To insure the efficiency of mill-saws, it is highly important to have them firmly secured in the frames by which they are reciprocated. Swing-frames for carrying saws are ordinarily of wrought iron or steel, and made up of several pieces mortised and tenoned together in the form of a rectangular frame or parallelogram, of which the longest sides are termed verticals and the shortest crossheads or crossrails. In the case of deal frames, the swing frame differs somewhat from that of a timber frame, in having two extra verticals, which separate it into two equal divisions. These are necessary in order that two deals may be operated upon simultaneously, each division being devoted to a separate deal, and likewise to enable the connecting-rod which works the frame to pass up the center and oscillate on a pin near the top, thereby avoiding the deep excavations and costly foundations required where the rod is engaged with the pin at the bottom. The rack that advances the deals to the saws passes through a "bow" in the connecting-rod and the middle of the frame, the deals are placed on either side of it, on rollers purposely provided. In sawing hard deals, the saws require to be sharpened about every tenth run or journey, and every twentieth for soft. Fifty runs, or one hundred deals, are reckoned an average day's work; this is inclusive of the time required for changing the saws, returning the rack for another run, and other exigencies. For attachment to swing-frames the saws have buckles riveted to them; these are by various modes connected to the crossheads. Each top buckle is passed through the crosshead and is pierced with a mortise for the reception of a thin steel wedge or key, by whose agency the blade is strained and tightened. The edge of the crosshead upon which the keys bed is steeled to lessen the wear invariably ensuing from frequently driving up the keys. The distances between the blades are adjusted by interposing strips of wood, or packing pieces, as they are termed, of equal thickness with the required boards or leaves; the whole is then pressed together and held in position by packing screws. The saws themselves are subsequently tightened by forcing home the keys until a certain amount of tension has been attained, this is ascertained only by the peculiar sound which emanates from the blade on being drawn considerably tight and tense. Great experience is required to accustom the ear to the correct intonation, as in general the tensile strain on the saws approximates so closely to the breaking point that one or two extra taps on the keys are quite sufficient to rupture them.
Mr. Brunel, in the government saw-mills at Woolwich, adopted a method of hanging saws by means of a weighted lever, like a Roman steelyard. A cross-shaft affixed above the saws to the cornice of the main frame carried a lever, weighted at one end and provided with a hook or shackle at the other for engagement with the saw buckle. In using this apparatus the blades were strained one at a time by linking the lever to the buckle and then adjusting the movable weight until the desired tension was acquired, after which the key was inserted into the mortise and the lever released. This arrangement is not now in common use on account of the trouble attending its employment, and at present the saws are merely strained by hammering up the keys. The saw blades had usually a tensile strain of upwards of one tun per inch of breadth of blade. It is to be further observed that the cutting edges of the saws are not quite perpendicular, but have a little lead, or their upper ends overhang the lower about three eighths of an inch or one half of an inch, according to the nature of the material to be sawn. The object of this is that the saws may be withdrawn from the cuts in the ascending or back stroke, and allow the sawdust free escape. The eccentric actuating the mechanism for advancing the timber to the saws is generally set in such a manner that the feed commences just at the moment when the frame has attained half its ascending stroke, and continues until the entire stroke has been completed. By this regulation the saws are not liable to be suddenly choked, but come smoothly and softly into their work.--Worssam's Mechanical Saws.
In the matter of the application of William N. Bartholomew, assignor to J. Reckendorfer, for letters patent for a design for Rubber Eraser--Letters patent for designs have increased in importance within the past few years. Formerly but few were granted, now many are issued. To this day they have made so little figure in litigation that but three reported cases are known in which design patents have come into controversy. With their increase, questions have arisen concerning their scope and character, which have given rise to dispute and to inquiry as to the correctness of the current practice of the office in this branch of invention. While on the one hand, it is insisted that the practice has always been uniform, and is therefore now fixed and definite; on the other, it is asserted, that there has never been, and is not now, any well-defined or uniform practice, either in the granting or refusal of design patents.
The act of 1836 made no provision for the patenting of designs. The earliest legislation upon this subject is found in the act of August 29, 1842, section 3; and the only legislation upon the subject is found in this section and in section 11, of the act of March 2, 1861. The definition of the subject matter, or, in other words, of a "design," is the same in both acts. It is is follows:
"That any citizen, etc., who, by his, her, or their own industry, genius, efforts, and expense, may have invented or produced any new and original design for a manufacture, whether of metal or other material or materials, any original design for a bust, statue, bas-relief, or composition in alto or basso-relievo, or any new and original impression being formed in marble or other material, or any new and useful pattern, or print, or picture, to be either worked into or worked on, or printed, or painted, or cast, or otherwise fixed on any article of manufacture, or any new and original shape or configuration of any article of manufacture not known or used by others, etc."
This definition embraces five particulars.
1. A new and original design for a manufacture.
2. An original design for a bust, statue, etc.
3. A new and original impression or ornament to be placed on any article of manufacture.
4. A new and useful pattern, print, or picture to be worked into or worked on, or printed, or painted, or cast, or otherwise fixed on any article of manufacture.
5. A new and original shape or configuration of any article of manufacture.
The first three of these classes would seem to refer to ornament only; the fourth to ornament, combined with utility, as in the case of trade marks; and the fifth to new shapes or forms of manufactured articles, which, for some reason, were preferable to those previously adopted.
The disputed questions which have thus far arisen under these definitions are:
1. What variations may be claimed or covered by the patent consistently with unity of design.
2. Is a new shape of an article of manufacture, whereby utility is secured, a subject of protection under this act; and
3. Is mechanical function of any kind covered by it.
As to the first of these questions, it seems to have been assumed that the design spoken of in all parts of the sections referred to covered a fixed, unchangeable figure, that the protection of letters patent did not extend to any variation, however slight, but that such variation constituted a new design, might be covered by a new patent, and might safely be used without infringement of the first. This, it is said, is the correct theory of the law, and has been the uniform adjudication of the Office.
Neither of these statements is absolutely correct. The law by no means defines a design with such strictness. The language is, "new and original design for a manufacture," "new and original impression or ornament," "new and original shape or configuration." It would seem to be too plain for argument, that the new design, or impression, or shape, might be so generic in its character as to admit of many variations, which should embody the substantial characteristics and be entirely consistent with a substantial identity of form. Thus, if the invention were of a design for an ornamental button, the face of which was grooved with radial rays, it would seem that the first designer of such a button might properly describe a button of five rays, and, having stated that a greater number of rays might be used, might claim a design consisting generally of radial rays, or of "five or more" rays, and, that it could not be necessary for him to take out a patent for each additional ray that could be cut upon his button. So, if the design were the ornamentation of long combs by a chain of pearls, it would seem that a claim for such a design might be maintained against one who arranged the pearls, either in curved or straight lines, or who used half pearls only, and that such modifications if they had occurred to the designer, might properly have been enumerated in his specification as possible and equivalent variations. In short, I can see no reason, under the law, why designs may not be generic, why what are called "broad claims," may not be made to them, and why the doctrine of artistic or aesthetic equivalents may not be applied to them.
This has been recognized to a greater or less extent in the adjudications of the courts and in the practice of the Office.
One of the reported cases is that of Boothvs. Garelly 1, Blatch 247. The design is described as consisting of "radially formed ornaments on the face of the molds or blocks of which the button is formed, combined with the mode of winding the covering on the same, substantially as set forth, whether the covering be of one or more colors." The specification, in "substantially" setting forth the design, contained this language: "It will be obvious from the foregoing that the figures can be changed at pleasure by giving the desired form to the face of the mold by depressions and elevations which radiate from a point, whether in the center of the mold or eccentric thereto."
In the consideration of the case by the Court no objection was made to this statement or claim. In the case of Rootvs. Ball, 4 McLean 180, the learned judge instructed the jury that "if they should find that the defendants had infringed the plaintiff's patent by using substantially the same device as ornamental on the same part of the stove they would, of course, find the defendant guilty. To infringe a patent right it is not necessary that the thing patented should be adopted in every particular; but if, as in the present case, the design and figures were substantially adopted by the defendants, they have infringed the plaintiff's right. If they adopt the same principle the defendants are guilty. The principle of a machine is that combination of mechanical powers which produce a certain result. And in a case like the present, where ornaments are used for a stove, it is an infringement to adopt the design so as to produce substantially the same appearance."
It has been the constant practice to grant patents for designs for fonts of type, for sets of silver plate, for a series of printers' flourishes, and the like. This class of cases has always passed without objection.
Two other cases which have arisen within the Office deserve notive. The first was for a series of miniature shoulder straps, with emblems denoting rank, provided with a pin, to be worn under an officer's coat, upon his vest, or as a lady's breastpin. The drawing shows eight of these pins with emblems of rank, varying from that of second lieutenant to major-general, specification describing the brooch for a second lieutenant goes on to say: "I propose to introduce, on some of them, the different ornaments showing the respective ranks of the army, from a major-generalship to a second lieutenancy. See Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8."
The second case was that of an application for a monogram visiting card, on which the name was to be inscribed or printed in the form of a monogram. The applicant filed a drawing, showing a card upon which was a monogram of his own name. In his specification he gives certain rules for forming such monograms, and then says: "It is manifest that the form of the letters as well as the letters themselves can be changed as required by circumstances or the taste of the individual for whom the monogram is designed; and that the general form and outline of the monogram may be varied; and indeed, must vary to be adapted to the particular name it is required to represent."
The claim was for "a monogram, visiting card, or visiting card upon which the name is inscribed or printed in the form of a monogram, substantially as herein specified."
This application was rejected by the Examiner and Board of Examiners-in-Chief, but was allowed by the Commissioner upon appeal.
It is true that, before and since this patent was issued, many patents have been refused for what I have called generic designs. One man having designed a tack head, ornamented with radial lines, was compelled to take out one patent for his tack with six radial lines, and another for the same tack with eight. There are other instances of like character, but they only serve to show that the practice of the Office has not been uniform, and that the true practice is still to be adopted and followed.
I have no hesitation in saying, in view of the premises, that a valid patent may be granted for a new genus or class of ornaments as well as for specific ornaments, though I do not doubt that, under the statute, every species, variety, and individual having distinct characteristics under such a genus might also be patented, the patent being subordinate and tributary to that which covered the class. From the nature of this subject-matter there must always be more latitude in the issue of patents for trifling changes, or form, or outline, since it is only necessary that such changes should constitute a new "design" to entitle them to a patent of this class.
The second question relates to the elements of utility in patents for designs.
Upon this point, it is said by my predecessor, in Jason Craneex parteCommissioners, December-May, 1869, p. 1, that the construction which has been given to the act of 1842, by the Office, ever since its passage, is that it relates to designs for ornament merely; something of an artistic character as contradistinguished to those of convenience or utility.
The Board of Examiners-in-Chief, in the present case, say "The practice of the Office has been uniform from the beginning, and has always excluded cases like the present from the benefit of the laws relating to designs." And, again, "The general understanding has always been that the acts of 1842 and 1861 were intended to cover articles making pretensions to artistic excellence exclusively."
In thus denying that a new "shape or configuration" of an article, whereby utility or convenience is promoted, is the proper subject of a patent under the acts referred to, the Office would seem to have involved itself in the absurdity that if a design is useless it may be patented; whereas, if it be useful, it is entitled to no protection.
Fortunately no such "uniform practice" has existed, and the Office is relieved from so grievous an imputation. The practice seems to have been taken for granted by the appellate tribunals, and, so far from being as stated, is, as nearly as possible, the reverse of it. Articles have been, and are being, constantly patented as designs which possess no element of the artistic or ornamental, but are valuable solely because, by a new shape or configuration, they possess more utility than the prior forms of like articles Of this character are designs for ax heads, for reflectors, for lamp shades, for the soles of boots and shoes, which have been heretofore patented as designs, and to this class might be added, with great propriety, that class of so-called "mechanical" patents, granted for mere changes of form, such as plowshares, fan blowers, propeller blades, and others of like character.
When, therefore, my learned predecessor in Crane's case added to this number a box so designed as to hold with convenience a set of furs, he did but confirm and not alter the practice of the Office, so far as it can be gleaned from the patented cases. I am of opinion that the class of cases named in the act as arising from "new shape or configuration" includes within it all those mere changes of form which involve increase of utility. This I take to be the spirit of the decision in Woostervs. Crane, 2 Fisher 583. The design was of a reel in the shape of a rhombus. The learned Judge says "In this case, the reel itself, as an article of manufacture, is conceded to be old and not the subject of a patent. The shape applied to it by the complainant is also an old, well-known mathematical figure. Now although it does not appear that any person ever before applied this particular shape to this particular article, I cannot think that the act quoted above was intended to secure to the complainant an exclusive right to use this well known figure in the manufacture of reels. The act, although it does not require utility in order to secure the benefit of its provisions, does require that the shape produced shall be the result of industry, effort genius, or expense, and must also, I think, be held to require that the shape or configuration sought to be secured shall, at least, be new and original as applied to articles of manufacture. But here the shape is a common one in many articles of manufacture, and its application to a reel cannot fairly be said to be the result of industry, genius, effort, and expense. No advantage whatever is pretended to be derived from the adoption of the form selected by the complainant, except the incidental one of using it as a trademark. Its selection can hardly be said to be the result of effort even; it was simply an arbitrary chance selection of one of many well-known shapes, all equally well adapted to the purpose. To hold that such an application of a common form can be secured by letters patent, would be giving the act of 1861 a construction broader than I am willing to give it"
It would seem from this language that if there had been "advantage," that is, utility in the adoption of the form of the rhombus, that it would have found more favor in the eyes of the Court.
This subject has been well discussed in the opinion of Commissioner Foote in Craneex parte. I concur in that opinion, except as to the recital of the former practice of the Office, which a careful examination has shown to be erroneous.
The third question may be readily disposed of. Modes of operation or construction, principles of action, combinations to secure novelty or utility of movement, or compositions of matter, can hardly be said to be "shapes, configurations, or designs," but where the sole utility of the new device arises from its new shape or configuration, I think it may fairly be included among the subjects which the act of 1842 was designed to protect.
The present case may, in view of the foregoing consideration, be disposed of without difficulty. Letters patent are asked, by applicant, for a new design for a rubber eraser, which consists in giving to the eraser a cylindrical body, with ends beveled to an edge. The claim is for the "cylindrical rubber eraser provided with a wrapper or case, as herein shown and described"
In the body of the specification the applicant describes the mode of making the eraser, and he also enumerates its advantages over erasers of the ordinary forms.
The Examiner does not object to the application because of the utility of the eraser, although the Board of Examiners in Chief seem to base their decision upon that point alone, but he pronounces the form already old in its application to artists' stumps, and he insists that the mode of composition or construction can form no element, for the claim for a design patent.
In the latter statement he is undoubtedly right. These patents are granted solely for new shapes or forms, and the form being new it is immaterial by what process that form is attained. The composition of matter or the mode of construction is neither "design," "shape," nor "configuration," and must be protected, if at all, under a patent of another kind. I cannot say that the presence of such matter in the specification would be objectionable if description merely, but it could in no way be allowed to enter into, or to modify the claim.
As to the first ground of rejection, I think the Examiner is in error. This purports to be a new form or shape of a distinct article of manufacture, to wit: rubber erasers. If it be new, as thus applied, it is immaterial whether pencils, or stumps, or pen holders, or anything else may or may not have been made cylindrical. If they are not substantially the same article of manufacture as erasers, the old form applied to this new article is unquestionably entitled to protection.
The applicant has not defined his invention with entire accuracy. He should strike from his claim the words "provided with a wrapper or case," as those relate to construction and not configuration, and he should insert the words "having the ends beveled to an edge" in lieu of the phrase erased, or he should adopt the usual form of claim for designs, viz: "The design for a rubber eraser, as shown and described."
As the claim stands, it ought not to be allowed, and the decision must be affirmed, but the applicant will be allowed to amend as suggested.
(Signed) S.S. FISHER.
Commissioner of Patents
3,201.--SEWING MACHINE.--H.A. House, Bridgeport, Conn. November 4, 1869.
3,211.--BORING TOOL.--Alexander Allen, New York city. November 5 1869.
3,215.--MODE OF AND DEVICES FOE SECURING STAIR RODS.--H. Uhry, New York city. November 6, 1869.
3,229.--TRANSPORTATION OF LETTERS, PARCELS, AND OTHER FREIGHT BY ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE, AND IN APPARATUS CONNECTED THEREWITH.--A. E. Beach, Stratford, Conn. November 9, 1869.
3,303.--RELOADING CARTRIDGE SHELL.--R.J. Gatling, Indianapolis, Ind. November 16, 1869.
3,342.--WOODEN PAVEMENT.--I. Hayward and J.F. Paul, Boston, Mass. November 20, 1869.
3,358.--MACHINERY FOR DISTRIBUTING TYPE.--O.L. Brown, Boston, Mass. November 20,1869.
3,219.--WEIGHING MACHINE.--M. Kennedy, New York city. November 10, 1869.
3,260.--BRAN DUSTER.--W. Huntley and A. Babcock, Silver Creek, N.Y. November 12, 1869.
3,339.--RAILWAY CARRIAGE.--E. Robbins, Cincinnati, Ohio. November 19, 1869.
3,341.--REVOLVING BATTERY GUN.--R.J. Gatling, Indianapolis, Ind. Nov. 19, 1869.
3,360.--SASH FASTENER.--S.L. Loomis, South Byron, N.Y. November 20, 1869.
3,363.--MAGNETIC MACHINES AND MAGNETS.--J. Burroughs, Jr., Newark N.J. November 20, 1869.
A comprehensive description of this excellent machine was given upon page 230, Vol. XVIII., of the SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN. We now present our readers with an engraving of it and a summary of its important features, which doubtless render it equal if not superior to any machine of the kind in market. The frame in which the feed rollers are arranged is so hung to the frame-work of the molding machine, that it can be raised or lowered at pleasure, in order to properly adjust the feed rollers for action upon the "stuff," and it is also so constructed as to permit the feed rollers to yield in case of variations in the thickness of the "stuff" passing under them. The spindle of the side cutter-heads is hung in a vertical frame arranged to be moved up and down, and laterally, to adjust the cutter-head for action, and is provided at its upper end with a box or bearing, whereby the bearing of the box is always kept upon the spindle instead of at different points of the same as in other machines, and this without interfering with the adjustability of the side cutter-head. Thus uneven wear is avoided.
RUSS' MONITOR MOLDING MACHINE.
RUSS' MONITOR MOLDING MACHINE.
The bed of the machine is formed with a series of slots or openings provided with bridge bars so that the cutters may act upon the edges of the stuff without danger of injury from striking the bed. The presser shoe is also made adjustable for different thicknesses of the "stuff" and self-yielding to variations in thickness, by a peculiar method of hanging the bar, which carries the presser shoe, to the framework of the machine.
The clamp which holds the press block which acts upon the "stuff" after it has passed through the cutter, is of novel construction, and the spindle of the side cutter-heads is so arranged in connection with a loose pulley and the pulley-drums, that both cutter-heads are driven by one belt and in the same direction.
The bed plate is provided with springs through which the side cutter-heads are arranged, to move laterally or transversely with a bridge-plate or plates, susceptible of adjustment independent of the cutter-heads, whereby an adjustable support to the "stuff" is given as it passes over the line of the openings in the bed.
Most machines have weighted pressure feed, but this having steel springs adjustable by a screw and hand wheel, a heavy or light pressure can be applied according to the work done or size of molding. The cutter-heads are square and slotted so that any style of molding can be stuck by putting cutters on all sides of the head, thus equalizing the cost and lessening the power. The pressure shoe is arranged to hold the "stuff" at the very point of contact with the cutters, and, as we have shown, is readily adjusted to a long or short cutter, so that a small molding can be made as smooth as a large one, and so as not to require any finishing with sandpaper or a hand tool.
The machine has also a bevel track very useful for picture frame molding, and a patent cap of great value for the cutters, and readily applied to any slotted head or common head. The wrenches that go with the machine, and the common malleable iron caps for the top cylinder, are shown in detail. These machines are now running in Worcester, Boston, and Fitchburg, Mass.; Chicago, Ill.: Philadelphia, Pa.; Brattleboro, Vt.; Whitesboro, N. Y.; Charleston, S. C., and other places, and, it is claimed, are capable of doing better work and more of it than any machine now in use.
This machine is covered by several patents taken through the Scientific American Patent Agency. It is manufactured by R. Ball & Co., of Worcester, Mass, to whom write for further information.
At the last regular meeting of the American Geographical and Statistical Society at its rooms in the Cooper Institute, Professor Newberry, of Columbia College, delivered an address on the subject of his explorations in Utah and Arizona Territories. The speaker commenced by giving a short history of the circumstances under which the two government expeditions to which he was attached were organized. He then confined his remarks to the subject of the latter expedition, no account of which has yet been published. Its aim was principally to explore the region embraced by what is known as the old Spanish trail from Santa Fe to California. After giving an interesting account of the topography of the region traversed, he proceeded to speak of the traces which were found on every hand of a former occupancy by a numerous population now extinct. These were most numerous near the course of the San Juan river. There were found ruins of immense structures, a view of one of which he exhibited, built regularly of bricks, a foot in thickness, and about eighteen inches in length, with the joints properly broken, and as regularly laid and as smooth as any in a Fifth Avenue mansion. This structure he said was as large as the Croton reservoir. Inside were rooms nicely plastered as the walls of a modern house. There were also traces of extensive canals, which had been constructed to bring water to these towns, which were received into large cisterns. The lecturer also exhibited pieces of pottery which he said abounded everywhere, showing that in a former age all this vast region had been inhabited. He gave it as his opinion that the depopulation of this region was attributable to the fact that both to the north and the south were warlike hordes, and from the incursions of one and the other of these, the peaceable Aztecs, who had been the former denizens of the country, had been gradually wiped out. The only people left here now were the Mokies, who lived in towns inclosed within high, thick walls, and who were almost inaccessible. These people were visited, and the explorers were received by them with great hospitality. The speaker concluded by giving a short account of the manners of the people and their customs, as far as an opportunity was had to observe them.
The term "palier glissant," which does not admit of being very happily translated into an English term of equal brevity, is the name given by the inventor, Mr. Girard, to a frictionless support, or socket, designed to sustain the axes of heavy wheels in machinery. Since it is a contrivance deriving its efficacy from hydraulic pressure, it may, without impropriety, be considered here. The friction of axles in their supports is the occasion of a considerable loss of power in every machine.
The loss of power itself, though a real disadvantage, is nevertheless a matter of secondary consequence compared with the attendant elevation of temperature, which, were not means carefully provided for reducing friction to the lowest point possible, might soon be so great as to arrest the operation of the machine itself. It was stated in a public lecture delivered in May, 1867, before the Scientific Association of France, that, in a certain instance within the lecturer's knowledge, the screw shaft of a French naval propeller became absolutely welded to its support, though surrounded by the water of the sea, in consequence of the great heat developed by its revolution.
The ordinary means of reducing friction is to apply oil, or some other unctuous substance, to the parts which move upon each other. Some disadvantages attend this expedient, but till a better is suggested they have to be endured. The cost of the oil expended in maintaining in proper condition the axles of the machinery in a foundery, or of the rolling stock of a railroad, amounts to a large sum annually; while the want of neatness which its use makes, to a certain extent, inevitable, and the labor which must be constantly employed to prevent this want of neatness from becoming much greater than it is, are serious items to be set off against its positive usefulness.
The object of Mr. Girard is to get rid of all these drawbacks by the simple expedient of substituting water for oil. It would not avail to apply water precisely as oil is applied. Though any one's experience may tell him that two smooth pieces of metal will slide more smoothly on each other when they are wet than when they are dry, yet every one knows also that oil facilitates the movement much more perceptibly than water; and also, that in the case of oil there is no difficulty in maintaining the lubricating film, whereas water easily evaporates, and in case of the accident of even a moderate elevation of temperature, it would be expelled from the joint entirely. Mr. Girard proposes, therefore, to employ the water to act, first, by its pressure, to lift the Journal to be lubricated; and secondly, by its fluidity, to form a liquid bed or cushion between the journal and its box, on which the journal may rest in its revolution, without touching the metal of the box at all.
The construction will be understood by referring to the figure. One of the journals is represented as removed, and in the cylindrical surface of the socket are seen grooves occupying a considerable part of the area exposed. These grooves communicate, by an aperture in the middle, with a tube which is represented externally, and which sends a branch to the other journal, through which water under a heavy pressure is introduced into the box beneath the journal. The effect of the hydraulic pressure is to lift the axle, opening a passage for the escape of the compressed water, which at the same time, because of its release from compression, loses the power to sustain the weight. If, therefore, by the first impulse, the axle is thrown upward to any sensible distance, it will immediately fall back again, once more confining more or less completely the water. After one or two oscillations, therefore, the axle will settle itself at length in a position in which, while the water will escape, it will escape but as a film of inappreciable thickness. In this condition the journal turns upon a liquid bed, and the resistance to its revolution is so excessively small that a slow rotation given by hand to a wheel sustained by it will be maintained for many minutes without perceptible retardation. In fact, the most striking illustration which can be given of the immense superiority of thepalier glissantover a support lubricated in in any other way, is furnished by placing two precisely similar wheels or disks side by side, weighing five or six pounds each, with a diameter of seven or eight inches, and journals of half an inch in diameter; one of them furnished withpaliers glissants, and the other with boxes lubricated with fine oil. Give each of them a velocity of rotation of about one revolution in a second; the one lubricated with oil will come to rest before the other begins to give evidence of any sensible retardation; but if at any moment the stop-cock which supplies the water to the second be turned, this one will also stop, and its stopping will be instantaneous.
It might be supposed that a journal supported in the manner above described would be unsteady and liable to injurious vibrations. This is not the case, and it is easy to see why not. When the journal is truly in the middle of the socket, that is to say when there is an equal distance between it and the wall of the socket on either side, it will be equally pressed from both sides. But if it is in the least displaced laterally, the pressure on the side toward which it moves will instantly increase, while that on the other side will correspondingly diminish: both causes transpiring to resist the displacement, and to maintain the journal in the position of true equilibrium.
The water pressure by which these "slippery supports" are supplied must be created by a force pump worked by the machine itself. The reservoir need not be large as the expenditure of water is very minute in volume. To the objection which may naturally be made, that the working of the pump must be a tax on the motive power without return, a reply at once simple and satisfactory is found in the experience of Mr. Girard, that the working of the pump does not consume so much as half, and sometimes not more than one one quarter, of the power which is lost in friction when the ordinary modes of lubrication are employed; so that by the adoption of this expedient the available power of the machine is very sensibly increased after deducting all that is expended in the performance of this additional work.
BEES BENEFICIAL TO FRUIT.--Dr. A. Packard, editor of theAmerican Naturalist, replies to a query in regard to the effects produced upon fruit by the agency of honey bees, that all the evidence given by botanists and zoologists who have specially studied the subject, shows that bees improve the quality and tend to increase the quantity of fruit. They aid in the fertilization of flowers, thus preventing the occurrence of sterile flowers, and, by more thoroughly fertilizing flowers already perfect, render the production of sound and well developed fruit more sure. Many botanists think if it were not for bees, and other insects, many plants would not bear fruit at all.
Steamboats on the American plan are to be introduced on Lake Geneva, Switzerland. This will add very greatly to the comfort and pleasure of tourists on that beautiful lake.
PUBLISHED WEEKLY AT NO. 37 PARK ROW (PARK BUILDING), NEW YORK.
O.D. MUNN. S.H. WALES. A.E. BEACH.
"The American News Company," Agents, 121 Nassau street, New York
"The New York News Company," 8 Spruce street
VOL. XVII., No. 1....[NEW SERIES.]....Twenty-fifth Year.
NEW YORK, SATURDAY, JANUARY, 1, 1870.
Is the heartfelt wish conveyed in this beautiful and unusually large number, to each and all of our friends and readers This holiday number is worthy of note not only on account of its size, its rich table of contents, and profuse illustrations, but because we publish this week the largest edition ever sent out from this office.
Our readers may be surprised at our publishing the title page of the volume again this week but they will please observe it is the title page of Vol XXII, which we are now commencing The title pages will hereafter be published with the first instead of the last number of each volume, so as to bring it in its proper place for binding.
Subscriptions are pouring in from all parts of the country in the most encouraging manner. Many have already secured the prize engraving, by sending in the requisite number of names-but we feel obliged to confess that there is now a considerable want of vitality in the competition for the cash prizes. We expect however, that as soon as the new year's greetings are fairly exchanged, that this opportunity to receive some purse money will attract the attention of our enterprising readers The times may be a little close just now, but we are confident that the spring will open joyously, and we are quite sure that the people will still want to know what is going on in the GREAT WORLD OF INDUSTRY, which, it will be our duty to chronicle.
All lists intended to compete for the cash premium must be marked "Cash prize list."
Once more we say a "Happy New Year" to all.
The daily press is giving currency to a great many facts in regard to the present incomplete condition of the Suez Canal, and some journals are arguing therefrom that it is a failure. As yet, ships of heavy draft are unable to get through it. Some disasters to shipping have occurred in the Red Sea after the canal has been passed, and it is not at all improbable that more troubles will arise before everything goes smoothly.
The Red Sea is comparatively unknown to navigators. It contains hidden rocks which must be charted and buoyed before its navigation can be rendered safe. Surely this ought not to take the world by surprise. As to the canal itself, we are only surprised that it has reached its present state of perfection and we advise those who now make haste to prophesy ignominious defeat for one of the greatest enterprises of the century, to suspend judgment for a time. New York journalists might certainly call to mind with profit, the annual troubles attending the opening of the canals in this State. Frosts heave and rats undermine, and banks annually give way, yet these things are not regarded as surprising. But upon the opening of a work, to which all the minor canals in the world are like the rods of the magicians to Aaron's rod which swallowed them up, it is expected that everything shall move without difficulty, and that no oversight will have been committed. Truly this would be to attribute a power of prevision to M. Lesseps beyond what is human. The world can afford to wait a little till this huge machine gets oiled. Great enterprises move slow at the outset. We have yet unshaken faith in the ultimate success of the Suez Canal.
In our description of the novel steam boiler, published on page 209, last volume, we made a quotation from several eminent writers and experimenters on the subjects of heat and steam, to the effect that the tubular system in steam boilers was wrong in theory and unsafe in practice, and although this system has hitherto been extensively used on account of some advantages which it secures, it has long been a serious question with thinking men whether these advantages were not obtained at too dear a rate.
While not prepared to admit all the force of the objections made to the tubular system, there are arguments against it that it will not do to treat lightly and which seem to us more and more forcible the more we candidly reflect upon the subject. One of the most forcible of these which occurs to us is, that in the tubular system the disruptive force of unequal expansion is far more likely to become a cause of danger than in the plain cylinder boiler. In such boilers the tension of expanded tubes is transmitted to the shell, which are greatly strained without doubt, often nearly to the verge of rupture. When this occurs it is evident an unusual strain, caused by sudden generation of steam, would act in concert with the expansion of the tubes, and we have no doubt these causes combined have given rise to many an explosion when the steam, acting singly, could never have produced rupture.
But while we give due weight to this argument, there is one often referred to by our correspondents, and which we often see stated in newspapers, as ridiculous as the one we have noticed is forcible. It is that when, in such boilers, water, by carelessness or otherwise, is allowed to fall below any of the tubes, the steam which surrounds them is decomposed, and becomes an explosive mixture of hydrogen and oxygen gases, ready to explode with terrible violence whenever the temperature of the tubes shall have reached the proper point.
This argument is ridiculous, because it rests on no experimental basis. It is a flimsy theory, entirely unsupported by any facts. Never has it been proved that hot iron, at any temperature likely to be obtained in steam boiler tubes, decomposes steam except by itself appropriating the oxygen of the steam, and leaving the hydrogen, by itself no more explosive than any other heated gas.
The sole object of the tubular boiler is to increase the heating surface, without corresponding increase in other particulars. That it is not the only means whereby this object can be secured has already been demonstrated and we believe will hereafter be shown in divers ways. We have no more doubt that the next fifty years will witness the total abandonment of the tubular system, than we have that the world will last that length of time.
There seems a growing opinion among railway managers that the sole end and purpose of a railroad is to line the 6 pockets of, if not its stockholders, at least its directors. In fact we not long since saw a statement in a widely-circulated journal, that, as the sole purpose of railroads is that the companies who own them should make money, it is absurd to suppose they would be content to manage them in any way whereby such a result would not be most likely to accrue.
The journal referred to, in making this statement a basis for an argument in favor of railway consolidation, entirely ignored the rights of the public from which railway corporations have obtained their charters. In these charters certain privileges were granted, not out of pure generosity, but with the understanding that certain benefits were to accrue to the public. Its safety and convenience were to be considered as well as the profits to the owners.
Every charter granted to these roads involves a contract on their part to do the public a certain service, and in a large majority of cases these contracts are to-day unfulfilled. Day after day sees the power to control more and more centered in a few unscrupulous wily managers, and the comfort and safety of passengers more and more disregarded; yet still the people submit.
But they do not submit without complaint. Now and then a newspaper correspondent grumbles, and the news of smashes that may be almost daily seen in the papers gives a text for an occasional editorial blast, as little heeded by the delinquent companies, as a zephyr is felt by an oak.
Thus the New YorkTimes, on the occasion of a recent railway disaster, gives vent to a little mild denunciation. It says:
"The general rule in this country (to which there are indeed exceptions) in regard to the purchase of railway materials is simply this: buy the cheapest. First cost is the controlling and often the only question entertained. The nature of the materials and processes to be used in the manufacture of rails, for instance, are not mentioned. The buyers for some of our roads, especially new roads, never make the slightest allusion to quality, and never specify tests and inspections, but simply go about among the mills, comparing and beating down prices, and accepting the very lowest. More than one of our rail makers are to-day rolling, under protest, rails upon which they decline to put their trade-mark--rails made from the very cheapest materials, in the very meanest manner--for all that is required is that they shall stick together till they are laid. And if American makers will not roll them, Welsh makers will. The late report of the State Engineer of New York says: 'American railway managers, instead of offering anything like a reasonable price for good iron rails, have made themselves notorious by establishing as standard, a brand of rails known all over the world as "American rails," which are confessedly bought and sold as the weakest, most impure, least worked, least durable, and cheapest rails that can be produced.' The State Engineer refers, in confirmation of this opinion, to the statement of Mr. A.S. Hewitt, United States Commissioner to the Paris Exposition, a statement not yet controverted; and to a statement of Mr. Sandberg, an English engineer of note, in the LondonTimes. A leading American railway president and reformer has publicly said: 'There is a fear on my part that railway companies will themselves tempt steel makers to send a poor article by buying the cheapest--first cost only considered--as they did with the ironmasters.'"
This certainly is a blessed state of affairs. We have given privileges to giant corporations, which they have improved so profitably, that they now can defeat, in our Legislatures, any attempt to revoke them, and can laugh at any demand for better management.
Disguise it how we may, the railroads have got the upper hand of the people, and they seem likely to keep it, unless, indeed, their rapacity shall react against themselves.
At the moment of this writing accounts reach us of the officers of a prominent railway line intrenching themselves against the officers of the law, and employing force to resist the service of precepts calling them to account for alleged frauds upon the stockholders.
That the Legislature of this State has the power to put a stop to these disgraceful proceedings, is certain; what it will do remains to be demonstrated.
If there is anybody satisfied with the action of the managers of the American Institute, in the matter of awarding prizes to the competing engines exhibited at the recent fair, we have yet to meet that complacent individual. Neither the exhibitors nor the general public could be expected to accept with equanimity such a report as the managers have made, because it is inadequate to give any real idea of the relative merits of the engines tested. The exhibitors, at a large expense, took their engines to the hall of exhibition, placed them in position, and with them drove the machinery exhibited there; and now, when in return they had a right to expect a decided, manly course on the part of the managers, the oyster is swallowed and the contestants are each politely handed a shell.
The conditions on which the general test was to be made contained, among other specifications, these: that "the water supplied to and evaporated in the boiler will be measured by means of a meter, and the coal burned may also be weighed."
Only one of the conditions quoted was properly complied with. The coal was weighed, but though a meter was used to measure the water, tests made, we are informed,after the trial of the engines, showed that the meter was so inaccurate as to completely invalidate any calculation based upon its record of the water supplied. Nevertheless this has, we are credibly informed, been made the basis of calculation; and the amount of coal consumed during each trial has been rejected either as a basis of calculation or a check on the inaccuracy of the meter.
Other prescribed regulations were observed with great care. The engines were indicated in a masterly manner by a gentleman of great experience, as the cards--tracings of which we have seen--bear ample testimony. The temperature of the feedwater was 47 degrees; it should, in our opinion, have been heated, but we waive this point. The state of the barometer and temperatures of engine room and fire-room were observed; but we respectfully submit, that with coal consumption left out of the calculation, and the water consumption an unascertained quantity, the question of relative economy, the vital point to be settled, is as uncertain today as it was before the test.
In theTribuneof December 20, appeared a statement of the test to ascertain the accuracy of the meter used, which showed that in an aggregate of twelve tests it varied nearly three per cent in its record from the actual quantity delivered, while at times it was so erratic that it varied in one instance overten per cent.
Truly, considered in connection with this fundamental error, temperatures of engine and boiler rooms, and states of barometer, will not count for much with engineers.
An oversight like this would, however, never have been laid at the door of the managers, however it might invalidate the test; but when the utterly absurd decision announced in the papers, after a tedious delay had led the public to expect an exhaustive statement, gave rise to general disappointment and excited the utmost dissatisfaction, it became manifest that a manly, straightforward course on their part was not to be hoped for, and that any protest against the consummation of the farce would be vain.
It is not for us to decide on the merits of the engines submitted to test. It was for the judges to do this. We maintain that nothing that the public will accept as a decision has been reached, and on behalf of the public we protest that the managers have not only placed themselves in a very unenviable position by their action in the premises, but have done a lasting injury to the American Institute, the results of which will be disastrously felt in future exhibitions.
The studied ambiguity of the report which awards two first prizes to the competing engines, is no less apparent than the desire to shun responsibility.
In July, 1869, the New Dominion Patent Law went into operation, but it has not yet been approved by the Queen, and if rejected the Canadian Parliament will perhaps try its hand again. Although Canadians may freely go to all parts of the world and take out patents for their inventions, they have always manifested a mean spirit and adopted a narrow policy, in reference to inventors of other nations. Their present patent laws are so framed as practically to debar all persons except Canadians from taking patents; and the result is that American and English inventions are pirated and patented in the Dominion, without so much as a "thank you, sir," to thebona fideoriginators.
A protest has been presented to her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, asking that the new law may be rejected, on the ground that it deprives the subjects of the Crown of their equal rights throughout the empire. There is force in this objection, and Lord Granville has promised that it shall be duly considered before the Queen is advised to sign the law.
The probable result will be a revision of the Dominion patent code so as to let in Englishmen but exclude the Yankees, from whom the Canadians derive whatever of improvement, progress, and energy they possess.
Ingratitude seldom enters into the composition of a true inventor, and nothing in our business career has afforded us more pleasure than the frequent letters addressed to us by those who have, during more than twenty years, employed the Scientific American Patent Agency. We cannot find room for all the pleasant missives that come to us from our extensive list of clients, but we may give a few as samples of the many.
Mr. Daniel J. Gale, of Sheboygan, Wis., has recently secured through our Agency Letters Patent for a "Perpetual and Lunar Calendar Clock." In the fullness of his satisfaction he thus writes: "The fact is, I shall never be able to thank you sufficiently for what you have done for me. I sent you a copy of the paper printed here, which favorably notices my improvement and your great Agency. The fees charged me for my patent have been low enough. Already, by one of my own townsmen, I have been offered $4,000 for my interest in the patent. But I must not take up too much of your I time. Please allow me to add that I regularly receive your valuable paper, the SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, and that you may number me as one of its stanch friends."
Mr. Edwin Norton, of Brooklyn, N.Y., in a recent note, says: "Allow me to express my thanks for the promptness and efficiency with which the business of obtaining a patent for my 'Cinder and Dust Arrester' has been conducted through your Agency--and not only in this case but in several previous ones. This is thefourthpatent obtained by me through four Agency within nine months. It gives me pleasure to add my testimony to that of many others, with respect to the very satisfactory manner in which your Patent Agency is conducted."
Mr. E. J. Marstens says, in reference to his improved "Field Press"--"I find everything correct. You certainly accomplished more than I expected after the first examination by the Primary Examiner. I hope soon to be able to give you another case."
Mr. S. P. Williams, an old client, writes as follows: "I received the patent on my 'Trace Lock for Whiffletrees,' and I am truly pleased with the prompt manner in which you have done the business. It is only a few weeks since I made the application, and I expected that it would be as many months before the patent could be granted."
It certainly argues well for the intellectual character of the readers of the New YorkWorldthat during the prevalent taste for sensational journalism, it has found the publication of a series of philosophical lectures acceptable. We thank our neighbor for thus making these lectures available to the general public. Their ability is unquestionable; and the calmness and candor which Professor Fiske brings to the treatment of the subject is such as to add greatly to the force of his logic.
The "positive philosophy" has been shown by Professor Fiske to be much misunderstood, misapprehension not being confined solely to the ranks of its opponents.
His exposition of some of the misconceptions on which Professor Huxley has based some criticisms upon the writings of Comte, strikes us as especially forcible; and the whole course of lectures proves Professor Fiske to be one of the clearest and most able of American thinkers.
These lectures are followed as they appear, with great interest, and their publication in the World we regard as a real and permanent benefit to the public.
The announcement of these lectures came to hand too late for our last issue, and the first has already been delivered. The course is as follows: Friday, Dec. 17, The Battle Fields of Science, by Andrew D. White, President of the Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. Friday, Dec. 24, How Animals Move, by Professor E. S. Morse, of the Peabody Academy of Science, Salem, Mass. Friday, Dec. 31, The Correlation of Vital and Physical Forces, by Professor G. F. Barker, of Yale College, New Haven. Friday, Jan. 7, The Air and Respiration, by Professor J. C. Draper, of the College of the City of New York. Friday, Jan. 14, The Connection of Natural Science and Mental Philosophy, by Professor J. Bascom, of Williams College, Williamstown, Mass. Friday, Jan. 21, The Constitution of the Sun, by Dr. B. A. Gould, of Cambridge, Mass. Friday, Jan. 28, The Colorado Plateau, its Canons and Ruined Cities, by Professor J. S. Newberry, of Columbia College, New York.
The course is a good one, and ought to be, and doubtless will be, well attended. Abstracts of the lectures will appear as delivered, in the SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN.
This lecture did not disappoint the expectations of those familiar with the subject of the discourse, which, considering the difficulty of restating familiar historical facts in such a manner as to clothe them in a garb of originality, is high praise. Many, however, found great difficulty in hearing the speaker at the back part of the hall, and some left the room on that account. This was unfortunate, as the lecture will scarcely be exceeded in interest by any subsequent one of the course. The speaker said that "In all modern history, interference with science in the supposed interest of religion--no matter how conscientious such interference may have been--has resulted in the direst evils both to religion and science, andinvariably. And on the other hand all untrammeled scientific investigation, no matter how dangerous to religion some of its stages may have seemed, temporarily, to be, has invariably resulted in the highest good of religion and science. I sayinvariably--I mean exactly that. It is a rule to which history shows not one exception. It would seem, logically, that this statement could not be gainsaid. God's truth must agree, whether discovered by looking within upon the soul or without upon the world. A truth written upon the human heart to-day in its full play of emotions or passions, cannot be at any real variance even with a truth written upon a fossil whose poor life was gone millions of years ago. And this being so, it would also seem a truth irrefragable; that the search for each of these kind of truths must be followed out in its own lines, by its own methods, to its own results, without any interference from investigators along other lines by other methods. And it would also seem logically that we might work on in absolute confidence that whatever, at any moment, might seem to be the relative positions of the two different bands of workers, they must at last come together, for truth is one. But logic is not history. History is full of interferences which have cost the earth dear. Strangest of all, some of the most direful of them have been made by the best of men, actuated by the purest motives, seeking the noblest results. These interferences and the struggle against them make up the warfare of science. One statement more to clear the ground. You will not understand me at all to say that religion has done nothing for science. It has done much for it. The work of Christianity has been mighty indeed. Through these 2,000 years it has undermined servitude, mitigated tyranny, given hope to the hopeless, comfort to the afflicted, light to the blind, bread to the starving, life to the dying, and all this work continues. And its work for science, too, has been great. It has fostered science often and developed it. It has given great minds to it, and but for the fears of the timid its record in this respect would have been as great as in the other. Unfortunately, religious men started centuries ago with the idea that purely scientific investigation is unsafe--that theology must intervene. So began this great modern war."
Professor White next reviewed the battle between science and theology on the subjects of the "earth's shape, surface, and relations," "the position of the earth among the heavenly bodies," in which Copernicus and Galileo struggled so bravely and successfully for truth.
The lecturer said:
"The principal weapons in the combat are worth examining. They are very easily examined; you may pick them up on any of the battle-fields of science; but on that field they were used with more effect than on almost any other. These weapons were two epithets--the epithets 'Infidel' and 'Atheist.' These can hardly be classed with civilized weapons; they are burning arrows; they set fire to great masses of popular prejudices. Smoke rises to obscure the real questions. Fire bursts out at times to destroy the attacked party. They are poisoned weapons. They go to the heart of loving women; they alienate dear children; they injure the man after life is ended, for they leave poisoned wounds in the hearts of those who loved him best--fears for his eternal happiness, dread of the Divine displeasure. The battle-fields of science are thickly strewn with these. They have been used against almost every man who has ever done anything for his fellow-men. The list of those who have been denounced as Infidel and Atheist includes almost all great men of science--general scholars, inventors, philanthropists. The deepest Christian life, the most noble Christian character has not availed to shield combatants. Christians like Isaac Newton and Pascal, and John Locke and John Howard, have had these weapons hurled against them. Nay, in these very times we have seen a noted champion hurl these weapons against John Milton, and with it another missile which often appears on these battle-fields--the epithets of 'blasphemer' and 'hater of the Lord.' Of course, in these days these weapons though often effective in disturbing the ease of good men and though often powerful in scaring women, are somewhat blunted. Indeed, they do not infrequently injure assailants more than assailed. So it was not in the days of Galileo. These weapons were then in all their sharpness and venom. The first champion who appears against him is Bellarmine, one of the greatest of theologians and one of the poorest of scientists. He was earnest, sincere, learned, but made the fearful mistake for the world of applying direct literal interpretation of Scripture to science. The consequences were sad, indeed. Could he with his vast powers have taken a different course, humanity would have been spared the long and fearful war which ensued, and religion would have saved to herself thousands on thousands of the best and brightest men in after ages. The weapons, which men of Bellarmine's stamp used, were theological. They held up before the world the dreadful consequences which must result to Christian theology were the doctrine to prevail that the heavenly bodies revolve about the sun, and not about the earth.
"The next great series of battles were fought on those great fields occupied by such sciences asChemistry and Natural Philosophy. Even before these sciences were out of their childhood--while yet they were tottering mainly towards, childish objects and by childish steps--the champions of that same old mistaken conception of rigid Scriptural interpretation began the war. The catalogue of chemists and physicists persecuted or thwarted would fill volumes."
After alluding to many other battle-fields of science which might not for want of time be dwelt upon at length the lecturer reviewed the battle grounds of medicine and anatomy on which some of the severest warfare has been waged.
The speaker here remarked that "perhaps the most unfortunate thing that has ever been done for Christianity is the tying it to forms of science and systems of education, which are doomed and gradually sinking. Just as in the time of Roger Bacon excellent but mistaken men devoted all their energies to binding Christianity to Aristotle. Just as in the time of Reuchlin and Erasmus they insisted on binding Christianity to Thomas Aquinas, so in the time of Vesalius such men gave all efforts to linking Christianity to Galen. The cry has been the same in all ages. It is the same which we hear in this age against scientific studies--the cry for what is called 'sound learning.' Whether standing for Aristotle against Bacon, or Aquinas against Erasmus, or Galen against Vesalius, or making mechanical Greek verses at Eton, instead of studying the handiwork of the Almighty, or reading Euripides with translations instead of Leasing and Goethe in the original, the cry always is for 'sound learning.' The idea always is that these studies aresafe."
The speaker next proceeded to show that not alone in Catholic countries, has such warfare been waged, and that even now in Protestant America the fight is going on.
One of the fields on which the severest warfare had raged in Protestant countries was that of Geology. "From the first lispings of investigators in this science there was war. The early sound doctrine was that fossil remains werelusus naturae--freaks of nature--and in 1517 Fracastor was violently attacked because he thought them something more. No less a man than Bernard Palissy followed up the contest, on the right side, in France, but it required 150 years to carry the day fairly against this single preposterous theory. The champion who dealt it the deadly blow was Scilla, and his weapons were facts obtained by examination of the fossils of Calabria, (1670). But the advocates of tampering with scientific reasoning soon retired to a now position. It was strong, for it was apparently based upon Scripture--though, as the whole world now knows, an utterly exploded interpretation of Scripture. The new position was that the fossils were produced by the deluge of Noah. In vain had it been shown by such devoted Christians as Bernard Palissy that this theory was utterly untenable; in vain did good men protest against the injury sure to result to religion by tying it to a scientific theory sure to be exploded--the doctrine that the fossils were remains of animals drowned at the flood continued to be upheld by the great majority as 'sound' doctrine. It took 120 year for the searchers of God's truth, as revealed in nature--such men as Buffon, Linnaeus, Woodward, and Whitehurst--to run under these mighty fabrics of error, and by statements which could not be resisted, to explode them.
"Strange as it may at first seem, the war on geology was waged more fiercely in Protestant countries than Catholic, and of all countries England furnished the most bitter opponents. You have noted already that there are generally two sorts of attacks on a new science. First, there is the attack by pitting against science some great doctrine in theology. You saw this in astronomy, when Bellarmine and others insisted that the doctrine of the earth's revolving about the sun is contrary to the doctrine of the Incarnation. So now against geology it was urged that the scientific doctrine that the fossils represented animals which died before Adam was contrary to the doctrine of Adam's fall, and that death entered the world by sin. Then there is the attack by the literal interpretation of texts, which serves a better purpose generally in arousing prejudice. It is difficult to realize it now, but within the memory of the majority of those before me, the battle was raging most fiercely in England, and both these kinds of artillery were in full play and filling the civilized world with their roar. Less than thirty years ago, the Rev. J. Mellor Brown was hurling at all geologists alike, and especially at such Christian divines as Dr. Burkland, Dean Conybeare, and Pye Smith, and such religious scholars as Professor Sedgwick, the epithets of 'Infidel,' 'Impugner of the Sacred Record,' and 'Assailant of the Volume of God.' His favorite weapon was the charge that these men were 'attacking the Truth of God,' forgetting that they were simply opposing the mistaken interpretations of J. Mellor Brown. He declared geology 'not a subject of lawful inquiry;' he speaks of it as 'a dark art,' as 'dangerous and disreputable,' as a 'forbidden province.' This attempt to scare men from science having failed, various other means were taken.
"To say nothing about England, it is humiliating to human nature to remember the trials to which the pettiest and narrowest of men subjected such Christian scholars in our country as Benjamin Silliman and Edward Hitchcock. But it is a duty and a pleasure to state here that one great Christian scholar did honor to religion and to himself by standing up for the claims of science despite all these clamors. That man was Nicholas Wiseman, better known afterward as Cardinal Wiseman. The conduct of this pillar of the Roman Catholic Church contrasts nobly with that of timid Protestants who were filling England with shrieks and denunciations. Perhaps the most singular attempt against geology was that made by a fine specimen of the English Don, Dean Cockburn of York, toabuseits champions out of the field. Without apparently the simplest elementary knowledge of geology, he opened a battery of abuse. He gives it to the world at large by pulpit and press; he even inflicts it upon leading statesmen by private letters. But these weapons did not succeed. They were like Chinese gongs and dragon lanterns against rifled cannon. Buckland, Pye Smith, Lyell, Silliman, Hitchcock, Murchison, Agassiz, Dana, and a host of of noble champions besides, pressed on the battle for truth was won. And was it won merely for men of science? The whole civilized world declares that it was won for religion; that thereby has infinitely increased the knowledge of the power and goodness of God."
The lecturer classed the present opposition of the Catholics to the Free School system in this country among the long list of battles between science and theology and concluded his lecture as follows:
"But, my friends, I will not weary you with so recent a chapter in the history of the great warfare extending through the centuries. There are cheering omens. The greatest and best men in the churches--the men standing at centers of thought--are insisting with power, more and more, that religion shall no longer be tied to so injurious a policy--that searchers for truth, whether in Theology or Natural Science, shall work on as friends, sure that, no matter how much at variance they may at times seem to be, the truths they reach shall finally be fused into each other. No one need fear the result. No matter whether science shall complete her demonstration that man has been on the earth six thousand years or six hundred thousand. No matter whether she reveal new ideas of the Creator or startling relations between his creatures--the result, when fully thought out, will serve and strengthen religion not less than science. The very finger of the Almighty has written on history that science must be studied by means proper to itself, and in no other way. That history is before us all. No one can gainsay it. It is decisive, for it is this: There has never been a scientific theory framed for the use of Scriptural texts, which has been made to stand. This fact alone shows that our wonderful volume of sacred literature was not given for any such purpose as that to which so many earnest men have endeavored to wrest it. The power of that volume has been mighty indeed. It has inspired the best deeds our world has known. Despite the crusts which men have formed about it--despite the fetters which they have placed upon it--Christianity has blessed age after age of the past, and will go on as a blessing through age after age of the future. Let the Warfare of Science, then, be changed. Let it be a warfare in which religion and science shall stand together as allies, not against each other as enemies. Let the fight be for truth of every kind against falsehood of every kind--for justice against injustice--for right against wrong--for beauty against deformity--for goodness against vice--and the great warfare which has brought so many sufferings, shall bring to the earth God's richest blessings."