COREESPONDENCE. 49 



(diatoms), and in other departments of practical microscopy, since the 

 working distance is extremely small." He further warns his readers 

 against the pretensions put forth in advertisements to the effect that 

 " Hasert has succeeded in making objectives which render the screw- 

 adjustment no longer necessary;" as he (Dr. Dippel) found that this 

 maker's lenses do not work through cover-glasses, which Hartnack's 

 easily do. As to the mechanical work of Hasert's newest objective, 

 I may say that no tyro in our English workshops would think of 

 turning out anything so clumsily primitive. A point of far greater 

 importance to microscopists is, that the lens although alleged to be 

 a sixteenth is a much lower power. 



I remain yours, &c., 



F.E.M.S. 



Mr. Branwell's proposed Prize for the best Objective. 



To the Editor of the 'Monthly Microscopical Journal.^ 



Sir, — I regret that any words of mine should have been con- 

 strued by so courteous a writer as Mr. Branwell into an implication 

 against the integrity of the opticians. Such an implication was far 

 from my thoughts. Moreover, I have reason to believe the opticians 

 have seen nothing invidious conveyed in my allusions to them. 



The persons most interested in the award of medals — the opticians 

 — have little respect for amateur opinions of lenses. They know the 

 testing of lenses to be such essentially special and difficult work — 

 depending so much on the training of the eye, on manipulative skill, 

 on judgment in the management of the illumination — that they do 

 not readily believe an amateur can possess the qualifications necessary 

 to enable him to give a valuable opinion. 



The awarding of medals for objects made for sale necessarily pro- 

 duces an immense amount of vexation among the unsuccessful, and, in 

 many cases, draws a sharp line excluding them ever after from being 

 fairly judged on their merits. 



Mr. Branwell sets too high a value on the security of the " unim- 

 peachable ability " of the jury in the selection of the prize lens. The 

 past history of competitive awards, as shown at the exhibitions since 

 '51, teems with strange incidents scarcely known except to opticians. 

 If he wishes to be informed of these matters, there are two sources of 

 information : the fortunate exhibitors, and the unfortunate. From the 

 former he may learn how amateur jm'ymen have come to the task 

 lacking the main qualifications valuable in the eyes of the expert ; 

 how, after a mass of confused hesitation, it has hai^jDened that 

 judgment has been pronounced in favour of qualities which the 

 optician knew to be of quite inferior importance, — the real points of 

 excellence being seldom discoverable by the amateurs, whilst in 

 nearly every instance they have been indebted to the opticians for 

 the very terms in which to express their judgments ! From the 

 unfortunate exhibitors he may learn that however eminent may have 

 been the names of jurymen, that was no security for their " unim- 



E 2 



