560 Journal of Applied Microscopy. 



Journal of generally speaking, it is difficult to 



determine the value of a publication to 



Applied Microscopy. its readers for the reason that, beyond 



===^===^====^== an occasional letter of praise from " an 



L. B. ELLIOTT, EDITOR. ^j^j subscriber" or " an admirer " who 



Issued Monthly from the Publication Department is influenced by some particular article 

 of the Bausch & Lomb Optical Co., ^^^^ coincides with his own vicws, 



Rochester, N. Y. ' 



SUBSCRIPTIONS: 



=== editors and publishers rarely receive 

 ^ n ,. v''"^t'7''^"''A . • «. ,1; any comments on their work. 



One Dollar per Year. To Foreign Countries, $1.25 -' 



per Year, in Advance. The reader who finds the publica- 



The majority of our subscribers dislike to have their tioU of interest COUtinUCS it, whilc 



files broken in case they fail to remit at the expiration , . , j • tjv . n 1 j 



of their paid subscription. We therefore assume that no aUOthcr, interested lU a dlltCrent held, 



interruption in tlie series is desired, unless notice to , , . . , . , 



discontinue is sent. throws the copics aside as received, 



and at the expiration of his subscrip- 

 tion orders it discontinued. At this point the publisher receives the first hint 

 that his publication is lacking in something. But what ? 



It is this lack of consultation and exchange of ideas between the publisher 

 and his patrons which is responsible to a large extent for the deficiencies which 

 the public find in the publication. Most publishers are glad to be set right 

 when drifting into impractical fields, and to add new subjects when required. 

 Of none is this more true than of the Journal, and it is with the hope of bring- 

 ing ourselves more in touch with our readers, and thus knowing better how to 

 provide for their particular requirements, that we would earnestly request an 

 expression from each one who has found need for a kind of material not already 

 provided. 



* 

 * * 



It has often happened that, in visiting the various laboratories, complaints 

 have been made regarding the ineffectiveness of the laboratory equipment, and 

 upon investigation it was found that what was originally, and should still be, a 

 very excellent equipment, had materially degenerated through the lack of proper 

 daily care. 



In large laboratories it is almost impossible for the professor or instructor to 

 give time to the personal inspection and care of apparatus, but it rarely happens 

 that a student assistant can not be found competent to perform all that is re- 

 quired. For example, the touch of a perspiring finger on the lacquer of an 

 instrument has little effect if removed the same day, but left to itself produces 

 an indelible stain. The few specks of dust which fall upon the eyepiece during 

 the day may be of little consequence, but the accumulation of weeks will render 

 the best glass useless. 



The sliding brass parts of the microscope can not be protected by lacquer, 

 and in the course of time an accumulation of verdegris, small though it may be, 

 on the surfaces of a delicately fitted adjustment will destroy its fine working, 

 while if wiped away daily or weekly the instrument will retain its delicacy 

 indefinitely. Next to the system of making each student responsible for every 

 piece of apparatus he uses, frequent and systematic inspection is most essential 

 to the maintenance of a satisfactory working equipment. 



