STASIAX ERRORS. 139 



The method of calculation* used by him and by his 

 numerous Re-Calculators, makes it impossible that any one 

 of these values can possibly be true if any other one has been 

 proved to be false. 



Surely, Crookes' syntheses of thallium nitrate prove N =. 

 14.04 to be utterly false. 



Therefore all the values of Stas are false. Not a single 

 one can be true, if any one single atomic weight of Stas has 

 been demonstrated false. 



Now, in this case of thallium, good, sufficient determina- 

 tions have proved (Lepierre) Tl == 204, exactly. 



Hence the excellent determinations by Crookes crush- 

 ingly prove N = 14.04 utterly untenable and totally false. 



Thereby fall all the atomic weights of Stas. 



To what extent chemical research and commercial analy- 

 ses have been falsified will soon become apparent. 



Here it may suffice to show the error committed in this 

 manner on the atomic weight of thallium. 



Crookes himself found the atomic weight so different 

 from 204 or any whole exact number, that he rested his fight 

 against the so-called Prout- Hypothesis on his own excellent 

 determinations. 



Mr. Crookes did not know that he had falsified his splendid 

 laboratory tuork by using the false value of Stas for nitrogen. 



As practical chemist, he knows that if he puts a one 

 thousandth part of strychnine into pure water, this water is 

 poisoned. 



He was not sufficiently versed in chemical science to 

 realize that putting an error of 0.04 into N^ 14, he falsified 

 the result of his own labors; he poisoned scientific truth. 



He next poisoned chemical literature, poisoned his own 

 editorial spirit, poisoned the very atmosphere in which 

 other chemists have to live, exposed to his poisonous pen. 



He has held chemical science back in the mud and mire 

 of Stas' labyrinth by his persistent poisoning of all data of 

 truth in his journal, and by his constant attempts at the 



* Compare that first great humbug-calculation, by Strecker, 1846. 

 See Sebelien, pp. 73-75. " The Method of the Least Squares." 



