186 Mistellantes. 
hastily accredited report having been given, we have long supposed that 
it was a mistake, and that credence had been too easily given by us to a 
result which if true, would have been extremely important, and which 
we confess we ought not to have admitted without the most rigorous 
proof. It is now in our power to settle this matter on the authority of Mr. 
Stickney himself, and through the kindness of our friend Josiah Thomp- 
son of Philadelphia, from whom we have received a letter dated June 29, 
ult., and covering a letter to him from Mr. Stickney dated Dec. 21, 1831, 
thirteen years after the first publication of the supposed discovery of cin- 
nabar. Mr. Thompson remarks: “When in the west some years ago I 
visited the localities mentioned, (on the shores of lakes St. Clair and Erie,) 
and soon found that the sand in question contained no mercury, but was 
probably composed of garnets either broken up or in very small crystals. 
I afterwards wrote on the subject to Mr. Stickney who gave me the su 
stance of his subsequent researches in the annexed communication.” 
-“T should not have thought of reviving the thing at so late a period had 
I not heard it alluded to by a very distinguished scientific lecturer, whose 
authority for the assertions had been derived from the communications 
originally appearing in your widely circulated Journal, and which have 
been transferred to several standard works both American and European.” 
We now quote Mr. Stickney’s statement: 
“ Some nine or ten years since I lay wind bound on the western shore 
of Lake Erie, with a small craft for several days, near the mouth of Otter 
Creek, a little south of Pleasant Bay, where the black and garnet colored 
sand is abundant. It struck me as probable, that it was a sulphuret of 
mercury. I levigated a few grains of the latter between two stones; ¢ 
bright, opaque, red appearance when broken tended to confirm me in the 
‘opinion. Having no other employment, I mixed clay, water, and sand, 
with my hands and formed it into a retort and receiver; dried them ™ 
the sun ; and afterwards baked them in the hot sand and ashes when 
we had a fire on the beach. I then introduced a small portion of the r@ 
sand into the retort; it could be but a small portion, as it did not 
more than half a pint. I set up my apparatus with small stones; fitting 
on and luting the receiver with some of the same clay and sand. Thus 
prepared, I put charcoal from our fire into the little furnace, and plowed 
them with a blowpipe made of a hollow weed. After continuing it for 4 
time at a low red heat and permitting it to cool moderately, I broke the re 
ceiver, and discovered, as I then conceived, minute globules of mercury: 
I now concluded I had determined the presence of mercury in the sa™ 
I took with me quantities of the sand; and when I returned home I sei 
mitted some of the red sand pulverised to nitro-muriatic acid, and precPF 
tating the solution with carbonate of potash, I had a copious white precip 
itate. I weighed the sand; but having accidentally spilled some of “A 
solution, I did not weigh the result. I made minutes at the time whic 
