of Fish Oil. 273 



away by this theory, had he not happened to form an intimacy 

 with that eminent man, the late Mr. Tennant, of whom he would 

 say, if he might he allowed to go out of his way to pay a compli- 

 ment to departed merit, that he united in himself more diversity 

 of talent andcomprehensivenessof genius than anymanof this age. 

 Mr. Tennant told him not to be led away by this theory, for the 

 French were changing the whole nomenclature of the science, 

 and all this phlogistic theory would in consequence be soon over- 

 turned. On hearing this, he had desisted from the study, and 

 the result had verified the prediction of Mr. Tennant. Since that 

 time. Sir Humphry Davy had worked another revolution in the 

 names of chemical substances, and perhaps the present genera- 

 tion might be fated to witness another change. This variety of 

 classification and frequent substitution of one defective nomen- 

 clature for another, arose from the propensity of men to genera- 

 lize from particular appearances. It appear-^d to him that Mr. 

 Wilson was meddlin"? with a subject which he li.d not .mderstand, 

 when he spoke of the properties of oil. It turned out, on his 

 evidence, that he was the only person who ever applied this jirin- 

 ciple to the boiling of sugar, In London the plaintiffs were the 

 only persons who used it. Wilson, indeed, wished to insinuate 

 that another house had adopted it; but all they did was, to al- 

 low him to make an experiment, and then they rejected the 

 plan merely because it was too dangerous. It was worthy of 

 notice, that Mr. Harris of Liverpool, who had adopted this pro- 

 cess, thought it necessary to communicate the circumstance to 

 \he insurance-office, altiiough the risk had been proved to be less 

 than from tallow, which he had formerly used in boiling sugar. 

 Now, with regard lO the risk of this process, it was said to be 

 less than that of the ordinary process, for two reasons: first, that 

 sugar at .3.50 degrees of heat emitted gas highly inflammable; 

 and, secondly, that there was danger of the sugar boiling over. 

 On that part of the case the plaintiffs had calk'd only Mr. Ro- 

 binson, and Mr. Harris from Liverpool ; but he would defy his 

 learned friend to produce any sugar-refiner who would say that 

 he had ever seen a sugar-boiler overflowing. Sugar boiled for 

 their purpose at 240, and, if riised to a greater heat, it would 

 defeat their ol;ject. Whenever, therefore, it rose higher, they 

 threw water on the fire to damp it ; and besides, while the per- 

 sonal security of those attending the process reciuired caution, 

 there would be little danger of the boiler being allowed to over- 

 flow. The real risk of u sugar-house arose from the multiplicity 

 of stoves and fires, by which a greater .nass of combustibles than 

 wa« collected in :ilmost any other manufactory was exposed to 

 danger. He defied his learned friend to produce any instance of 

 sug.ir ever having been boiled to a heat of 350 degrees, unless 

 Vol,. .'i.L No. 2G4. Jpril 1820. U it 



