NTN 
| 
A 
dejoinder to Mr. Quinby on Orank Motion. 2.3» 
ter; and thus all nature would become a lifeless, silent, and 
dismal ruin. On the other were the heat w 
present cherishes and enlivens this globe allowed to increase 
beyond the bounds at present prescribed to it, beside the 
destruction of all hon and vegetable life, which would be 
the immediate and inevitable consequence, the water would 
lose its present form, and assume that of an elastic vapour 
like air; the solid parts of the globe would be melted and 
confounded together, or mixed with the air and water ‘in 
smoke and vapour; and nature would return to: the me, on 
— 
~~ 
3 : P " oe Bical 
> z ; a€ 
ree 
Kad’ om. ey Mr. Quinby’s 6 aint be Crank Mo- 
tion; in the Tt number of this Journal. 
T® THH EDITOR. 
IR, 
My reply, in one of : your former numbers, to Mr. ‘Qain- 
by, charging him with misrepresenting a passage in the 
North American Review, has drawn along answer from that 
ntleman, which may be bere to require some notice. 
With that part of Mr. Quinb r, which combats the 
— the writer of the: article ing m Engine, in Rees’ 
yclopedia, I have no concern. 1 quoted that article for its 
facts © 7, and these I believe’ Mex Quinby: mesocaeigien 
able to overthrow. 
‘The question between Mr. Quiet ‘saditayenll ta; very 
ow. | had stated that there was in the steam engine a 
leek of power, in changing the direction of its action, from 
nme to rotary, as no ets from Messrs. Leans’ re- 
ports performance of the engines used at the mines in 
coer: me I further specially stated that this loss aime 
not very satisfactorily accounted for.” Mr. Quinby ha 
a short time after, made the very new discovery “ pares 
crank occasions no loss whatever of an acting — "dt 
suited his purpose to suppose that I attributed the loss in 
question, to the use of the crank, which is now most com- 
ee eae the agents in changing the direction of the me- 
can construe the passage in question, as 
walt as Mr. Quinby, or myself; and determine whether } at 
