December i6, 1887.] 



SCIENCE. 



299 



hydrogen as would unite with oxygen in the formation of water ; 

 and this is the theory contained in most modern text-bool<s on 

 combustion prepared for the use of English-speal<ing students, and 

 generally employed in calculations by the scientific men of England 

 and the United States. 



About the year i860, Messrs. Scheurer-Kestner and Meunier- 

 Dollfus made experiments on the heat evolved by the combustion 

 of various coals ; using the same method as that employed by 

 Messrs. Favre and Silbermann, and checking the latter's experi- 

 ments on wood charcoal and hydrogen gas, before testing the 

 coals. The experiments on coals showed that it was incorrect to 

 calculate the heat of combustion of coal from the heat of its com- 

 bustible constituents as determined by Favre and Silbermann ; or, 

 in other words, that it was not correct to assume that the carbon 

 in coal was of the same density as wood charcoal, and that the hy- 

 drogen of the coal was in a gaseous state : these being the neces- 

 sary assumptions, when Messrs. Favre and Silbermann's constants 

 are used in the formula to which reference has been made above. 

 The report of Messrs. Scheurer-Kestner and Meunier-Dollfus has 

 been well named ' classical,' — all operations and calculations being 

 fully detailed, — so that, speaking rationally or scientifically, the 

 conclusion seems inevitable that a scientific investigator must 

 either find some error or accept the results. Well, how has the 

 scientific world, that is to say, the English-speaking scientific 

 world, received these results ? Generally by ignoring them, and 

 going on in the good old way, according to the creed formulated by 

 Messrs. Favre and Silbermann. Here is a scientific (?) statement 

 made by one investigator who has carefully studied the report 

 (Mr. B. F. Isherwood, in Journal of the Franklin Instztuie, July, 

 1884) : — 



" The results of the calorimetrical experiments made by Scheurer- 

 Kestner and Meunier-Dollfus on the heat of combustion of the 

 Alsatian coals, were never accepted by the British scientists, not- 

 withstanding that no error was ever pointed out in either the appa- 

 ratus or the method employed. Nor could the writer ever accept 

 them, although he bestowed the closest scrutiny and stddy upon 

 them." 



This is science, with a vengeance ! " I can't find any mistakes in 

 the methods or calculations," says the scientist, " but the results are 

 opposed to my present belief, and I can't accept them. I have pub- 

 lished numerous treatises containing calculations founded on the 

 methods and data of Favre and Silbermann, and these new results, 

 which would condemn my work, must be ignored or denied." ' 



The statement contained in the above quotation, that the results 

 of the experiments made by Messrs. Scheurer-Kestner and Meunier- 

 Dollfus were never accepted by the British scientists, is not abso- 

 lutely correct. Mr. John Percy, in the last edition of his treatise on 

 fuel, gives the results, and calls attention to the inaccuracy of the 

 ordinary method of calculation. Similar corrections are made in 

 the last supplement of Watt's ' Dictionary of Chemistry.' 



Quite recently, Messrs. Scheurer-Kestner and Meunier-Dollfus 

 have repeated their former experiments, obtaining substantially the 

 same results as before ; and it seems probable that right methods 

 of calculating the heat of combustion of coal will be generally 

 adopted before long. If the results are true, they will certainly be 

 accepted, some day ; but the length of time during which they 

 have patiently awaited admission to the temple inhabited by Eng- 

 lish-speaking scientists is a sufficient answer to the question, ' If a 

 new fact, overturning some established theory, is presented, do the 

 scientists examine it critically, and either disprove or accept it, or 

 do they ignore it as long as they can, and only take it into their 

 hearts when worn out by its persistent demands .' ' If a truth is 

 announced, there need be no fear that it will not prevail in the end ; 

 but numerous facts, similar to that just cited, sufficiently disprove 



^ Scientific men seem to hunt in couples, so to speak ; and Mr. Eonney, in answer- 

 ing the Duke of Argyll {r/ature, Nov. 24). argues in the same manner as his Ameri- 

 can brother in the above quotation. He does not accept the new theory, and thinks 

 that no reasons are required for his disbelief. Here are his words : — 



"To conclude, the Duke still — and this is our special complaint — treats the 

 matter rather according to ecclesiastical than to scientific method. He is fully per- 

 suaded of the e,\cellence of Mr, Murray's hypothesis, and considers it to be 'one of 

 those discoveries in science which are self-luminous/ and ' must carry conviction to 

 all.' Very well, but there are some people , not very few in number, who do not share 

 this opinion." 



Hail to the new science, announced by Mr. Bonney ! The voice of many people 

 is the voice of God. 



the theory fondly entertained by many scientists, that they have 

 reached the ideal state where they desire only to know the truth,, 

 regardless of consequences. 



Another brilliant French writer, Mr. Alexander Dumas, well sums, 

 up the matter, as follows : — 



" II est vrai que peut-^tre les contemporains ne me croiront pas.. 

 . . . Qu'importe! je I'aurais dit; d'autres me croiront: lav^rit^ est 

 une de ces, titoiles qui peuvent rester des mois, des annees, des. 

 siecles, dans les profondeurs du ciel, mais qui finissent toujours par 

 etre decouvertes un jour ou I'autre. J'aime mieux 6tre le fou qui 

 se voue 4 la recherche de ces etoiles-li, que le sage qui salue et qui 

 adore, les uns apres les autres, tous ces soleils que nous avons vus. 

 se lever, que Ton nous a donnes pour des astres immutables, et qui,, 

 a tout prendre, n'ont jamais ete que des meteores plus ou moins. 

 durables, plus ou moins brilliants, plus ou moins trompeurs, tou- 

 jours fatals ! " Richard H. Buel. 



New York, Dec. 7. 



The ' Act of God ' and ' Fuerza Mayor.' 



Mr. Appleton Morgan's ■ Act of God " and Mr. Nevin'& 

 ' fuerza mayor ' appear to me to be pretty much alike, and ta 

 threaten a new peril to railway travel, — a peril, according to Mr^ 

 Nevin, which in Mexico is already to be encountered. I tremble 

 to think what might happen, for example, if the engineer of the- 

 locomotive should happen to sneeze just as he passed a signal that 

 a bridge had been carried away somewhere on the Mexicaa Central 

 Railroad by " the flooding of a river." Here would be a double- 

 ' fuerza mayor ; ' for an inclination to sneeze is certainly irresisti- 

 ble, and, besides, " the flooding of a river " certainly relieved from 

 the responsibility for the irresistible inclination, even if, according 

 to Mr. Nevin, it did not relieve the watchman from the duty of 

 putting up the danger-signal. But, although we may have to take 

 our lives in our hands when we travel by rail in Mexico (according 

 to Mr. Nevin), I hope that time has not yet come in the United, 

 States. 



In short, this is the actual practical answer to Mr. Morgan's, 

 cleverly reasoned and delightfully insouciant paper. It may not be 

 the answer a railway lawyer would write, or would recognize as. 

 sufficient, but, from the travelling public's standpoint, it is all there: 

 is to be said. It is all very well for the sleek attorneys of great 

 railroad corporations to say that so long as the company provides,, 

 as Mr. Morgan says, " the last improvement in safety-insuring de- 

 vices," its responsibility for the safety of those it transports ceases. 

 " Let us bow to the Divine Will, gentlemen of the jury," says Mr. 

 Morgan. " An overruling Providence has decreed that my client 

 should " roast thirty-two human beings in slow agony on a floor of 

 ice at White River. But our track was in perfect order, our engine 

 was all right, we were running on time. We are not legally to 

 blame." Would Mr. Appleton Morgan have bowed to the Divine 

 Will if he had happened to have been rescued in a half-roasted con- 

 dition at White River, less an arm, or an eye, or a leg? I venture 

 to say he would have done nothing of the sort. I venture to say 

 he would have commenced proceedings against the company for 

 twenty-five thousand or fifty thousand dollars as soon as he could, 

 swear to a complaint. And yet Mr. Morgan will concede that the 

 accident at White River could not have happened in spite of the 

 Divine Will. 



The people of this nation do not exist at the will and pleasure of 

 the railway-companies ; nor is this nation governed by Mexican 

 laws. Mr. Morgan's familiarity with his subject enables him to 

 write very plausibly concerning the rights and duties of railway- 

 companies ; but he cannot convince me, for one, that they are not 

 more sinning than sinned against. If the principle of the ' Act of 

 God ' is to be resurrected in the United States, as in Mexico, where- 

 is the line to be drawn, and who is to draw it, — the railway-com- 

 panies, or their ingenious lawyers ? George Bradwin. 



Jersey City, Dec. 6. 



The Flight of Birds. 



My friend. Prof. Frank H. Storer, has called my attention to an, 

 important note on the wings of birds, by that accurate and inde- 

 fatigable investigator. Prof. Jeffries Wyman. It is to be found on 

 p. 169, vol. v.. Proceedings of the Boston Natural History Society., 

 This note is all too short, but forms an interesting adjunct to the: 



