18(5 



• KNOWLEDGE * 



[Aug. 11, 1882. 



9n£ni)(rs( to Corrrstponlitntd. 



n$ tarhf in tk« vt«k. 

 'i-imo fvr »citnt\fie information 

 to M# Editor for corrtiponiienit 

 ft or addrtnet t^f corretpondtnin be given in 

 ■epondentt ekontd write on one tide oilv of the 

 le^if. 4. SacM letter ekomld hare a title, and 



',' Alt ecmmnnit^Hont for the EJ> 

 O^ce on or before the S-.tturJay pre< 

 imere^eimy eiremUition ^ftehieh compete 



Ui.<m TO Co«»«MTj>D«si».— 1. y 

 ftn le aMtvereJ thr,%^:h the poet. 2 

 eanmot beforvarjej, mor ran the nam 



paper, amj put dravinge on a eeparate lenf, 



i« replgiug to a tetter, r^erenee thonU be made to il< NHM&rr, the page on vAicA it 



appeart, and He title. 



G. Jareatt. Terlalim reports of the Association lectures nnd 

 papers would scarcely fit in with the plan and purpose of Kxowlkhge. 

 They might be (though even tlmt is doubtful) exactly described, 

 but unless this meeting differs very much from others, they would 

 not be very simply worded. \Yliat I hope to do is to give the 

 essence of the more interesting communications. I may probably 

 attend this meeting. Hitherto I have been deterred from attend- 

 ing such gatherings by the general prevalence of the cant of 

 science and what may be termed, without disrespect, scientific 

 fogeydom. The real i)ur|X)rt and purpose of scientific research, ac 

 well as the true value of scientific discoveries, seem often over- 

 looked at these meetings, while the guiding principle seems to bo, 

 " Claw me and I'll claw thee." The great object which the asso- 

 ciation should set itself is the humanising of science. Even those 

 of our best scientific workers who have consented to help (our 

 Darwins, Spencers, Mills, Ac, have kept persistently aloof) have 

 appeared at their Weakest " in this association." Still good work 

 has been done at these gatherings on occasion ; let us hope it may 

 be so on this occasion. — G. E. A. The inscription is not on the top 

 of the boss, but, as should have been stated in the pajjer, on the 

 sloping side. If the date be genuine (and the letters were there cer- 

 tainly fifty -eight years ago), and if the accretion from the calcareous 

 water continuously passing over it a film of only one-twentieth of 

 an inch has been arrested, the measure of rate of deposit will err 

 rather by being too low than too high. — Jos. Offord. Many thanks. 

 The subject has great interest for me. The pictures, if not too 

 erpengive to engrave, would Ixj very acceptable. — DiFFrciLTi'. I 

 should say, "Give it up"; if, then, you find it can be done without 

 trick, send it to me, with solution, for a problem in Knowledge. 

 / give it up. — A. (1) You perplex me. In one sentence you say 

 you know scarcely anything of astronomy or physics ; in another 

 yon decide vcrj- positively and authoritatively (also quite wrongly, 

 but that is scarce worth mentioning) a question which can 

 only be dealt with by astronomers and physicists. You speak 

 very flatteringly of my knowledge and Dr. Ball's ; bnt speak 

 of our obstinacy in adhering to the idea that the earth was 

 onco red hot, or white hot ; asking, then, whether gases 

 conid consolidate without cooling, even allowing they were 

 hot at first — a question which really shows that you have not a 

 clear conception of what is at issue. "Another century will ex- 

 plode the fallacy j " in other words, you are a century ahead of the 

 astronomers of to-day— yet later on, " One more silly question j 

 does the moon revolve in the same relation to the earth ns the 

 earth does to the stm ? . . . I feel quite ashamed of my stupidity." 

 The answer to the question is, of course, " No ; " but ... is it 

 silly ? and are you stupid ? If you really thought so, would yon 

 toll Dr. Ball and myself we are building on a " miserable delusion ?" 

 2. My " private sentiments " about vivisection are tolerably well 

 known. I abominate cruelty to animals as much as you can ; it 

 indicates an utterly detestable nature ; but I consider those who 

 would stop scientific inquiries, primarily directed to the dirtiinution 

 of pain and the saving of human lives, because they cannot bo con- 

 ducted without pain to animals (assuming all possible care taken 

 to limit and, where jiossilJe, prevent pain) to be cruel in much 

 (irreater degree than those even who wilfully torture animals. If one 

 dear to me were suffering under a painful disease, and I were told that 

 there was a good chance, or even any chance at all, that by an 

 experiment conducted on an animal a means of cure might be found, 

 I know that I should say let the experiment be tried as quickly as 

 possible ; give as little pain as possible ; if not inconsistent with the 

 nature and object of the experiment, use anaesthetics ; and, if the 

 experiment bo such that the animal would suffer aftcrivards, 

 destroy it immediately after the result of the experiment has 

 Ix-en •necured. I know 1 should decide thus, and— pardon me 

 for saying it— I am certain that under similar circumstances 

 yon would decide so too. Now, what right have you or I to 

 decide so, in a case where a human sufferer is very dear to 

 UH- father or mother, husband or wife (as the case may be), 

 brother, sister, son, daughter (grown up, young, or infant), and to 

 denounce a practice which, as conducted bj' every student of science 

 worthy to be called man, is simply the generalisation of the special 

 act I have considered ? Do you think the sufferers among the mul- 



titudes unknown to you, among the poor, in hospitals, and so forth, 

 have no friends or relatives who think more of their real sufferings 

 than of the problematical tortures (or say even they were real) of 

 chloroformed animals ? Think of those dearest to you in suffering, 

 and ask how you would decide, were such n c(nestiiin put to you as I 

 have suggested; when you have quite inaile up your mind that you 

 would execrate the man who should try tlie experiment for your 

 dear one's relief, you may begin to objurgate the general practice; 

 but Hot as a tender-hearted being, in my judgment. — J. E. Okill. 

 Y'ou are as extreme about abstinence from stimulants ns A. about 

 vivisection. It is sheer nonsense to say in the face of all exporienco 

 that there is no innocent use of stimulants, and that, whatever be 

 taken, there will be a craving for more which very few can with- 

 stand, " for we know scientifically that each drop is but a link in 

 the forging of the chain which may probably bind and drag them 

 down to poverty or insanity." Nino out of ten who take wine, or 

 beer, or spirits in moderation, do not know what craving for liquor 

 means, at least by any experience of their own. During two parts 

 of my own life (in 1859-00, in 1879-81) my daily consumption of 

 liquor has been in excess of what would bo considered prudent by 

 medical men ; and at other times (for nine months in 18GG-G7, 

 for eighteen in 1877-78, and recently for short periods) I havo 

 taken no stimulants at all, and for tho rest of the time, since 

 I was sixteen or seventeen, I suppose not a day has passed 

 that I havo not taken either a glass or two of wine, or a pint or so 

 of ale, or a glass or two of spirits and water per diem. In all 

 those years, now nearer thirty than I could wish, I havo never 

 known what cravintj for liquor is. I havo often felt exceeding 

 thirsty, when taking much exercise, with the feeling that I would 

 much rather drink a glass of ale than a glass of water, and that 

 it would do me more good : but I havo never felt a craving even 

 for a glass of ale, and (being told alo was not good for mo) I 

 suppose I havo not taken so much as half-a-dozen glasses of ale 

 per annum for tho last ten years. It is the same with nearly 

 all men I know ; they can bo very moderate, or totally abstain, 

 or take a plentiful allowance, just as they may choose. 

 If the weaker brethren want tho stronger to go without stimu- 

 lants for their encouragement, well and good. I don't boliovo 

 much in those weaker brethren heituj encouraged. When they want 

 an excuse to backslide, they are pretty sure to find one. But, if it 

 were made clear to mo that I could do them good by joining tho 

 ranks of the professed abstainer;', I would do it, — provided I found it 

 agree with me ; otherwise, not. — J. Pakkee Fowler. Seo preceding 

 rojily. If, however, you find my " airing my views," (and 1 suppose 

 Airy airing his) about tho transic of Venus, akin to the display of 

 Blue Ribbon by the pledged ones, I should fancy argument useless. 

 But experience has again and again shown that common-sonso re- 

 strictions havo in the long-run much more effect than extreme 

 measures. Drunkenness is never quite so rifo anywhere as whore 

 teetotal movements have for awhile been most successful. — J. GoM- 

 PEBTz Mo.NTEFioRE. I also was rather perplexed by the statement 

 that Edward, called Plantagenct, was tho twenty-fifth king of 

 England. I suppose in French histories of England they count 

 tho Saxons, Danes, &c. Perhaps they call Alfred the first king 

 of England, or, starting from Egbert, drop out some. I know 

 of no English history in which Edward, surnamed Plantagcnet, 

 comes out twenty-fifth. — L. E. L., M. Kearden. Please repeat 

 botanical question. M. R. desires to know where in London 

 there is an extensive retail mart for books of general litera- 

 ture, light reading, works out of print. M. R. thinks that as 

 regards whist, and games of chance generally, ignorance is bliss. 

 —Dc riuslihus, &c. I find in whist capital rest after work ; tho 

 more I play it the less it seems to me a game of chance. — J. Parker 

 FowLEE. Thanks for experiment in willing game. The third 

 showing a danger attending such experiments is worth noting, but 

 wo havo admitted a letter calling attention to that point.— G. 

 II(>i>»o.v. Wo havo subjects more pressing than organ playing. — 

 Sigma. I doubt if study occasions tho mind trouble described by 

 W. M. N. Steady mind work rather tends to cure it.— E. C. K. 

 Yes ; Venus can bo clearly seen on the sun's face without a tele- 

 scope. Of course, a smoked glass would be necessary. — A Scotch 

 SfiiscEiiiER. Messrs. Coxwell & Glaisher reached a height of about 

 C} miles, though French aeronauts aro disposed to deny this. At a 

 height of 7 miles the atmospheric density is reduced to aboiit one- 

 fourth ; the density of hydrogen at atmospheric pressure is only 

 about 7-hundredth8, ^ay one-fourteenth that of air, so that, sup- 

 posing tho balloon did not allow the hydrogen to expand, as 

 with the diminished pressure it would tend to do, tliero would still 

 remain ascensional power at a height of seven miles, but, of course, 

 very much less than at tho earth's surface. The lifting power at 

 the earth's surface is equal to about 13-14ths the weight of tho 

 balloon's content in air at sea-level ; at a height of seven miles it 

 amounts but to about 5-7th8 the weight of tho same content in air 

 of one-fourth the density at the sea-level, or is less in the same 



