on the Oil Question. 101 



graduation of a thermometer. I will not, however, insult the 

 authors of the book, by giving a copy of his evidence. It is 

 printed entire at p. 156 of Mr. Gurney's Report of the First 

 Trial, and is a perfect chemical curiosity. 



With regard to the fact which I stated, at p. 342 of the last 

 Journal, respecting the expansion of oil, viz., that " I had 

 found by direct experiment, that whale oil expands more than 

 one-fifth in bulk, when heated from 58°. to 460°," these Asso- 

 ciates have exhibited a notable degree of unfairness and want 

 of candour ; inasmuch as they are desirous of casting a 

 suspicion on the assertion, and yet have neither the courage to 

 contradict it, nor yet the liberality to acknowledge its correct- 

 ness. Hear them on this point. " Let us suppose for a 

 moment," say they, " that Mr. Parkes has given a correct 

 statement as to the degree of expansion which oil undergoes by 

 heat*." " Mr. Parkes states, as already noticed, that oil, on 

 being heated from 58° to 460°, expands one-fifthf." " Now, 

 then, as to the quantity having nearly filled the vessel, so as 

 not to allow for its expansion, which Mr. Parkes says he finds 

 to be more than one-fifth in heating from 58° to 460°|:." " Al- 

 lowing for a moment the accuracy of Mr. Parkes' statement, 

 that oil when heated expands one-fifth in volume §." " Mr. 

 Parkes assumes, that whale oil expands, S)C. W" " With respect 

 to the expansion of oil, I believe that the estimate rests upon 

 Mr. Parkes' own authority, ^c.H." In the name of common 

 civility, I would ask, what can all this mean respecting an 

 assertion of so simple a nature ? Are these Associates all in- 

 capable, now that their experimenter is " absent in a remote 

 part of the world," of finding other evidence .? 



The next thing to which I shall advert is, the apparatus that 

 was employed by the defendants' chemists, for producing the 

 results which they were desirous of detailing to the Court and 

 Jury ; and upon this question, the associates write thus : " The 

 only material diflTcrcnce," say they, " between the apparatus 



*■ The Avcofiatcs' licniuiks, p. 6. t Ib'ul. p- 7. J Ibid. (i. 43. 



jlbid. 1>.4T. 11 Ibid. |>. ol. T[ Ibid. p. 51. 



