sense techniques for conducting a successful survey. Unfortunately, the description of techniques and procedures did not always follow a logical order and on occasion were repeated with slightly different wording. However, the overall effect is to provide the reader with a blueprint containing both sweeping philosophical concepts concerning a survey and a plethora of minute details explaining the operation of instruments and the proper conduct of a field survey.
Among the cookbook-style listings of the "Papers," Hassler details 13
steps in measuring a baseline (24), 6 steps
in observing horizontal angles to systematically remove error (25),
7 steps for reading vertical angles (26),
and 13 steps for the proper use of a hand-held reflecting circle (27).
Of the steps detailed for observing horizontal angles, Hassler stated,
"Experience has completely sanctioned this method of observing, by an accuracy
in the final results never obtained without it."(28)
As a result of his belief that the successful scientist and engineer fully understand the capabilities and limitations of his instrumentation, Hassler recommended that "An observer furnished with an instrument with which he has never observed should first ascertain its properties and defects from the mathematical principles on which it is constructed."(29) Hassler proceeded to do just that in his analysis of the two-foot diameter theodolite, and then offered advice on learning to observe with the repeating reflecting circle, an instrument of his design: "It is therefore necessary to proceed at first with measured and cautious steps, and to form a regular habit of an order easy in the manipulation, which, when it becomes habitual, will always proceed more surely and rapidly."(30) Although referring to specific instruments, the foregoing recommendation and advice are universal in their application.
Hassler displayed a wealth of field experience in relating such things
as placing an accurately determined mark every 100 to 200 meters along
a base line, such that in the event of accident, it might be possible for
the surveyor to recover the line without having to return to the beginning.
In a process that could take weeks to complete, this was certainly sound
advice. He recommended that in the event it was necessary to leave the
apparatus in the field overnight, that the surveyor either maintain a guard
or construct a fence about the apparatus for protection, "if it be in a
place where cattle pasture."(31) He obviously
had experienced a close encounter with a cow at some point in his career.
He admonished the surveyor to assure that the instrument stand is steady
and that "proper care has been taken as to the solidity of the stand, which,
in the field, must always be placed on three plugs reaching deep into the
ground."(32) Once the stand is secure,
he recommended that the base support for the instrument be circular as
although "a triangular support board [for the instrument] would be sufficient,
the circular one is much preferable, on account of the protection which
it affords to the instrument against accidental touches in passing around
it during the observation."(33) It is apparent
from such recommendations that Hassler had experienced a vast number of
adverse situations in the field, analyzed the cause, and determined a best
course of future action. Like many old surveyors, it is probable that he
had made every possible mistake once, but only once.
Hassler's attention to detail extended to the establishment of survey
marks which consisted of "truncated hollow cones of hard baked stoneware
open at top and bottom" with an inner diameter at the top of six inches,
a lower inner diameter of twelve inches, and a height of sixteen inches.
They were placed "at such a distance below the surface of the ground as
to be perfectly secured from accidents arising from ploughing, &c."(34)
This concern with security from accidents showed remarkable foresight in
an undeveloped nation, as a major problem for the national survey network
through the years has been the maintenance of established survey monuments
because of development, vandalism, and natural deterioration.
Once the marks were established, signals had to be erected over them
for observations from distant stations. Hassler had used spheres covered
with white linen for signals in Switzerland in 1798. He related that, "Their
diameters were from sixteen to twenty inches. They were very distinctly
visible with the telescope on my instrument, though only thirteen inches
in length, at a distance of fifty miles, and as far as ten miles with the
naked eye; but they did not answer equally well in the lower atmosphere
of the country near the seashore...." Hassler was "therefore induced to
use a kind of signal presenting a luminous point by reflection of the sun."
He "chose the form of a truncated cone, under such an angle as would be
the most favourable for the morning and evening illumination." He covered
these cones with tin as that was the "cheapest reflecting surface" which
he could choose.(35) Although this would
seem to be but a common sense application, it showed considerable thought
as he was the first to use reflected solar light for survey signals pre-dating
Karl Friedrich Gauss's invention of the heliotrope by about five years.
In the observation of these cones, "In distances of thirty to forty miles,
they presented a distinct luminous point, when the sun was in such a situation
as to reflect its rays directly to the observer.... It is evident that
the luminous point which was observed on the tin cone depended on the angle
which the sun subtended with the line from the observer to the signal,
and required of course a small reduction to the centre of the signal."(36)
As an example of the extent to which the "Papers" could be used as a
field manual, as well as a document providing a grand overview of how mapping
and science organizations could be integrated into a coherent unit in the
National Government, RADM Charles Wilkes, USN, wrote in his autobiography
of being attached to the hydrographic survey party of Captain Alexander
S. Wadsworth, USN, in 1832. Wilkes had studied under Hassler and was convinced
of the necessity to conduct accurate surveys following the methods advocated
by him. Wadsworth was not a technically oriented officer and "was little
acquainted with surveying, except after the old fashion, and was doubtful
of any other method. After much conversation I gave him a copy of Hassler's
work, which had been published in the Phill Transactions, saying that it
contained everything that was Required, and said I had studied with Profr
Hassler and flattered myself was well acquainted with it from beginning
to end, and pledged myself to carry it out successfully if permitted, and
if not, I desired to be detached at once.... [After] a few days reflection,
he admitted this was entirely new to him, but from the explanations I had
given him of the modus operandi and reading Hassler's paper, he was satisfied
it was the true course to pursue."(37)
(38)
COLONEL ROBERDEAU'S RESPONSE
TO THE "PAPERS"
The first public response to Hassler's "Papers" was that of Colonel
Isaac Roberdeau, of the Army Topographical Engineers. On December 9, 1826,
Roberdeau addressed the Columbian Institute of Washington, D.C., and followed
this with publication of his text in the Daily National Journal
on January 1, 1827.(39) Roberdeau stated
that "should the work be resumed, the execution of it may, as well as for
economy, as to ensure its success, be entrusted to the Topographical Engineers,
with the cooperation of the Navy." This suggestion is interesting in itself
because it seems to be the only occasion on which a spokesman for the Army
seriously entertained the concept of taking over the Survey of the Coast.
But it had many additional statements that Hassler construed as attacks
upon himself, and other statements that were probably well-meaning, but
politically naive in a democratic society.
Roberdeau added little technical knowledge to the debate on how to accomplish
the survey. For the sake of economy, Roberdeau suggested reverting to "chronometric
surveys" as the primary means of establishing control and dispensing with
a continuous triangulation of the coastal areas. In continuing the theme
of economy, he inserts into his address that the cost of procuring the
instruments in London was $17,601.61, while Hassler's salary and expenses
during the period he was in Europe amounted to $20,382.37, [these values
are correct although Hassler did not receive full payment until returning
to the United States] and then goes on to state that because of expenses
of the recent war, "...a disinclination to science, or to improvements
of this kind, naturally prevailed" and that "of all times to propose the
continuance of so expensive an undertaking,...this [1816-1818] was the
least propitious: but, from whatever causes, the project now appeared to
want sufficient patronage, the appropriation for defraying the future expenses
was withheld, and the operation ceased, if, indeed, it might properly be
said to have been begun, nor has it since been renewed."
Perhaps more onerously, Roberdeau suggests that civilians are unfit
to undertake such a survey because among other reasons, "...there would
be no concentration of command, or obligation to duty, other than arising
from personal motives; when the service led to places prejudicial to health,
or otherwise inconvenient, disagreeable, or hazardous, obedience might,
and probably would be refused...." Paradoxically, he argued that civilian
scientists should be part of the survey parties, but that command should
remain with military officers. To back this up, he provided the example
in the British Navy that, when Edmund Halley was placed in charge of a
scientific expedition in 1698, the crew mutinied. Roberdeau makes it clear
that he feels there would be a similar occurrence in the United States,
if military officers were placed under civilian control. As a final volley
at civilian management of such an enterprise and particularly at Hassler,
Roberdeau goes on: "That there exists here native talent abundantly sufficient
for the management of such an institution, is not to be doubted...."
Roberdeau woefully underestimated Hassler in presenting such views to
the public. Hassler immediately wrote to the National Journal. Reflecting
the partisan politics of the day and the role of the press in supporting
or suppressing causes of its choice, the National Journal refused
to publish Hassler's response. Hassler in turn provided the New York
American with a copy of his response which was printed. (40)
He responded eloquently to Roberdeau's "suggestions", defended his own
position and reputation well, and displayed his deep-seated belief and
faith in American democracy. Within his response, he duplicated a personal
letter dated December 3, 1825, from the recently deceased Thomas Jefferson
to add to his counterattack. In this letter Jefferson writes Hassler, "I
regret much that it [the Survey of the Coast] was not carried into execution,
as, independently of the permanent security it would have procured for
the navigation of our coast, it would have been an honorable monument of
the state of science at this early period of our history."
Roberdeau was wrong on many points of his address. He had done insufficient
homework to realize that the Survey of the Coast was under the control
of naval and military officers at that time, although no centralized organization
had evolved since 1818. On technical points he was no match for Hassler.
But beyond refuting factual errors, Hassler was most eloquent in attacking
Roberdeau's concept of military control of the survey, his suggestion that
civilians would prove self-serving and disobedient, and the xenophobia
apparent in Roberdeau's urging the employment of native talent.
Taking these points in order, Hassler has "now to notice that part of
the observations which urges the employ of none but military and naval
officers, on the ground that they would never obey civil directions.
I am reluctant to believe that this be a fair statement of the views and
character of our republican military. It is a principle of the constitution,
that the military shall be in subordination to the civil power.
The President of the United States, who can happily rarely obtain that
elevation by mere military character, is the constitutional commander of
the army, and can delegate this power, in the whole or in parts, as he
pleases.... No officer fit for the occupation would think of such a cavil,
in a work as the Coast Survey was: nor is there, in the obedience
to scientific directions, any thing that could derogate to the highest
military character."
Concerning Roberdeau's assertion that civilians by their very nature
would shirk duty and run from hardships, Hassler opens the door to both
civilian and military men taking part in the Survey when he asserts: "...that
blind, and even ignorant, obedience and strict discipline may suffice for
common military purposes, while in a scientific work only actual zeal and
scientific interest for the object in view, decide the fitness of the man:
ideas of private interest, false honor and pretensions, are, in their
nature, foreign and directly inimical to such a work, and do not even occur
to the man fit for it."
In finishing his response, Hassler strikes a note for all the immigrants
that had made and would in the future help make the United States a great
nation. He concludes:
"...I feel it my duty to refer to a fact in relation to national civilization
and improvements, as shown by the universal history of mankind. The nation
that shall exclude from itself the admission and use of foreign talents
and knowledge, must always remain behind in the paths of civilization,
and will appear comparatively barbarous, if not really become so. Sciences,
arts, and ideas for improvements, are the common property of all nations
-- their mutual ties -- and can not be successfully cultivated without
free intercourse, exchange, and intermixture.
"It is surprising to hear a contrary assertion promulgated in the United
States... --- in that country, that ought to be adduced as the most striking
instance of the truth of that principle. Every civilized nation ... has
contributed its share to that happy mixture of knowledge and ideas of improvement,
that has caused the character of this country to rise to so high a standing.
I do not hesitate to assert, that the continuance of this intermixture
is essential to its future progress, and, I may add, vitally important
to its existence as an independent nation."
Colonel Roberdeau had actually done Hassler a favor by giving him a
national forum. Hassler seized the opportunity and presented himself not
only as a man of science but also as a firm believer in the democratic
principles of his adopted country. By being published within a large metropolitan
newspaper, he attained a much wider readership than would have been possible
merely through the distribution of the Transactions of the American Philosophical
Society.
Hassler's "Papers" also received complimentary reviews from the European
scientific community which added to his prestige and the knowledge of his
work within the United States. Besides notices in the French scientific
press, the great German astronomer Friedrich Bessel, who was the first
to determine the distance to a star, published the salient points of the
"Papers" in Schumacher's Astronomische Nachrichten and ends with
the comment, "It is to be lamented that such a complete apparatus as that
now on hand in America has not been applied according to its intention
and by its author."(41) The Russian circumnavigator,
Admiral A. D. von Krusenstern, wrote from St. Petersburgh in 1831, "I regret
exceedingly that your talents and extensive knowledge in this branch have
not been taken advantage of in America. In Russia your talents would have
been better estimated."(42) This was true.
Zschokke relates that Hassler had been offered a large salary to accept
a position by the Russian Ambassador in Washington. Hassler replied: "In
money, Sir, I do not get paid here, but I shall accomplish an invaluable
labor for this American Republic that shall never perish. That, Count,
is better than money."(43)
The publicity associated with the "Papers" led to Secretary of the Navy,
Samuel Southard, issuing a report on April 14, 1828, on the state of charts
of the seacoast of the United States. In this report he condemns the existing
charts because: they are of small areas and detached from one another;
they only show inshore areas and do not extend far enough offshore to be
of value to a mariner approaching our shores; they were produced "by incompetent
men, with incompetent means"; there were no fixed principles in ascertaining
the latitude and longitude of fixed points; and they did not cover the
whole coast. Southard went on: "For these and other reasons, they are unsafe;
and, in many instances, useless and pernicious."(44)
Although momentum had certainly transferred to Hassler and his methods
with respect to the Survey of the Coast, it would still be a number of
years before he would be reinstated as Superintendent of the Survey.
Following Hassler's resignation from the Boundary Survey, his fortunes
took a decided turn for the worse for a number of years. As he had claimed
"no ambition, and the life of a farmer has more charms for me than any
other...."(45), he moved his family to
Cape Vincent, New York, on the banks of the St. Lawrence River. Like Voltaire's
Candide, he wished to retire from the world and "tend his own garden."
He bought 4,000 acres and proceeded to move his family through the wilderness
to the fine home and farm buildings which he was assured that he had purchased.
This was no exception to most of his business dealings, as his fine home
and buildings turned out to be log cabins of one room each. He then, according
to his daughter Rosalie, bought a second home three miles from his farmland
for $1,000. This seems to have been sight unseen as it consisted of one
large room with a fireplace at one end and an attic not high enough to
stand up in. She went on, "Then there was a shed which might have answered
the purpose of a kitchen, had they not forgotten that all important appendage
to a kitchen -- a chimney."(46)
Hassler was not one to be daunted by such difficulties and proceeded
to hire what skilled workmen existed in the area, had a kitchen installed,
and added an addition to his house which was as large as the original home.
As no house servants could be procured in this remote area, the Hassler
family began to do its household chores for probably the first time. As
Mrs. Hassler was not suited for such a life and the eldest daughter Caroline
began exhibiting symptoms of depression, the bulk of the housework fell
to twelve-year-old Rosalie whom Hassler proposed "should do the cooking,
little dreaming of the permanent injury I was doing myself, by doing the
work of a woman at that tender age." (47)
Given the history of American pioneer women, this complaint probably fell
on deaf ears.
However, the Hassler household could not have been happy during these
years. Caroline became suicidal and had to be watched continuously. Mrs.
Hassler engaged in odd behavior of disappearing for hours or days at a
time leaving the rest of the family in an uproar as to her fate. She would
return seeking assurances of the love and affection of Hassler and the
rest of the family.(48) In 1823, she packed
her bags, left Cape Vincent and proceeded to the home of friends in New
York. She and Hassler only saw each other on one occasion after this.
Probably beginning in the spring of 1822, Hassler began building a large
house on his farm that was never finished. It was very large and was called
the Swiss Castle by the local inhabitants. It was in a lovely location
as "from the second story window at the west end of the house is to be
seen Lake Ontario and the western extremity of the noble river, St. Lawrence,
which here unites its waters with those of Lake Ontario."(49)
As well as seeing to the construction of the house, Hassler saw also to
the operation of his farm. It appears to have been operating as late as
1830 and that he had Swiss tenants who produced dairy products.
Perhaps his tenants were able to operate the farm profitably, but Hassler
was not. He left the farm for a teaching position at Jamaica (near Brooklyn),
New York, in 1824. He never returned to his farm as a permanent abode.
His son Scipio remained behind on the farm and lived for some years as
a recluse in the "Swiss Castle." He taught at Union Hall Academy, a private
school. This job ceased to exist upon the death of the proprietor, and
on October 4, 1826, Hassler wrote his old friend John Vaughan, "...the
total sum of my last six month's earnings is $23, and for the four month's
previous work for the Morris Canal I am neither paid nor likely to be so
soon. So I am at leisure to write books, but really I think it would be
an improvement even for these even if I was ... somewhat relieved from
the anxiety of securing the most urgent wants of my family." (50)
This was the nadir of Hassler's life. Wifeless, penniless, jobless,
he was reduced at 55 years of age to selling what family treasures remained
in his possession, even "his father's gold snuff-box, for which he felt
an attachment also was sold which caused him much sorrow."(51)
However, forces were in motion that would lead to a reversal of his fortunes
within the next few years. Roberdeau's address to the Columbian Institute
just two months later marked the turning point for both Hassler and the
Survey of the Coast. Also, because of his textbook writing, he developed
a strong relationship with Professor James Renwick of Columbia University
and Lieutenant Charles Wilkes, USN, that would help him through the next
few years.
As much of what Hassler wrote was in French, Renwick translated his
texts; for what Hassler wrote in English, Renwick revised, corrected, and
improved the language to make it palatable to American and English audiences.
Professor Renwick was also a spokesman for Hassler and his methods as related
to the Survey of the Coast as he translated Friedrich Bessel's response
to the "Papers" and published them in Silliman's Journal in 1829
and the New York American with the added comment, "The suspension
of the operations for the Survey of the Coast of the United States, begun
in so admirable a manner by Mr. Hassler, may be considered as a national
misfortune. It is such in truth; not so much from the loss of the previous
expenditures, in consequence of the delay, or from the deferring of its
advantages to a future period, as from the fact, that the principles and
methods proposed, and some of them actually used, by Mr. Hassler, were
in advance of the science of Europe at the period. As these principles
and methods require the highest proficiency in mathematical and physical
science, their application to practice originally in the United States,
would have redounded to the national honor."
Charles Wilkes was courting Renwick's sister Jane and married her in
1826. Because Wilkes was an avid student of mathematics and the sciences,
he engaged Hassler to tutor him in mathematics, geodesy, and other physical
sciences. Hassler's tutoring of Wilkes seems to have occurred on a sporadic
basis between 1825 and 1828. Wilkes, whose career as a Union Naval Officer
was to include heading the United States Exploring Expedition (1838-1842)
and later almost single-handedly bringing Great Britain into the American
Civil War on the side of the Confederacy, was possessed of a brilliant
mind coupled with many of the same personality characteristics of Hassler's.
(52) Both lived by precepts that dictated
absolute integrity. As a consequence, or perhaps in spite of, they forged
an enduring friendship that lasted until Hassler's death. Wilkes relates
that, "Being a pupil of his on and off for about three years, I had a great
trial of patience when I found him in one of his stolid bad humours, yet
I esteemed him highly. To go counter to his opinions and teachings required
some courage. He was often like a wayward child; nothing would please him
and the only way I had to do was to feign myself in a passion and retort
upon him, which usually brought him to himself -- but I bore much before
I discovered this mode of treating his temper."(53)
But, as opposed to the boys of Union College who were not concerned with
their studies, Wilkes viewed Hassler's capabilities as a teacher "not to
be surpassed and any amount of explanation he was ever Ready to give."(54)
Hassler held a variety of jobs up until 1830 in addition to his textbook writing and tutoring. He accepted a job as an instructor of elementary mathematics and French at Burke's Seminary in Richmond, Virginia, from February 1828, until early 1829. At some time in the late 1820's he was appointed city Surveyor of Brooklyn, New York. Because he was an excellent surveyor and would not acquiesce to political pressures, Wilkes relates that "... he did not keep the Situation long. They complained that he was too accurate and refused to cut down streets where the benefit was not equally assessed and some parties injured. He was fixed in his determination to do justice and those who had urged improvements for their own benefit opposed him and succeeded in having him removed."(55) He also wrote a book of tables of logarithms which ended up being well received because of its accuracy and ease of use. Finally in late summer 1829, he was appointed gauger in the New York Custom House. This steady income allowed him to again have his remaining children under one roof. From Rosalie we learn that because of the poor condition of their furniture after "innumerable moves and having given away some, sold others.... we felt quite happy and did not trouble ourselves about the looks of our old fashioned furniture, but some of our old acquaintances did and only made us one visit -- we no more lived in style -- that was enough cause to cut our acquaintance. We had become poor and they had become rich; so we bid each other goodby."(56)
1. Adams, C.F. 1875. Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, Vol. IV. p. 457, 458. Philadelphia. In: Cajori. 1929. p. 97.
3. Van Ness, C.P. 1828. New York Evening Post. January 3, 1828. In: Cajori. 1929. p. 102.
4. Norris. 1882. p. 71. In: Cajori. 1929. p.102.
5. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers on Various Subjects connected with the Survey of the Coast of the United States". In: Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 2, New Series, Philadelphia. All references to will be referred to as: Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers...."
6. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 241.
7. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 241-242.
8. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 273, 274.
9. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 252.
10. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 274.
11. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 400.
12. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 395.
13. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 246-250, 250-273, 273-286.
14. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 259-260.
15. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 268-269.
16. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 390.
17. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 295.
18. Scientific investigators had been struggling
with the concept that observations were imperfect and subject to both instrumental
and observational error for many years. Carl Friedrich Gauss was the first
to develop a means to place bounds on a portion of this error with his
celebrated mathematical technique of "least squares." He developed this
technique as a youth in 1795, apparently just prior to his entrance at
Gottingen. He did not publish the method at that time, and it remained
to the French mathematician Adrien-Marie Legendre and the American Robert
Adrain to develop and publish the concept independently in the early Nineteenth
Century. Legendre published in 1805 while Adrain arrived independently
at the concept of least squares adjustment of error in 1808. Hassler had
been a student at Gottingen although it is unclear if he was there at the
same time as Gauss. Regardless he maintained a lifelong friendship with
Gauss and corresponded frequently with him. (Dunnington, G.W. 1955. Carl
Friedrich Gauss Titan of Science. p. 286. Hafner Publishing Co., New York.)
It is probable that Hassler also knew Robert Adrain, who published a mathematical
journal in Philadelphia, as Robert Patterson was a mutual friend of both.
In fact, Robert Patterson had posed the following question in Adrain's
journal, The Analyst, which led directly to Adrain formulating the "Law
of Probability of Error of Observation:"
"In order to find the content of a piece of ground ... I measured with
a common circumferentor and chain the bearings and lengths of its several
sides, ... but upon casting up the difference of the latitude and departure,
I discovered ... that some error had been contracted in taking the dimensions.
Now, it is required to compute the area of this inclosure on the most
probable supposition of this error."
Nathaniel Bowditch was the first to arrive at a solution and Adrain
awarded him a $10 prize. But Adrain built on that solution to formulate
a solution to the more difficult general problem. His paper was entitled
"Research concerning the probabilities of the errors which happen in making
observations." (Cajori, F. 1890. The Teaching and History of Mathematics
in the United States. p. 66-69. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education,
Circular of Information No. 3, 1890. Washington, D. C.) It is almost certain
that Hassler would have had to be familiar with the work of Gauss and Adrain
when he made the statement "Absolute mathematical accuracy exists only
in the mind of man...."
Another source of error which Hassler did not address was that of the "personal equation." Hassler, at the time of writing of the "Papers....," was probably not aware of this concept. There is a full discussion of "personal equation" as applied to the the development of the "American Method" of longitude observation by the Coast Survey in the mid-1840's in Chapter _____??????
19. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 260.
20. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 290.
21. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 400.
22. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 398.
23. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 399.
24. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p.285-286.
25. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 302-303.
26. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 338-339.
27. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 345-347.
28. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 304.
29. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 294.
30. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 345.
31. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 286.
32. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 325.
33. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 288.
34. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 311.
35. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 309-310.
36. Hassler, F. R. 1825. "Papers....", p. 311-312.
37. Wilkes, C. 1978. Autobiography of Rear Admiral Charles Wilkes, U.S. Navy 1797-1877. p.288-290. Edited by Morgan, W. J., Tyler, D.B., Leonhart, J. L., and Loughlin, M.F. Naval History Division, Department of the Navy, Washington. Hereafter, this document will be referred to as: "Wilkes, C. 1978."
38. Alexander S. Wadsworth, Jr., became an assistant on the Coast Survey and served from 1850 until 1862. He died as the result of an apparent attack of cholera in Washington, D.C. in August, 1862.
39. Hassler, F. R. 1834. Principal Documents...., p. 37-46.
40. Hassler, F. R. 1834. Principal Documents...., p. 46-54.
41. Hassler, F. R. 1834. Principal Documents...., p. 60-67. This was a translation of a review by F. W. Bessel that appeared in: 1827. Schumacher's Astronomische Nachrichten, Vol. 5. p. 396, Altona. Hassler's friend, Professor James Renwick of Columbia College, translated this article and published it in: 1829. Silliman's Journal, The American Journal of Science and Arts, Vol. 16. p. 225-234. New Haven.
42. Hassler, F. R. 1834. Principal Documents.... p. 67-68.
43. Norris. 1882. p. 521-525. In: Cajori. 1929. p. 130.
44. Hassler, F. R. 1843. Remarks upon the survey of the coast of the United States. In: Report of Committees, 27th Congress, 3d Session, Report No. 43, House of Representatives. January 12, 1843. p. 31.
45. Hassler, F. R. 1834. Principal Documents.... p. 4.
46. Norris, Rosalie Laetitia Hassler. 1882. Recollections of Rosalie Laetitia Hassler Norris. In: Cajori, p. 133. This unpublished document recalls Rosalie's growing up in the Hassler household and apparently provided Cajori with much insight regarding the personal life of Ferdinand Hassler. Cajori reported that the original manuscript resides in the Simon Newcomb Papers that are deposited in the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. He used a copy of this manuscript that he obtained from Dr. Anita Newcomb McGee in preparation of The Chequered Career of Ferdinand Rudolph Hassler. This document will hereafter be referred to as Norris, R. L. H. 1882. Recollections ....
47. Norris, R. L. H. 1882. Recollections.... In: Cajori. 1929. p.134.
48. Charles Wilkes in his autobiography (p. 221) related the following incident: "Her excentricities seemed almost like derangement. She would absent herself for days, and having created the Greatest consternation, would come back in the best of Spirits and Make all up. An anecdote of these excentricities I have from good authority. On one very cold day she was missing, while they were living on the farm. It was freezing cold. All they knew - she had gone out, and on her detention, the family & Mr. Hassler became greatly alarmed. They went every where in search for her. Hours passed. Mr. H. walked up and down his rooms, wringing his hands and weeping. After some fifteen hours, she was found in the hay loft where she had hid herself to experiment on the love and affection of her family."
49. Norris, R. L. H. 1882. Recollections.... In: Cajori. 1929. p. 134.
50. Letter from Hassler to John Vaughn in the Archives of the American Philosophical Society, MS. Communications on Philol., Lit., Antiq., Geogr., etc. Vol 2, No. 181. In: Cajori. 1929. p. 140.
51. Norris, R. L. H. 1882. Recollections.... In: Cajori. 1929. p. 140.
52. Wilkes headed the United States Exploring Expedition, 1838-1842. During this expedition he is credited with the discovery of 1500 miles of Antarctic coastline. The American public and politicians barely noticed his return except for the acrimonious accusations that he was cruel and used excessive violence in enforcing discipline. Wilkes was commanding officer of the USS SAN JACINTO on November 9, 1861 when he stopped the British ship TRENT and seized two Confederate diplomats who were on their way to England. This action made him a hero in many Northerners eyes but almost led to Great Britain entering the war on the side of the Confederacy. Wilkes was retired from the Navy following this incident.
56. Norris, R. L. H. 1882. Recollections.... In: Cajori. 1929. p. 151.
| Last modified: Fri, 30-Nov-2007 16:35 EST | Library.Reference@noaa.gov | ||
|
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
USA.gov - The U.S. Government's Web Portal
|
|||