284 American Microscopes em ieee 
in daily use in Europe without detrimental results.” [?] Possibly 
no one but Dr. Hagen has ever heard that the use of vertical in- 
struments caused a rush of blood to the head; but the experience 
of all microscopists here (Dr. Hagen excepted) is against the use 
of the low-stand vertical instruments, and that evils and imperfect 
work do result from the use of such. To show that the “comicality” 
of the objection is not original with American microscopists, the 
following is extracted from Dr. Wm. B. Carpenter’s work on 
the Microscope,—an author whose opinion is certainly equal to 
Dr. Hagen’s thirty years’ experience—written fifteen years ago. 
“Scarcely less important . . . . is the capability of beimg placed 
in either a vertical or a horizontal position, or at any angle with 
the horizon, without deranging the adjustments of its parts to each 
other.” .. . . “It is certainly a matter of surprise that opticians, 
especially on the Continent, should have so long neglected the very 
simple means which are at present commonly employed in this 
country of giving an inclined position to microscopes, since it is 
now universally acknowledged that the vertical position is, of all 
that can be adopted, the very worst.” Perhaps if Carpenter’s work 
had been translated into German fifteen years ago it might not 
have been needful to write this paper. 
Dr. Hagen has so little to say of American microscope makers, 
other than Tolles, that he found it impracticable to make so many 
mistakes in regard to them. If he had taken more “pains” he 
could have added materially to the number. 
Of Spencer he says:—‘‘ A few years ago, however, he retired 
from the business.” ‘This is a mistake, for which probably Dr. 
Hagen is not responsible. “TI have not, in fact, had an opportunity 
to compare Spencer’s objectives and oculars.” “ In Boston, Salem, 
and Massachusetts generally, there are none of Spencer’s instru- 
ments to be found ;” that is because he ‘‘ spared the pains” to find 
them. The writer had them, and would have guided the inquirer 
to others. : 
Of Zentmeyer he remarks:—“As near as I can find out he 
makes no glasses. Hach of his stands that I saw had objectives and 
oculars of Tolles or Wales.” Another example of the superficial 
knowledge obtained by Dr. Hagen; a portion of the very oculars 
which he saw on Mr. Bicknell’s instrument, and which he gives the 
power of as Tolles, were made by Zentmeyer! Had he not “spared 
pains ” to inquire, he could have learned that Zentmeyer does make 
glasses, and that one of the Tolles’ stands which he had seen was 
furnished with an excellent objective by Zentmeyer. In the notice 
of Zentmeyer’s stand the most important and characteristic features 
are entirely unnoticed ! 
Tn his notice of Grunow’s instruments he particularizes an in- 
verted microscope, the peculiarity of which was a movement by 
