HYDROGEN. 245 



have not time to look into the many more numerous errors 

 possible in that synthesis. 



Ed-ward W. Morley is a thorough Stasian with all that 

 implies; he glories in it. We can take space only for a 

 very few particulars. 



Being also very Clarkian, he aims above all at minute 

 "probable errors;" that is, de facto, close concordance. 

 He shapes his work with a special view of this requirement. 



This is desirable, within certain restrictions; but it is the 

 height of folly to suppose that mere concordance is truth. We 

 have shown that repeatedly. 



Morley's Show of Precision. 



Morley makes a wonderful show of precision. This often 

 is fatal. For example, he gives full record of weight com- 

 parisons (p. 31) for 1887 and 1892; to eight decimals for the 

 gramme set, to five decimals for the milligramme set. 



He does not give deviations merely; that would look too 

 simple and would be practical. No, he gives complete 

 numbers. 



Thus, his lo-gr. piece, in 1887, was 38, in 1892, only 8 

 hundredths mgr. light. 



He puts this 9 999.62 and 9 999.92 which looks impres- 

 sively exact to the common chemical public, but would be 

 too ridiculously cumbrous for actual use. 



It is, of course, curious to note that this ten-gramme 

 piece gained in weight by use during five years. 



The loo-gr. piece was short 66 and 49 hundredths mgr. 

 in 1887 and 1892, but the 5O-gr. 3 short in 1887, and 36 long 

 in 1892. 



Wonderful precision suspiciously so, when stated that 

 the weights have been little used and handled with great 

 care. 



It might have proved interesting to have such u exact" 

 determinations made at shorter intervals. The changes are 

 too funny. 



But we have room only for the results of his weighings 

 of hydrogen and oxygen, expressed in grammes per liter 

 (his density). 



