2 go On the Converjion of Iton into Steel 



ing (leel by its union with iron fliould be eftablinietl by ex- 

 periments more perfect and more rigorous than any hitherto 

 performed, before a conclufion fo important be drawn and 

 refted upon. 



The remarks made in the iirft paragraph of this paper 

 apply equally to the refults of Sir GcoYge as defcribcd by 

 him, and that of the Polyteehnic School. So far as the de- 

 fcriplion of parties, and the tcUs ufed by each, go, the refults 

 obtained in the experiments conniiunicated by nie feem to 

 prove, with equal certaintv, the prefence of fteel ; and, as a 

 further proof of this, I Ihall adduce from the baronet's own 

 experiments an identity of rcfuits obtained in two of his own 

 operations, wherein it appears difficult to diltinguifh betwixt 

 the nature of the produ6l:5. I allude to that obtained when 

 the diamond was inclofed in a cylinder of iron, and to an- 

 other experiment, wherein, following the procefs of Clouet, 

 he fufed a mixture of iron, carbonate of lime, and pounded 

 crucible*. In tlie treatment of thcfe prodncl:s refpeftively, 

 no tixed or determinate feature of (leel is applicable to the 

 one more than the other. If, therefore, in the courfeof fub- 

 fequent conmiunications, T prove, by the nioft unexception- 

 able experiments, that the decompofition of the carbonic 

 acid in lime never afi'orded one particle of carbon to the iron 

 fufed in contaA with it, which iron polTeired fimilar proper- 

 ties with that obtained along with the diamond, fo far as the 

 baronet's obfervation and tetls went, will not the experiment 

 of the diamond forming llcel appear (till more etjuivocal, and 

 require more demonftrative proofs of its combination with 

 iron than any yet adduced ? 



Upon the baronet's fecond experiment, wherein he ex- 

 pofed a portion of iron under circuiutianees fimilar to thofc 

 of the diamond experiuient, and obtained no tufion, I fliall 

 fhortly remark : That the uncertain and unequal degree of 

 heat obtained in a fmith's forge, jiarticularly if fingle blaftcd, 

 will cafiiv account for a few gU;bu!eri being fufed in the one 

 cafe, and none in the other. Jihfters were found in both, 

 and it does not appear bv anv comparative trials of quahly 

 that thefe blilters were eflentially dirierent, or produced by 

 ditferent caufes. To prove that an irregularity of heat might 

 produce the ditTerence noticed, namely, the fufion of a few 

 clobules of the iron, a reference might be made to others 

 of Sir George's own experiments, where in one he fufed iroti 

 filino;s, but could not reduce fraguients of horfe-nails ! 



The major part of Sn- George's experiments which follow 



• See NJiiho'.foiiS Cliemical Journal, No. xl. pages 105 and 107. 



thofe 



