Chapter IX: Part 9

“In the summer of 1851,” he writes, “a unique little pony
phaeton was built by Mr. Andrews, of Southampton, for the
Queen. The original announcement stated that when the carriage
was delivered in front of the palace in the Isle of Wight,
‘the Queen and Prince expressed to Mr. Andrews their entire
satisfaction with the style, elegance, and extraordinary
lightness and construction of the carriage,’ which scarcely
weighed three hundredweight. The height of the fore wheels
is only eighteen inches, and of the hind ones thirty inches.
The phaeton is cane-bodied, of George IV style, with movable
head; the fore part is iron, but very light and elegant and
beautifully painted. This carriage is known as the victoria,
and has since been much improved in England and America.”

Mr. Stratton is probably right; but it was the French-built carriage which the then Prince of Wales brought to England in 1869 to which the name may be more correctly ascribed. It is to be noticed, however, that the pony phaeton and the victoria proper differ from one another only in size and in the presence or absence of a driver’s seat. The Prince of Wales’s carriage was curved in shape and hooded, but about the same time Baron Rothschild imported a victoria from Vienna of the square shape. Both forms persist. At first, of course, the victoria was looked on with suspicion, but the Princess of Wales speedily showed her liking for it—it did indeed make an ideal lady’s carriage—and in a short while the world followed suit. “Light, low, easy, fit for one horse, and looking very well behind a pair of cobs,” remarks Thrupp, “it is not surprising that the victoria meets with so much patronage.” At first it would seem that the hood was not made to lie flat, a fact amongst others which prompted a caustic critic in 1877 to grumble at the conservatism of English manufacturers. “Even with so good a model of this carriage as that presented to them in the victoria,” he wrote, “the English builders do not see fit to maintain the same lines, and for some inscrutable reason deem that the hood when down should rest at an angle; whereas the ‘cachet’ of the Parisian equipages lies in the absolute straight line it maintains with the horizon.” Only a few years later, however, another critic was drawing attention to the superiority of the English victoria over its French counterpart. “Their rattle,” he wrote of the latter, “is enough to distinguish them. The French victoria is a low-mounted and decidedly unsymmetrical machine. The pole [is] a foot longer than it should be, the splinter bar and fore carriage too low”—a criticism which holds good to-day with most of the Italian carriages of this type.

Varieties of the victoria were constructed almost as soon as the carriage had reached to any degree of popularity. A hinge-seat was fitted into the front boot to face the ordinary seat, and this not proving enough, a permanent seat for two was built in its place, this innovation giving rise to the double victoria, which was built with or without doors. I need not, perhaps, dwell further on the victoria, except to observe that such changes as took place in the landau also took place in its more delicate rival.

Another open carriage which remained popular until the introduction of automobiles is the phaeton. Sir Walter Gilbey mentions several varieties. Of these the largest seems to have been the mail phaeton.

“It was a favourite carriage,” he writes, “seventy years ago
or more, and was frequently used by gentlemen for long posting
journeys in England and on the Continent. In these days this
carriage was always built with a perch, the undercarriage
resembling that of a coach, whence its name. For a time
elliptical springs were adopted, but during the last ten
years the fashionable mail phaeton has been a solid-looking
square-bodied vehicle on its old undercarriage.”

In 1889, he also observes that a jointed perch was used, the object being “to prevent the vehicle being twisted on bad roads, and also to preserve its equilibrium under trying conditions of roads.” The _demi mail phaeton_, to which Sir Walter gives the credit of having ousted the ugly _perch high phaeton_ from public favour, “derives its names from the peculiar arrangement of the springs in the construction of the undercarriage.” Another variety, the _Beaufort phaeton_, is large enough to carry six people, and was, in the first place, expressly designed to carry people to the meet. Yet another modification, the _Stanhope phaeton_, invented by the peer of that name, is smaller than the last-mentioned, and has achieved a world-wide popularity. “The head and apron render it suitable for winter work, and when the hood is thrown back the stanhope is an admirable vehicle for summer use whether in town or country.” The _T-cart_ is a smaller _stanhope_ “with compassed rail and sticked body in front and a seat for the groom behind.” Sir Walter records the fact that its greatest popularity was about 1888, after which it was supplanted by the _spider phaeton_—a “tilbury body on four wheels with a small seat for the groom supported on branched irons behind.”

It would be possible to mention half a dozen other varieties of the phaeton,[59] but such a list is best relegated to a coachbuilder’s catalogue. There is only one innovation which should not be allowed to pass unnoticed here. Many of the phaeton bodies during the ’sixties were constructed of basket-work; indeed, Croydon, where lived the inventor, received all the benefits which a new industry brings in its trail, but the popularity of these basket-carriages waned as rapidly as it had waxed—due, according to one writer, to the ridicule heaped upon them by _Punch_. A revival was attempted in 1886, and “we have a reminiscence of it in the imitation cane-work painted on the panels of many carriages” at a still later date.[60]

We come to the closed carriages.

The _brougham_ was undergoing about as many changes and improvements as fell to the lot of any other carriage, yet superficially it maintained much the same appearance. The coupé brougham so popular to-day is the relic of the old chariot.[61] Of its several varieties the best-known is, or rather was—for it is rarely, if ever, seen now—the _clarence_. “It was introduced,” says Sir Walter, “about the year 1842 by Messrs. Laurie and Marner, of Oxford Street, and has fairly been described as “midway between a brougham and a coach.” It had very curved and rather fanciful lines, seated four persons inside, and was entered by one step from the ground, carried the coachman and footman on a low driving seat, and was used with a lighter pair of horses than the family coach.” Certain models, however, show the driver’s seat to have been high, on a level, that is to say, with the roof; and not long after the first clarence was designed, Lytton Bulwer caused to be built what was called a _Surrey clarence_, which possessed a hammercloth. The attempt, however, to produce a miniature chariot did not succeed. Another variety, named uncomfortably the _dioropha_, was shown at the Great Exhibition of 1851.[62] Here the side windows would slide up and down upon a new principle, and “the whole upper part of the body from the elbow-line could be lifted from the lower, leaving a barouche body.” You were shown models of this upper portion hanging rather forlornly from the roof of a coach-house. But improvements in the landau caused the extinction of the _dioropha_, which does not seem to have been built after 1875. The _amempton_, invented by a Mr. Kesterton, was a smaller form of this carriage. The one-horse “growler” or “four-wheeler,” by the way, which still wanders up and down the streets of London, is the lineal descendant of the _clarence_.

Of the more unconventional four-wheeled carriages, the waggonette seems to have been introduced about 1845 by the Prince Consort after a German model, though one writer gives the credit of the design to the Prince himself. Here, as every one knows, the seats faced each other at right-angles to the driver’s seat, the door being at the back. At first they were built very large—to carry out the original intention of providing a _family_ carriage which should really be worthy of the name. Afterwards smaller models were produced, and proved equally popular. “The principle of riding sideways,” remarks Thrupp, “was not new. The Irish car, the four-wheeled Inside car of the Westmorland district, the old Break, and the Omnibus all contributed to the design of the modern vehicle.” A few particular varieties may be mentioned. The now forgotten _perithron_, a Suffolk invention, was a waggonette in which the driving seat was bisected down its centre, so as to allow a passenger entering from the back to reach the front seat. The _Portland waggonette_, built for the Duke of Portland in 1893, was a large carriage with a folding hood. Another carriage of the kind with a folding leather hood was presented by Lord Lonsdale to the King and Queen at the time of their wedding. This is known as a _Lonsdale waggonette_. “Lord Lonsdale,” remarks Sir Walter Gilbey, “allowed his name to be given to this device under the impression that he was the first to originate a head of this description; but his claim for invention of it was disputed at the time. Mr. Robertson stated that he had built such a waggonette so far back as 1864; Mr. Kinder had built one in 1865; and Messrs. Morgan stated that they had turned out a similar vehicle before the year 1870.” A very large waggonette, the _brake_, is a common enough object to-day, and is built in various forms. Sometimes a second seat is placed directly behind and parallel to the driver’s seat. In some models these seats stretch back throughout the length of the carriage, in which case it is a _char-à-banc_. Awnings, permanent or temporary, are generally provided.

In America the commonest four-wheeled carriage is the light _wagon_ or _buggy_, a name given in England to a light two-wheeled, single-seated cart (also called a sulky[63]) towards the end of the eighteenth century. The _buggy_ has one seat fixed on to a long, shallow tray; the _wagon_ is similar, but has two or more seats.

“These American waggons,” says Thrupp, “were modelled from the
old German waggon, but they have been so much improved as to
be scarcely recognised. The distinctive feature of the German
waggon was a light, shallow tray, suspended above a slight
perch carriage on two grasshopper springs placed horizontally
and parallel with and above the front and hind axle-tree; on
the tray one or two seats were placed, the whole was light and
inexpensive, and well adapted to a new, rough country without
good roads. These waggons may still be found in Germany and
Switzerland....

“American ingenuity was lavished upon these waggons, and they
have arrived at a marvel of perfection in lightness. The two
grasshopper springs have been replaced with two elliptical
springs. The perch, axle-trees, and carriage timbers have been
reduced to thin sticks. The four wheels are made so slender
as to resemble a spider’s web; in their construction of the
wheels the principle of the patent rim used in England in 1790
has been adopted. Instead of five, six, or seven felloes to
each wheel, there are only two, of oak or hickory wood, bent
to the shape by steam. The ironwork of the American buggy is
very slender, yet composed of many pieces, and, in order to
reduce the cost, these pieces of iron are mostly cast, not
forged, of a sort of iron less brittle than our cast iron....
The weight of the whole waggon is so small that one man can
lift it upon its wheels again if accidentally upset, and
two persons of ordinary strength can raise it easily from
the ground. The four wheels are nearly of the same height,
and the body is suspended centrally between them. There are
no futchels; the pole or shafts are attached to the front
axle-tree bed, and the front of the pole is carried by the
horses just as they carry the shafts; the splinter-bar and
whipple-trees are attached to the pole on swivels. Some are
made without hoods and some with hoods. These are made so
that the leather of the sides can be taken off and rolled up,
and the back leather removed, rolled, or fixed at the bottom,
a few inches away from the back, the roof remaining as a
sunshade....

“The perfection to which the American buggy or waggon has
been carried, and every part likely to give way carefully
strengthened, is marvellous. Those made by the best builders
will last a long time without repair. The whole is so slender
and elastic that it ‘gives’—to use a trade term—and recovers
itself at any obstacle. The defect in English eyes of these
carriages consists in the difficulty of getting in or out by
reason of the height of the front wheel, and its proximity to
the hind wheel—it is often necessary partly to lock round
the wheel to allow of easy entrance. There is also a tremulous
motion on a hard road which is not always agreeable. It is
not surprising that, with the great advantages of extreme
lightness, ease, and durability, and with lofty wheels, the
American waggons travel with facility over very rough roads,
and there is a great demand for them in our colonies. It must
be remembered that the price is small, less than the price of
our gigs and four-wheeled dog-carts.”

_Both from Studebaker’s (Chicago) Catalogue_]

Indeed, the tourist in America will come away with the impression that there is hardly a family in the continent which does not possess at least one buggy or waggon. They can be driven, too, at a very great pace. In this connection it is interesting to notice that it was a buggy which Lord Lonsdale selected in order to carry out his great driving feat in 1891, when “he undertook to drive four stages of five miles within an hour, using for the first three stages one, a pair, a team, and riding postilion in the fourth.”

There are, of course, many varieties, several invented after Thrupp wrote the above account. Of these some are peculiar to a particular State, while others seem to be in general use throughout the continent. In Chicago, for instance, and other towns of the middle west, the commonest buggy seems to be the _bike wagon_, of which a variety is the _cut-under bike wagon_, where the tray is double—the seat forming a bridge between its two parts.

Stanhopes and phaetons are also manufactured in America, though on a much lighter scale than in England. Another popular American carriage is the _surrey_, which has the two-seated arrangements of the larger waggons, but is without the tray. The _station wagon_, very popular in New England, resembles the old English chariot, and differs from it only in its driving seat, which is on a level with the inside seat and directly against the front lines of the carriage-body. This is one of the most comfortable carriages in the country. The _buckboard_, even slenderer than the buggy, is hardly more than the skeleton of a carriage, but seems none the less popular on that account. The _barge_ is the name given in Massachusetts to a two-seated waggon, and the word has a curious origin. It seems probable that it is a relic of the days when in that part of the country the boat sleighs used in the winter were put upon wheels in the summer. At a later date ordinary waggons were used for summer traffic, but the old name stuck. And I dare say there are a dozen or more local names of some peculiarity in other parts of America which to-day are given to carriages not in the least like those to which the name was originally applied.

Coming to the two-wheeled carriages, we find similar changes to those described above showing themselves. The old curricle, for instance, is now but rarely seen, its place being taken by one or other of the dog-carts. What was probably the most fashionable of these carriages during the early Victorian era is now practically extinct. This was the _cabriolet_, rather different in appearance from the vehicles of that name which had plied for hire but a few years before, yet built on the same principles as the earliest French gigs.

“They were greatly improved,” wrote Mr. G. N. Hooper in
1899,[64] “about fifty years ago by the well-known Count
D’Orsay and the late Mr. Charles B. Courtney, who greatly
refined the outlines and proportions, making them lighter,
more compact, and far more stylish. They became _par
excellence_ the equipage of the _jeune noblesse_, and no more
stylish two-wheel carriages for one horse were driven for many
years while they were fashionable. A large, well-bred horse
was a necessity, and this the cabriolet generally had.

“The groom, or ‘tiger’ as he was then called, was a special
London product: he was produced in no other city, British or
foreign; all the genuine tigers hailed from London. His age
varied from fifteen to twenty-five. Few there were that were
not perfect masters of their horses, were they never so big.
In shape and make he was a man in miniature, his proportions
perfect, his figure erect and somewhat defiant: his coat
fitted as if it had been moulded on him; his white buckskin
breeches were spotless; his top-boots perfection; his hat,
with its narrow binding of gold or silver lace, and brims
looped up with gold or silver cord, brilliant with brushing,
was worn jauntily. As he stood at his horse’s head, ready to
receive his noble master, you might expect him to say, ‘My
master is a duke, and I am responsible for his safety.’”

There is little enough to say of the gigs. The curricle, as I have said, is now rarely seen, though Sir Walter Gilbey mentions a particular one introduced about 1883 “which differed materially from the vehicle formerly known by that name. It consisted of a cabriolet, or whisky body, having an ‘ogee’ or chair back, the body being suspended by braces from C or S springs upon the undercarriage. Its peculiarity lay in the use of long lancewood shafts, set so far apart that the pole could be placed between them; the saddle-bar being used to support the pole, the shafts, it would seem, were somewhat unnecessary.” The _Cape cart_ brought into England from South Africa is a two-wheeled vehicle of this class with a pole in place of shafts, and “the sides being framed so as to present three panels.”

“At the back,” says Sir Walter, “was built in a large box
for provisions, the full width and depth of the cart, the
back seat forming the lid; the tail-board was used only as
a foot-rest. An adjustable centre seat with backrest could
be used so as to provide accommodation for six passengers. A
white canvas tilt on wooden hoops with sunblinds at the sides,
which could be strapped up when not wanted, covered the whole
body of the cart.”

And similar to the Cape cart is the _Whitechapel cart_, which brings me to a brief consideration of the _dog-carts_.

As originally designed, the dog-cart seems to have been built high, and, as its name implies, for the purpose of carrying dogs. Such a vehicle would seat four, a roomy, comfortable trap “with space under the seats, where a brace of pointers or other dogs could lie at ease.” As I have said in a preceding chapter, the sides of the cart “were made with Venetian slats to provide ventilation.” Such a cart, however, proved so agreeable that no long time elapsed before its original purpose was lost sight of, and it became one of the commonest of country carriages. Built on a small scale it was admirably suited for pony or cob. Numerous varieties exist. In the _tandem cart_, as generally constructed, the driver’s seat is high—the only cart, indeed, of the kind to maintain any height at all. In the _Ralli cart_ two seats are placed back to back, the foot-rest to the latter closing on the body when required. (Built somewhat on the lines of the ralli, by the way, is the Indian _tonga_, “a rather low, hooded vehicle ... furnished for draught by a pair of ponies on the curricle principle with pole and bar.”) The _Battlesden_, _Bedford_, and _Malvern carts_ are other varieties. More popular, perhaps, than any of these is the _governess cart_, which, while really in a class by itself, may be mentioned here. This is a low and particularly safe carriage, in which the seats are placed at the sides, as in the waggonette, and the door is at the back. An improvement on the governess cart, though not nearly so popular, is the _Princess car_, first designed in 1893. Here the back door is dispensed with, the entrance being in front. “The driving seat is arranged on a slide, whereby it can be moved forwards or backwards to adjust the balance; and it also enables the driver to sit facing the horse instead of sitting sideways as in the governess cart.”

In the last chapter I pointed out the chief varieties of public carriages. Of these the hansom and the omnibus have undergone considerable changes. The hansom was enormously improved by Mr. Forde, a Wolverhampton coachbuilder, in 1873, when the Society of Arts offered a prize for the best two-wheeled public conveyance. Mr. Forde’s carriage was much lighter than the older hansoms, and “its merits attracted the appreciative attention of foreigners, whereby an export trade became established.” Four years later another vehicle, the _two-wheeled brougham_, was introduced, but did not meet with success. The _Floyd hansom_ of 1885 showed other improvements, and for the first time the hansom became a private carriage. Here the “side windows were made to open, as were two small windows at the back of the cab.” For a short while, indeed, the private hansom was one of the smartest of gentlemen’s carriages. Then in 1889 was shown another hansom with a movable hood. This was wholly unsuccessful, but the _Arlington cab_, a Dorchester invention of this time, may still be seen in provincial towns to which the taximeter petrol cab has not yet reached. The chief peculiarity about this hansom is its doors, which, instead of reaching only half-way up and being constructed at a backward angle, reach from door to roof and are upright—thus giving a more spacious interior. These doors are “fitted with sliding glasses in the top part after the manner of an ordinary brougham door.” A _brougham hansom_ was introduced in 1887. “This afforded sitting-room inside for three or four; it was entered at the back, and when the door was shut, a seat across it was so arranged that there was no possibility of the door opening till the occupants’ weight was off the seat. The driver’s seat was in front, on the roof of the vehicle.” A _four-wheeled hansom_ was also seen in London some twenty-five years ago. Here the driver’s seat was behind the carriage on a level with the roof.

“Everybody knows,” remarks Sir Walter Gilbey, “that the hansom, by reason of its steadiness, is an exceedingly comfortable conveyance; there is no vehicle that runs more easily, particularly when the load is truly balanced.” But in spite of such improvements as rubber tyres and patent windows, the hansom seems doomed.

Shillibeer’s huge omnibuses were succeeded by smaller vehicles of similar construction. For some years no passengers were carried upon the roof except one or two beside the driver. Then in 1849 an “outside seat down the centre of the roof was added,” to reach which you had to climb an iron ladder. This continued until 1890, when the much more convenient “garden-seats” were substituted, and a curved flight of steps took the place of the rather dangerous ladder. Private omnibuses were first constructed about 1867. They contained a rumble at the back for the footman, but this was speedily dispensed with. As built to-day, they are of various sizes.

One other carriage may be mentioned, and then I am done. This is the _Irish car_. Here, as in the larger _bian_, the seats are arranged back to back and sideways. “The wheels are very low and are concealed as far as the axle-boxes, or farther, by the panel of the footboard, which panel is hinged to the end of the _tray_, either side of which forms the seat, to allow of its being turned up when not in use.” Occasionally there is a well between the seats for small packages. In private cars of this kind there is a small seat in front for the driver, but this is rarely to be found in the public vehicles. The width of the _Irish car_ is enormous, and occasionally leads the neophyte into trouble. Outside Ireland, I believe, the car is not seen.

“Walking in the pleasant environs of Paris,” wrote Mr. H. C.
Marillier some seventeen years ago, in an article entitled
_The Automobile: A Forecast_, “or even further afield, upon
the broad _routes nationales_ of Charente and La Beauce, it
is no uncommon thing to meet on a summer’s day a little open
vehicle flitting along without apparent means of motion,
upon noiseless rubber-shod wheels, or panting forth a gentle
warning from a square-shaped box in front. Two, and sometimes
three, persons are seated in it, one of whom drives by means
of a handle. To stop or to start again requires the turn of a
screw or the push of a pedal. Such, in its most accomplished
and most graceful form, is the _automobile_. To see it pass
at racing speed—some of these little machines can spurt at
twenty miles an hour—takes one’s breath away at first. The
apparition is uncanny.”

In another passage he speaks of these horseless carriages as playing “a prominent part as the natural successors of the hansom cab and the omnibus,” and draws what must then have been a fanciful picture of a city upon whose roads there would be seen almost as many horseless as horse-driven vehicles. To-day we know what has happened since these words were written. The hansom is a rarity, except during a strike of petrol-car drivers. The omnibus is a speedy machine with a powerful engine. The growler persists, but only for the benefit of those with much luggage or for those afraid of the internal combustion engine, that extraordinary discovery which has revolutionised locomotion even more than did steam eighty years ago. With such facts as these it would be easy to prophesy a total extinction of horse-driven vehicles except for purely ornamental purposes. Yet I believe that there may be a reaction in favour of a more leisurely means of locomotion. As yet it is impossible to be truly dignified in even the most gorgeously appointed motor-car. “Carriage people” no longer form a class, and the old coach-building firms which have not followed the times and shown one or other make of automobile in their rooms are few in number. Mr. Marillier, moreover, in the article just quoted, speaks of “that ideal future when life shall consist of sitting in a chair and pressing buttons”; but the horse is not yet extinct, and although it is not probable that any horse-carriages of an entirely new type will be constructed, I imagine that the older forms will persist, at any rate, for the next century or two. Indeed, to my mind, there must always be the man who will prefer the reins to the driving wheel. And who can blame him for the choice?

FOOTNOTES

[1] “In Europe, sledge is the name applied to a low kind of cart, but in America the word has been abbreviated to sled or changed to sleigh, which in either case involves the idea that a _sliding_ vehicle is meant. In the rural districts, the farmer employs a machine we call a stone-sledge. This is commonly made from a plank, the flat under surface of which is forced along the surface of the ground by ox-power.” _The World on Wheels_. Ezra N. Stratton. New York, 1888.

[2] _English Pleasure Carriages._ By William Bridges Adams. London, 1837.

[3] “They also possessed baggage-carts shaped like the chariots. One of these appears to have had a very high, six-spoked wheel and a curved roof box. In front of the box is a low seat, from underneath which projects a crooked drag-pole.” _Stratton._

[4] _A History of Egypt._ J. H. Breasted. New York. 1909.

[5] _Dictionary of the Bible._ 1906. Edited by J. Hastings. Art. _Chariot._

[6] “We account for this difference by supposing that in battle, when success depended in a great measure upon the stability of the chariot, special care was taken to provide a strong wheel, while a weaker one was considered good enough for a more peaceful employment, a four-spoked wheel in those days being much cheaper and lighter.” _Stratton._

[7] The Assyrians also possessed curious litters. “Two eunuchs,” says Stratton, “are shown carrying a sort of arm-chair on their shoulders, elegant in design, supplied with wheels, to be drawn by hand should the king have occasion to visit mountainous regions inaccessible for chariots.”

[8] _The History of Coaches._ G. A. Thrupp. London, 1877.

[9] See p. 39.

[10] Stratton treats of these Roman carriages and carts in considerable detail, and mentions in addition to the _plostellum_, or small _plaustrum_, the _carrus_, _monarchus_, and _birotum_. Of these the _carrus_, or cart, differed from the _plaustrum_ in the following particulars: “The box or form could not be removed, as in the former case, but was fastened upon the axle-tree; it lacked the broad flooring of planks or boards, which served as a receptacle for certain commodities when the sides were removed; the wheels were higher [and] ... spoked, not solid like the _tympana_.” The _carrus clabularius_, or stave-waggon, could be lengthened or shortened as required. The _monarchus_ was a very light two-wheeled vehicle something like the _cisium_. The _birotum_ was also a small two-wheeled vehicle, with a leather-covered seat, used in the time of Constantine, an “early post-chaise,” as Stratton puts it.

[11] The carts of north Italy in the eighteenth century had remained practically unchanged. Edward Wright, who visited Italy in 1719, thus describes them: “The carriages in Lombardy, and indeed throughout all Italy, are for the most part drawn with oxen; which are of a whitish colour: they have very low wheels. Some I saw without spokes, solid like mill-stones; such as I have seen describ’d in some antique basso-relievos and Mosaicks. The pole they draw by is sloped upwards towards the end; which is rais’d considerably above their heads; from whence a chain, or rope, is let down and fasten’d to their horns; which keeps up their heads, and serves to back the carriage. In some parts they use no yokes, but draw all by the horn, by a sort of a brace brought about the roots of them: the backs of the oxen are generally cover’d with a cloth. In the kingdom of Naples, and some other parts, they use buffaloes in their carriages, &c. These do somewhat resemble oxen: but are most sour, ill-looking animals, and very vicious; for the better management of them they generally put rings in their noses.”

[12] _The World on Wheels._

[13] On the other hand, the scythes used by other nations may well have been on the wheels. Livy describes those used by Antiochus (_currus falcatus_): “Round the pole were sharp-pointed spears which extended from the yoke of the two outside horses about fifteen feet; with these they pierced everything in their way. On the end of the yoke were two scythes, one being placed horizontally, the other towards the ground. The first cut everything from the sides, the others catching those prostrate on the ground or trying to crawl under. The long spears (_cuspides_) were not on the yoke, as some say.”

[14] _English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages._ J. J. Jusserand. London, 1888.

[15] _Early Carriages and Roads._ Sir Walter Gilbey, Bart. London, 1903.

[16] This appears to have been similar to the _carroccio_, described by Stratton as a very heavy four-wheeled car, surmounted by a tall staff, painted a bright red. Stratton also mentions the _cochio_, which he describes as a thirteenth-century carriage having a covering of red matting, under which, in the fore-part of the body, the ladies were seated, the gentlemen occupying the rear end. Both these _words_, however, seem to belong to a much later date and may be translations of an earlier original.

[17] “The XXX day of September the Queen’s Grace came from the Tower through London, riding in a charrett gorgeously beseen, unto Westminster.” MS. Cotton. Vitellius, F.v.

[18] _History of Great Britain._ Arthur Wilson. London, 1653.

[19] cf. Spenser, who uses three words which appear to be interchangeable.

“Tho’, up him taking in their tender hands
They easily unto her charett beare;
Her teme at her commandement quiet stands,
Whiles they the corse unto her wagon reare.
And strowe with flowers the lamentable beare;
Then all the rest into their Coches climb.”

[20] It is probable that the closed carriage in which the Emperor Frederick III paid a visit to Frankfort in 1474 was one of these cotzi. Here the interesting point is that the Emperor’s attendants, apparently for the first time, were relieved of the necessity of holding a canopy over His Majesty’s head, except when he went to and returned from the Council Chamber.

[21] Taylor mentions in one place that “for the mending of the Harnesse, a Knights Coachman brought in a bill to his master of 25 pounds.” He also says that the owners of coaches liked to match their horses if possible.

[22] _A Book about Travelling, Past and Present._ Thomas Croal. London, 1877.

[23] So Massinger in _The Bondman_ says:—

“For their pomp and ease being borne
In triumph on men’s shoulders.”

[24] The word hackney, possibly derived from the old French _Haquenée_, was the natural word to be used for a public coach, it being merely a synonym, used by Shakespeare and others, for _common_.

[25] _Curialia Miscellanea._ Samuel Pegge, F.S.A. London, 1818.

[26] Which was about the same sum that Defoe had to pay in London earlier in the century. “We are carried to these places [the coffee-houses],” he wrote in 1702, “in chairs which are here very cheap—a guinea a week, or a shilling per hour; and your chairmen serve you for porters, to run on errands, as your gondoliers do at Venice.”

[27] cf.

“With chest begirt by leathern bands,
The chairman at his corner stands;
The poles stuck up against the wall
Are ready at a moment’s call.
For customers they’re always willing
And ready aye to earn a shilling.”

_Echoes of the Street_.

[28] In an article in the _Pall Mall Magazine_ for March, 1912.

[29] Birch’s _History of the Royal Society_.

[30] Some people have considered that the name was not derived from the city of Berlin, but from an Italian word _berlina_, “a name given by the Italians to a kind of stage on which criminals are exposed to public ignominy.” This seems rather far-fetched. In England it was always thought to have been built first in Berlin, and was a common enough term for a coach early in the eighteenth century. Swift mentions it in his _Answer to a Scandalous Poem_ (1733):—

“And jealous Juno, ever snarling,
Is drawn by peacocks in her berlin.”

“It should be noted,” says Croal, “that we find the word differently applied in the earlier years of the century, and in such a way as to cast doubts on the derivations quoted. In some of the last Acts passed by the Scottish Parliaments before the Union, there are references to a kind of _ship_ or boat, called a berline. The royal burghs on the west coast of Scotland were in 1705 ordered to maintain two ‘berlines’ to prevent the importation of ‘victual’ from Ireland, this importation being forbidden at the time, and two years later an Act was passed to pay the expenses of the berlines.”

[31] A point of minor interest may here be noticed. When leather was first used for the covering of the coach quarters, the heads of the nails showed. But about 1660, “these nail-heads were covered with a strip of metal made to imitate a row of beads; from this practice arose the name of ‘beading’ which has been retained, although beading is now made in a continuous, level piece, either rounded or angular.” _Thrupp._

[32] See below, p. 133.

[33] The reader is referred for the fullest information on the subject of these stage-coaches to Mr. Charles G. Harper’s _Stage-Coach and Mail in Days of Yore_. 2 vols. London, 1903.

[34] _Omnibuses and Cabs._ London, 1902.

[35] It was over a _calèche_ presented by the Chevalier de Grammont to Charles II, that the famous quarrel took place between Lady Castlemaine and Miss Stewart, afterwards the Duchess of Richmond. The ladies had been complaining that coaches with glass windows, but lately introduced, did not allow a sufficiently free display of their charms, whence followed the gift of a French _calèche_ which cost two thousand livres. When the queen drove out in it, both the ladies agreed with de Grammont that it afforded far better opportunities than a coach for showing off their figures, and both endeavoured to get the first loan of it. In the fierce quarrel that followed Miss Stewart came off the conqueror.

[36] _Peter the Great._ By K. Waliszewski. Translated by Lady Mary Loyd. London, 1898.

[37] _Social Life in the Reign of Queen Anne._ John Ashton. London, 1883.

[38] Originally, I understand, a fish-cart or lugger.

[39] This well-known expression for a carriage is generally thought to have been used first by an American quaker later in the century. Ned Ward, however, would seem to have been its real inventor.

[40] At this time M. Dessein used to advertise in the London papers. In _The Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser_ for July 21, 1767, is the following: “To be sold, at Calais, a Travelling _Vis-à-Vis_, built at Paris about a year and a half ago; very fit also to use in the towns on the Continent upon occasion; being varnished in the newest taste, and covered with an oiled case to preserve it from the weather in travelling, and requires nothing but a new set of wheels to be in perfect repair to make the tour of Europe. Enquire of Mr. Dessein, at the Hôtel D’Angleterre at Calais, with whom the lowest price is left.”

[41] See next chapter.

[42] This was the Mr. Francis Moore, of Cheapside, who in 1786 and 1790 obtained patents for two two-wheeled carriages. The second of these bore considerable resemblance to the hansom-cab of a later date. It had enormous wheels—higher, indeed, than the body of the carriage—and the driver sat on a small box-seat in front and at a level with the top of the roof. The door was at the back.

[43] _Caricature History of the Georges_, Thomas Wright. London, n.d.

[44] “The shape of the body,” says Bridges Adams, describing Coates’s carriage, “was that of a classic sea-god’s car, and it was constructed in copper. This vehicle was very beautiful in its outline, though disfigured by the absurdity of its ornamental work.” When Coates had a fall, Horace Smith, of _Rejected Addresses_ fame, seized the occasion to write a mock condoling poem.

[45] For a detailed account of these mail-coaches the reader is referred to Mr. Charles Harper’s book, _Stage Coach and Mail in the Days of Yore_.

[46] _The Danger of Travelling in Stage-Coaches; and a Remedy Proposed to the Consideration of the Public_, by the Rev. William Milton, A.M., Vicar of Heckfield, Hants. Reading, 1810.

[47] It may be well to add here a note on the simpler springs which were in use at this time. These seem to have been of five distinct varieties—the straight or elbow spring, the elliptic spring, the regular-curved, and the reverse-curved springs, all these being either single or double, and the spiral spring. The straight spring was used in the stage-coaches, in the later phaetons, in the Tilbury, and in most of the two-wheeled carriages. The elliptic spring, invented by Elliott, was “used single in what are called under-spring carriages, where the spring rests on the axle, and is connected with the framework by means of a dumb or imitation spring so as to form a double or complete ellipse. This is technically called an under spring.” Its importance, of course, followed on its power of acting as a complete support, no perch being required to hold the two parts of the undercarriage together. Sometimes four of these springs were “hinged together in pairs,” and used thus in the larger four-wheeled carriages. When a regular-curved or C spring was used, “a leathern brace was suspended from it to carry the body or weight.” The reverse-curved spring was used in the older phaetons, and in the fore springs of the Tilbury, and springs similar to this had been used as body springs in place of suspension brackets or loops, or as upright springs, to the earlier coaches and chariots, under the technical name of S springs—“in which case leather braces were attached to them, and they were supported by a bracket or buttress of iron called the spring stay. The whip spring which succeeded them ... was used in the same way.” But in addition to these springs, there were all kinds of combinations, and the whole subject is too complicated for the lay mind to understand. The chief point, however, to notice is the changes in structure which were made possible by the elliptic spring of Elliott’s resting on the axle.

[48] Which reminds me that at the present day there is a singular three-wheeled cab to be hired in London, if only you know where to look for it. It is the only one of its kind, and rarely, I believe, appears until after nightfall. It is the kind of carriage which is to be avoided by those who have drunk not wisely but too well.

[49] A good description is given of the appearance of these coaches by Baron d’Haussez, an exiled Frenchman, in 1833.

“The appointments of an English coach are no less elegant than its form. A portly, good-looking coachman seated on a very high coach-box, well dressed, wearing white gloves, a nosegay in his button-hole, and his chin enveloped in an enormous cravat, drives four horses perfectly matched and harnessed, and as carefully groomed as when they excited admiration in the carriages of Grosvenor and Berkeley Squares. Such is the manner in which English horses are managed, such also is their docility, the effect either of temperament or training, that you do not remark the least restiveness in them. Four-horse coaches are to be seen rapidly traversing the most populous streets of London, without occasioning the least accident, without being at all inconvenienced in the midst of the numerous carriages which hardly leave the necessary space to pass. The swearing of ostlers is never heard at the relays any more than the neighing of horses; nor are you interrupted on the road by the voice of the coachman or the sound of his whip, which differs only from a cabriolet whip in the length of the thong, and serves more as a sort of appendage than a means of correction in the hand which carries it.”

[50] _Omnibuses and Cabs._

[51] See note on p. 192.

[52] According to Mr. Moore, whose account of this matter seems perfectly clear, the actual vehicle which proved so popular when plying the streets contained very much more of Chapman’s work than of Hansom’s, and, indeed, if full justice had been done, these light carriages should have come down to posterity as _chapmans_ and not _hansoms_ at all. On the other hand it is quite possible, that but for Hansom’s work, Chapman would never have given such careful attention to this class of vehicle.

[53] It seems, however, that so long as ten years before _one-horse cars_ of this form had been plying for hire in Birmingham and Liverpool.

[54] _Modern Carriages._ Sir Walter Gilbey, Bart. London, 1905.

[55] Bridges Adams has an amusing passage on the question of colour. He had his own ideas upon the best colours to use on a carriage body. “For bright sunny days,” he thinks, “the straw or sulphur yellow is very brilliant and beautiful; but for the autumnal haze, the rich deep orange hue conveys the most agreeable sensations. The greens used are of innumerable tints, commencing with the yellowish olive, and gradually darkening till they are barely distinguishable from black. Neither apple green, grass green, sea green, nor any green of a bluish tint, can be used in carriage painting with good effect as a ground colour; but in some species of light carriages a pleasing effect may be produced for summer by the imitation of the variegated grasses.” Quite a poetical idea! “Blues,” he continues, “were formerly principally used as a ground colour for bodies, to contrast with a red carriage and framework. Of late very dark blues have been used as a general ground colour, and when new they are very rich, being a glazed or partially transparent colour; but they very soon become worn and faded, the least speck of dust disfiguring them. Blue is also a cold colour, and while it is unfitted for summer by reason of its easy soiling, it is unpleasant in winter, owing to its want of warmth.”

[56] For full and particular accounts of all such carriages as have been constructed since the middle of last century, the reader is referred to the various trade journals. Further information is to be obtained from the Reports on carriages at the successive London and Paris Exhibitions. Here the more important differences between English, French, and Austrian carriages are clearly shown in a language which is not too technical for the ordinary reader to understand.

[57] This was also the case in France.

[58] There is an interesting passage in the 1878 Report which may be quoted here. “It is somewhat singular,” this runs, “that while the attention of the English coachbuilders has, for the past few years, been directed to perfect an arrangement to open and close landau heads in a simple and effectual manner, the French builders have paid little or no heed to the attainment of this desideratum, but have instead adopted a plan which allows of the doors of a landau being opened when the glass is up, being first introduced by M. Kellner ... in 1866.... The simplest method is to have two pieces of brass, about ten inches long, in the form of a groove, for the glass frame to slide in, hinged to the upper extremities of the door pillars, and to close down on the fence rail when not required for use.”

[59] Here, I suppose, should be included the _Eridge cart_, invented by Lord Abergavenny. It holds four persons on two parallel seats.

[60] The phaeton has found particular favour in France. At the Paris Exhibition in 1878 was shown a phaeton built at Rouen, which, according to the official Report, was “the finest small carriage exhibited in the French department for ingenuity and fitness for work.”

[61] Sir Walter Gilbey had a _posting brougham_ built for his own use, which to an even greater extent resembled the old chariot. In this case postilions were used.

[62] “The Patent Dioropha, or two-headed carriage, combining in one a clarence or pilentum coach, complete with all its appointments; a barouche, with folding head and three-fold knee-flap; and an open carriage. The heads can be removed or exchanged with facility by means of a pulley attached to the ceiling of the coach-house, aided by a counterpoise weight.” _Vide_ the Official Catalogue, which also gives illustrations of several Indian carriages, such as the _Keron_, the rath, a Mahratta carriage from Bengal, and a lady’s carriage from Lahore—the last being a four-wheeled conveyance covered with scarlet and crimson cloth, and shut in with thick curtains.

[63] The only sulky now to be seen in this country is the trotting carriage used in races—a mere skeleton. See also p. 210.

[64] _Suspension of Road Carriages._ A Paper read before the Institute of British Carriage Manufacturers at York. 1899.

INDEX

_Index_

Abergavenny, Marquis of, 270 n.

Ackermann, William, 230, 234

Adams, T. G., 232

Adams, William Bridges, 19, 49, 62, 65, 154, 212, 214 n., 227-230,
232-236, 258 n.

Addison, Joseph, 151

adometer, 115

Adrianople, 152

Africa, South, 278

Agrippina, 33

_Alchemist, The_, 75

Aldersgate Street, 190

_Alexander and Campaspe_, 58

Alexander of Parma, 67

Alexander Severus, 35

Alexander the Great, 27

Alexandria, 27

_All sorts of Wheel Carriage, Improved_, 166

ἅμαξα, 26, 27

Amelia, Princess, 104

_amempton_, 272

America, North, 36, 140, 205, 220, 221, 225, 236, 263

America, South, 20, 189, 236

Amsterdam, 225, 226

Andersen, Henry, 90

Andrews, coachbuilder, 267

Anne, wife of Richard II, 49

Anne, Queen, 154, 174

_Anne, Social Life in the Reign of Queen_, 158 n.

Anne Boleyn, 54

_Annual Register_, 214

Anstice, J., 205

Antioch, 29

Antiochus, 40 n.

ἄντυξ, 25

Antwerp, 68, 110

ἀπήνη, 26-28

_Apollo, or a Problem Solved_, 162

Appian Way, 28

_araba_, 40

Arabia, 40

_arcera_, 29

_Arlington cab_, 280

ἄρμα, 25, 26, 29

ἁρμάμαξα, 26, 27, 29

Arnot, Hugh, 102

Arundel, Earl of, 76, 77

Ashby, Lady, 120

Ashton, John, 158

Asia, 107, 108

Assyrian chariot. See _chariot_

Athens, 36

Ausonius, 31

Australia, 223

Austria, 51, 232

_automobile_, 256, 269, 282

_Automobile: a Forecast, The_, 281

axles, movable, 256, 269, 282

Babylon, 27

_back-door cab_, 249

Bailey, Captain, 88

Balack, Donald, 105

_barcos de tierra_, 20

_barge_, 276

Barker, Edward, 74

_barouche_, 206, 229, 230, 264, 271n.

_barouchet_, 230

Barrow, John, 107

_Bartholomew Fair_, 75

Baskerville, John, 191

basket, the, 168, 169.
See also under _boot_

_basterna_, 32, 37, 52

Bath, 61, 103, 104

_Battlesden cart_, 279

Baudry, M., 252

Baxter, coachbuilder, 258

Baynardes Castle, 77

beading, 120n.

Beatrice of Anjou, 50

_Beau’s Ideal, The_, 160

Beckmann, 65, 116

_Bedford cart_, 279

Belgium, 35

Bellasis, Richard, 57

Belvoir, 71

_benna_, 32, 35

Bennet, Mr., 221

Bennett, coachbuilder, 235

Berlin, 118 n.

_berlin_, 62, 109, 118-121, 139, 141, 175, 176, 216;
Korff berline, 207 _et seq._

_berlina_, 118 n.

_berline_. See _berlin_

_berlingot_, 141

_bian_, 239, 281

Bianconi, 239

_Bible, Dictionary of the_, 22 n.

_bike wagon_, 275;
_cut-under bike wagon_, 275

Birch, Thomas, 116 n.

Bird-Cage Walk, 258

Birmingham, 42, 190, 191, 250, 251 n., 255

_birotum_, 32 n.

Blackfriars, 82

Blackheath, 115-117

_Blackwood’s Magazine_, 238

Bligh family. See Darnley

Blount. See Blunt

Blunt, Colonel [Sir Harry, of Wicklemarsh], 115, 117, 118, 126

Bodger, 189

_Bondman, The_, 87 n.

Boonen, William, 71, 72

_boot_, first mention of, 73;
metamorphosed into basket, 74, 84, 111, 114, 168, 218, 229, 234, 235

Boston, U.S.A., 221

Boulnois, William, 249, 250

Boulogne, 70

Bourn, Daniel, 180, 181, 185

_brake_, 273

Breasted, J. H., 21

brewer’s cart, 96

Britain, 30, 39

British Museum, 48

_britzschka_ (_briska_, _brisker_, _brisky_), 232-234;
_briska-chariot_, 229, 232, 233;
_briska-phaeton_, 229;
_briska-landau_, 264

_broad-waggons_, 198

Broderithus, Stephanus, 65

_brouette_ (wheelbarrow), 99, 100, 108, 139

Brougham, Lord, 251

_brougham_, 251, 252, 257, 262, 271;
_posting-brougham_, 270 n.;
_two-wheeled brougham_, 279;
_brougham-hansom_, 280

Brouncker, Lord, 117

Browne, Sir Thomas, 73, 121, 221

Brussels, 67, 110

_buckboard_, 276

Buckingham, Duke of, 61, 86-88, 91, 107, 153

Buckingham, Earl of, 49

Budd, G. F., 262

_buggy_, 221, 236, 257, 273-275

Bulkeley, Sir Richard, 142, 143, 155

Bulwer Lytton, 271

Bunbury, H., 199

Burgh, Elizabeth de, Lady Clare, 48

_cab_, _hackney_. See _cabriolet_

_cab-phaeton_, 229, 233, 245, 266

_cabriolet_, 139, 170, 198, 199, 221, 234, 244 _et seq._, 266, 276;
_cabriolet de place_, 244

Cæsar, Julius, 29, 36

Cæsarius, 29

Calais, 172

_calash_ (_calesh_, _calèche_), 109, 140 _et seq._, 154, 155, 206, 221

_calesse_ (_calesso_), 35, 140

_caned whiskey_, 214

Canterbury, 110

_Cape cart_, 278

Capua, 28

_Caricature History of the Georges_, 198 n.

Carinthia, 121

Carlyle, Thomas, 207, 209

_carpentum_, 31, 33, 34

_carretta_, 50

carriage, early use of the word, 45;
early English carriage described, 47;
Chinese, 38, 107;
Dacian, 37

_Carriage Builder’s and Harness Maker’s Art Journal_, 72, 158

carriage-match, 188

_carriole_, 35, 69, 140, 224

_carroccio_, 50 n.

_carroch_ (_caroch_, _carroach_, _carroche_), 64, 80, 83

_carrosse_, 69;
_carosse à cinq sous_, 136 _et seq._

_carruca_, 32, 34;
_carruca argentata_, 35;
_carruca domestoria_, 35

_carrus_, 32 n.;
_carrus stabularius_, 32 n.

cart, 24, 81, 82, 247;
early English cart described, 45

Castlemaine, Earl of, 123, 124;
Countess of, 140 n.

_cathedra_, 37

Catherine of Aragon, 54

Catton, coach-painter, 188

Cecil, Lady, 76

Cenis, Mont, 104

Centlivre, Mrs., 160

_chaer._ See _chare_

_chair, sedan_, 85 _et seq._;
introduced into England, 87;
hackney chairs established, 87, 91;
characteristics of chairmen, 96, 102;
appearance, 99-101;
at Bath, 104;
persist at Edinburgh, 106;
regulations, 106;
Eastern chairs, 107;
mentioned, 123, 148, 166, 173, 221, 222

_chair, one-horse._ See _chaise_

_chairs-and-chairmen_, 198

_chaise_, 140, 141, 147, 148, 155, 156, 170, 171, 175, 196;
French chaise described, 147, 148;
_chaise à porteur_, 99;
_chaise de poste_, 170

Chamberlayne, William, 135

Chambers, Sir William, 185, 186, 260

Chapman, John, 250

_char._ See _chare_

_char-à-banc_, 273

_char-à-cote_, 224

_chare (car)_, 46, 49, 50, 52, 54, 69

_charette (chariette)_, 49, 50, 62, 67