304 THE MICROSCOPE. 
or separated, the lenses in the latter event are used singly ; but 
since not the least attempt is made toward correction in the 
single lenses, the result is interesting and abominable. Still, 
this is another instance where too much must not be asked from 
the same optical appliance. If a combination objective is good 
when used as a combination, the chances are that it will not be 
so commendable when disrupted. There are good combination 
objectives made in America and Germany, but French Triplets 
do not belong in that category. 
The cost of the cheapest one inch objective by American 
makers is five dollars, or twice that of a “Stove-pipe,” or Doub- 
let, of the same focal length, but the former is not only twice as 
good, but so infinitely superior that there can be no comparison 
between them. As for the one-fifteenth inch, the beginner would 
not want it at any price, nor even a better one. But the French 
Triplet one-fourth inch costs three dollars and fifty cents, while 
the least expensive American objective of the same focus is cat- 
alogued at fourteen dollars. These commendable lenses seem 
somewhat high priced, but they are in their way works of art, 
especially when compared with French Triplets. If the beginner 
cannot buy them, if he must have “ Stove-pipes” or French 
Triplets or none, he will do well to take none. The image 
formed by these lowest of low grade French lenses is of the 
poorest quality. The outlines are thick and indistinct; the 
general aspect is dull and lifeless, and the whole field of view has 
a hazy appearance, as if the observer were looking through a 
faint mist. The outlines of the image formed by the cheapest 
of American objectives are comparatively sharp and distinctly 
marked, the field of view is clear and bright, and the whole as- 
pect of things is brilliant and attractive. These Triplets, and 
Doublets, and Stove-pipes are exceedingly costly in another than 
a mere pecuniary sense. 
The continued use of French Triplets must have an injurious 
effect on the microscopist’s eyes. The image is so dull and the 
outlines are so obscure, that to see much of anything demands 
a strain on the eye that must, according to my experience, soon 
become fatiguing and finally injurious, unless the owner’s eyes 
are exceptionally strong. The reader may have suspected by 
this time that I have no very favorable opinion of French Trip- 
lets or even of “Stove-pipes,” but my opposition is not a mere 
