NOTES AND MEMORANDA. 
3G5 
Tlie July number of ‘New Preparations’ contains the following 
account of recent experiments. Dr. Stowell says : — 
My experiments were performed on cats and rats, poisoning them 
with solutions of corrosive sublimate — in some cases bringing on 
death immediately, in others not until the lapse of several days. The 
blood was examined both before and after death, and no change was 
discerned in the appearance of the blood-corpuscles, except in a few 
instances, when there was noticed some cliange in their shape. This 
is not what one would anticipate from a perusal of Professor Boettcher’s 
article. 
However, by following the method given in the last number of 
your Journal, we have demonstrated this nucleus in the red corpuscle 
of man (as previously reported), the dog, cat, and rat. The most 
satisfactory result was obtained from the blood of the rat ; the most 
unsatisfactory from that of a man. No value, however is attached to 
this fact. 
By using higher pow(;rs than at first employed, we are positive 
there is a granular appearance to this nucleus, not present in other 
parts of the blood-cell. In some cases this is quite marked, especially 
when the nucleus is large ; and also in those corpuscles where we 
have seen a nucleolus, this granular structure is very evident. This 
is what we should expect when accepting Beale’s theory of protoplasmic 
matter. 
In some specimens examined, the proportion of nucleated to non- 
nucleated cells was very small indeed, while in other sj)ecimeus the 
proportion was much greater.^' 
Is there a Science of Microscopy ? — “ To the student of natural 
science the microscoj^e is, and always will be a mere tool. Microscopy, 
as a special science, has very little claim for existence. In so far as 
a certain familiarity with the instrument, and training in the proper 
management of the light and accessories, are necessary to enable one 
to use the instrument, it may be called a science. We should detract 
nothing from the merits of those who are expert in securing the most 
perfect performance of an objective. 
Still, as a matter of fact — and plain facts should not give offence 
to anyone — we must admit that the great value of the microscope, as 
a means of investigation, lies in the aid it gives to almost every 
branch of science. 
This leads us to a statement of what, in our opinion, a micro- 
scopical journal should be. Eecognizing the value of microscopical 
study in the various branches of natural science, such a journal should 
aim to publish the results of research carried on with the microscope 
in every department. 
This opens a wide field, and demands the attention of the 
naturalist, the physician, the lithologist, and the botanist, of all, in 
fact, whose study leads them to examine minute strneture, and there 
are few indeed, at the present day, who find no use for a microscope. 
While we so 2)lainly deny the claims of microscopy to the position of 
* ‘ American Quarterly Microscopical Journal,’ vol. i. p. 46. 
