Aeeusa 1, 1864.] THE TECHNOLOGIST. 



THE BASIS OF TECHNOLOGY. 11 



from the realms of space, or mineral from the bowels of the earth, or 

 essence of plant, or secretion of animal, crystal or liquid, or vapour or 

 gas, he regards as coming in " & questionable shape." Is it a compound ; 

 and if so, what are its ingredients ? Are they compound in a less 

 degree, or in essence simple ? Are there any bodies truly simple -, and 

 if so, how many \ What new compounds is it possible to produce by 

 uniting in ways which Nature has not followed the simple and complex 

 substances which she supplies ? 



To act out in practice those queries and others, the chemist at all 

 times must keep both hands busy. His arms may never be folded. No 

 mighty panorama unrolls itself before his eyes, requiring only that he 

 fix upon it an unwavering gaze. No mysterious strangers longing to 

 unburden their bosoms of truths known only to themselves, seek his 

 eell as a confessional, and whisper revelations into his ear. He must be 

 likened to one of those grim inquisitors of the middle ages, whom no 

 man willingly answered, and who believed in no man's answer unless 

 he wrung it from him by torture. In truth, there is a wonderful simi- 

 larity between the old drawings of the inquisitors putting their victims 

 to the question, and the old drawings of the alchemists testing the 

 objects of their suspicions. In both cases there is a dark subterranean 

 chamber, with ominous tires lighting up the gloom. In both the pre- 

 siding genius is a wasted old man, with a haggard look, and the pitiless, 

 unsatisfied eye of a bird of prey which has often missed its quarry. In 

 both, obsequious familiars stand ready to do the bidding of the senior, 

 and strange machines and implements hang upon the walls and burden 

 the floor. In both, to complete the picture, all eyes are fixed upon the 

 doomed object of suspicion in the centre, from which, whatever truths 

 mechanical pressure can crush, or fire and water melt or dissolve, will 

 presently be gathered. The analogy is not a fanciful one, for unless 

 history has wronged the mediaeval Inquisition, it reversed the rule of 

 English jurisprudence, and counted every object of its notice guilty, till 

 he proved himself innocent : and such is certainly the law of the- 

 chemist, who, like the French terrorist, regards every substance as- 

 " suspect " of being something else than it seems, and puts a mark even 

 upon those against whom nothing has been proved before his searching 

 tribunal. 



But this comparison illustrates only one-half, and that the less- 

 important half, of what distinguishes chemistry from the other sciences. 

 It is not that it experiments, for all the sciences, excepting astronomy, 

 experiment. Nor that it tries to analyse everything, for every science- 

 is analytical, none more than astronomy ; and all to the extent of their 

 power treat nature inquisitorially. Chemistry differs only in degree 

 from the other sciences in this respect, although the degree of that 

 difference is immense. But it may be said to differ in kind from the 

 other sciences, in its power to modify or transform matter, and to effect 

 the creation of new bodies. That it can separate substances into their 



