190 Mev. J. J. Conybeare on Hatchetine. [March, 



heaving of veins. Neither this, however, nor my observations, 

 are sufficiently extensive to justify the theorizing, with any con- 

 fidence, on the subject. As far as I can conjecture, the appear- 

 ances offered by my own specimens would be most readily 

 accounted for by an hypothesis which should admit, 1. That the 

 laminated arrangement of the rock is not in all cases the result 

 of successive depositions. 2. That disturbances have taken 

 place subsequently to the formation and contortion (if these 

 be not synchronous) of the lamina*. 3. That at the period of 

 these disturbances, the degree of consolidation varied in different 

 portions of the mass. I would, however, conclude by strongly 

 recommending this rock to the more accurate examination of 

 future travellers ; and am, dear Sir, very truly yours, 



J. J. Conybeare. 



Article VI. 



On Hatchetine. By the Rev. J. J. Conybeare, MGS. 



(To the Editor of the Annals of Philosophy.) 

 MY DEAR SIR, Bath Eaiton, Feb. 10, 1823. 



I hasten to acknowledge that a perusal of Mr. Brande's 

 elementary work on Chemistry (which has only of late fallen 

 into my hands), has shown me that I have been anticipated by 

 that gentleman in the examination of the mineral substance 

 which I ventured to name hatchetine, and which is enumerated 

 by him under the varieties of bitumen, as mineral ailipocire. 

 Mr. Brande's work was published, I believe, early in 1821 . My 

 own experiments, made the autumn before, were transcribed for 

 the Annals in the January of that year. Strictly, therefore, I 

 have to apologize to your readers only for the second of my 

 communications (the short note appended to the examination of 

 mumia), which an earlier perusal of Mr. Brande's work would 

 certainly have caused me to suppress. Allow me to express my 

 satisfaction, that the examination of the substance in question 

 has fallen into better hands than my own ; and that my opinion 

 as to its specific difference from every other known variety of 

 bitumen is corroborated by so competent an authority. With 

 Mr. Brande's permission, however, 1 would still contend for the 

 superior propriety of the name hatchetine, both for the reason 

 formerly assigned, and from the feeling that it is rather desirable 

 to banish from our nomenclature all such significant names as are 

 not indicative of some actual property of the substance to which 

 they are applied. 



Believe me, dear Sir, very truly yours, 



J. J. Conybeare. 



