8 Discordant Opinions of Chemists 



Dr. Tliomson may say. Perhaps it may be difficult to disprove 

 what has been said, that boiling of sugar is more dangerous than 

 heating oil — that sugar boiling over would catch fire and burn as 

 it ran along the floor — that mixing it with water rendered it more 

 dangerous ; — such assertions could only be met by counter asser- 

 tions. But I would ask those gentlemen who made them, to re- 

 flect calnilv, without letting their judgements be biassed by their 

 prejudices, and sav whether they really believe that syrup could, 

 in the state in which it is boiled in the sugar-houses, and as the 

 fire-places are constructed, on boiling over, possibly set the building 

 on fire ? whether it would burn as it ran along the floor ? and 

 whether mixing water with sugar adds to its combustibility ? 

 The evidence given by Mr. John Martineau on this point, 

 which for clearness and perspicuity was not exceeded by any evi- 

 dence given on that trial, might, I should have thought, have set that 

 point at rest. He had watched the progress of sugar boiling upon 

 a large scale with the eye of a man of science — he had traced it 

 to its most dangerous point, and yet found it perfectly controul- 

 able ; and though this gentleman might not boast of holding that 

 rank as a general chemist which many others do, yet on this par- 

 ticular point I think he might be considered superior to them all. 

 The experiments of Mr. Brande proved that at a certain heat the 

 vapour issuing from sugar was inflammable ; but long, very long 

 before it arrived at that point, the sugar was spoiled, and rendered 

 unfit for any purposes for which sugar refiners could use it. The 

 neat and highly ingenious experiment of Mr. Children (whose 

 name anQ character as a man of science entitled him to a more 

 courteous observation than was made by the Solicitor-General, 

 who styled him a mere parlour chemist) proving the inflammable 

 point of sugar bv phosphorus, is not at all at variance with Mr. 

 Bratide's trial ; it demonstrated that long before sugar became 

 dangerous, it became completely spoiled. 



I have now gone through all the points on which the two par- 

 ties have difl^ered, and the difl^erences n^ust be determined by fu- 

 ture experiments. Those who have advanced opinions with a 

 conviction on their ujinds of their correctness, will not sitquietiy 

 under the imputation of having promulgated erroneous ones, par- 

 ticularly when they state these opinions to be facts founded upon 

 the results of actual trials ; and such facts cannot be disproved 

 by mere hvpotheses; they must be met by other experiments, not 

 tried for the purpose of obtaining a particular end, but every end 

 they are susceptible of. The dignity of chemical science has suf- 

 fered nmch bv this trial ; but, though this is to be lamented, we 

 may hope that the science will be greatly benefited, by a new 

 field being opened for future investigation that may lead to results 

 of great imijortautc. 



It 



