C. A. Joy on the Chimenti Pictures. 201 
guished observer adhered to his opinion. 
Out of the mass of testimony which was cheerfully furnished 
to me, I have made a few selections. 
Professor William B. Rogers, of Boston, whose opinions upon 
questions in physical science rank as high as those of any man 
of science in this country, has sent me the following valuable 
Suggestions, which I publish at length upon my own responsi- 
bility, as the writer has gone to Kurope and cannot be applied 
to for his consent. 
rof. Rogers writes: “I will state the impression gathered 
from a hasty scrutiny made both without and with the stereoscope. 
_ Itis simply this; that the difference between the two pictures 
18 such in kind and degree as might easily arise from imperfect 
or careless copying, and furnishes to my mind no evidence of 
ving been designed for stereoscopic effect. In my own at- 
ts 
of direction of some of the lines, his copy, however generally 
true, would not fail, on combination with the original, to exhibit 
decided stereoscopic relief. It is needless to remind those who 
are practiced in binocular combination, of the exquisite test 
which it affords of the slightest deviation from identity in the 
drawings combined. 
of these pictures may most reasonably be attributed to accident, 
and can hardl y weigh as evidence that the instrument had then 
been discovered. ws 
uch are my impressions from a brief examination of the 
AM. Jour. Scr.—Szconp Suries, Vor. XXXVILI, No. 113.—Serr., 1864. 
