Reply to a Revieiv in Brandes Journal of Science. 1 1 7 



Thursday (not delivered till Friday night). 

 *' My dear Sir, — You must surely be quizzing me, to suppose 

 that I should insert the inclosed, &c. 



" 1 am always yours, faithfully, 

 *' Dr. Granville, Saville-row. W. T. Brande." 



How far, by the refusal of an act of justice and impartiality 

 demanded of him, and by the language in which that refusal is 

 conveyed, Mr. Brande has or has not identified himself with my 

 reviewer — and thereby rendered himself obnoxious to all and each 

 of the charges I have brought forward and, I hope, proved against 

 ihe latter,— I leave the reader to decide. It is enough for me to 

 observe that Mr. Brande's conduct, as the editor of the Quarterly 

 Journal, in this affair, is to me a matter of great astonishment ; 

 and that, as a member of the Royal Institution, I shall take the 

 earliest opportunity of protesting, either at a general meeting, 

 or to the board of managers, against that Society's lending its 

 name to a journal in which an attack, involving matters of per- 

 sonal consideration, is admitted, and the reply, showing the in- 

 justice and unfairness of that attack, rejected. 



Under these circumstances I avail myself of the facility, which 

 the Philosophical Magazine liberally affords me, of giving pub- 

 licity to my reply to the review in question. 



Saville Row, A. B. GraNVILLE. 



Friday, 9th February, 1821. 



A Reply to an Article inserted in the 20th Number of the Quar- 

 terly Journal of Science, edited at the Royal Institution — 

 purporting to be a Revietv of Dr. Grat^vill^'s Treatise 07i 

 the internal Use of the Hydrocyanic Acid. In a Letter to 

 W.T. Brande, Esq. F.R.S. the Editor. 

 Dear sir, — You will readily remember, that when you in- 

 formed me of having received a " severe" critique on my work 

 on Prussic Acid for insertion in your Journal, of which, however, 

 you assured me that no use would be made, if I no longer enter- 

 tained the opinion I expressed in that work respecting the acid 

 prepared at Apothecaries' Hall — I instantly replied, that you 

 were welcome to admit and insert the article in question, jf you 

 thought proper : for as my opinion of the acid prepared at the 

 Hall, at the s))ecific period at which I was writing, had been 

 formed upon such ocular and experimental demonstration as 

 would have warranted still stronger expressions of disapproba- 

 tion on my part — 1 could not tamely surrender my humble judge- 

 ment to the terror of any review of my book, however severe. 

 The only concession I claimed in retmn was, that any reply that 

 I might think it necessary to write to the article you mcntioiierl, 



should 



