1895] MICROSCOPICAL JOURNAL. 231 



others whose attention has been called to it. Certainly, 

 direct light is ample for all lower powers. Probably too 

 large openings for light are allowed with most objec- 

 tives. Certainly, if direct light is used, such is 

 the case. Mr. Tolles made for me a clinical micro- 

 scope with one-inch ocular and with one -fourth inch 

 objective, second-class and with ten-inch tube. The 

 working distance was five thirty-seconds of an inch, 

 the stage to remain save when objectives are changed. 

 I asked him to reduce the stage opening to its smallest 

 size. It has worked well for more then twenty years. 

 Not long ago, Mr. Albert Storer, a Boston expert, found 

 it to be one-twenty-fifth inch in diameter. Mr. Tolles 

 also made for me another and much more expensive clin- 

 ical microscope, with " huge" inside lenses, but he had to 

 diaphragm the inside of this objective because the light 

 was dazzling. The light of a common stearine candle, 

 costing one cent, used direct with a two-inch eyepiece 

 for condenser has given a good field and brought out 

 details with Tolles' one-fiftieth inch objective. The 

 same with reflected light gives a field containing only 

 one-fourth of the direct illumination. 



24. Projection work of this objective has been done 

 on a large scale. In 1879, at Boston, in lectures at 

 which were present two thousand educated people, a 

 screen twenty-five feet square was successfully covered 

 with lime-light projections of the one-seventy-fifth pho- 

 tographs. In evidence of this, a gentleman from Lon- 

 don stated that he had seen the best work of the Poly- 

 technic Institute, that he felt qualified to judge, and that 

 this work of the one-seventy -fifth was unapproachable. 



25. As, at that time, considerable antagonism was 

 shown toward the one-seventy-fifth, a learned and fa- 

 mous individual connected with the above-named lec- 

 tures visited all Europe and took pains to ascertain the 



