CHEMICAL TRUTH. 
47 
CHEMICAL TRUTH. 
The legitimate and proper object of Chemical researches is 
the establishment of the truth, and the object of Chemical 
evidence is professedly the same. Yet we often find experi- 
mental Chemists diverted from the right scent by their 
propensity to bolster up some favourite theory, and Chemical 
witnesses are subject to a similar frailty, from a natural 
tendency to lean towards the side on which they are retained. 
In the legal profession the all-inspiring ambition is i( a 
verdict.” In the struggle for this prize truth is distorted, 
fact is so blended with fiction that it appears under false 
colours, justice is reduced to a mere hypothesis, and the 
lawyer who can obtain the acquittal of a man whom every 
body believes to be guilty, or non-suit one who was supposed 
to be sure of a verdict, stamps himself a distinguished member 
of his profession, and is eagerly sought after by the public. 
It is not so with the Chemist. He is not called into the 
witness-box as an advocate or a logician, but as an authority 
w ith reference to a plain matter of fact on w 7 hich his know- 
ledge and experience enable him to throw 7 some light. Yet 
it is difficult even with this obvious line of duty before his 
eyes, to divest his mind of all prejudice, and avoid the appear- 
ance at least of adapting his testimony to the purpose for 
which his services have been called into requisition. In this 
he may be assisted by the counsel, w 7 ho, in the examination 
in chief, naturally dwells on that part of the evidence which 
is most favourable to his case, avoiding such questions as 
might lead to unsatisfactory answers ; and thus, unless the 
witness should chance to break down on cross-examination, 
he may without deviation from the truth, serve the party w 7 ho 
retained him, in a case in which he might as easily have 
thrown the weight in the other scale if he had been retained 
by the opponents and questioned accordingly. But the pro- 
fessional character of the Chemist, is not, like that of the 
law 7 yer, concerned in the result of the trial, nor would he gain 
credit by purposely and ingeniously distorting his evidence 
so as to mislead the jury. On the contrary, if such a charge 
w r ere substantiated against him he w T ould cease to be an 
authority, and on a future occasion his evidence would have 
little w ; eight. 
It does happen, however, that the evidence of Chemists is 
sometimes very contradictory, and for the honour of the pro- 
fession some explanation of the circumstance is desirable. 
It may be accounted for in part by the different meaning 
