160 Electric Lighting . ,r February, 
was found dead in his bed. Having, during my short ac- 
quaintance with him, enjoyed his full confidence in reference 
to all his investigations, both completed and incomplete, I 
have no hesitation in affirming that his early death cut short 
the career of one who otherwise would have largely contri- 
buted to the progress of experimental science, and have 
done honour to his country. His martyrdom, for such it 
was, taught me an useful lesson I then much needed, viz., to 
abstain from entering upon a costly series of physical inves- 
tigations without being well assured of the means of com- 
pleting them, and, above all, of being able to afford to fail. 
There are many others who sorely need to be impressed 
with the same lesson, especially at this moment and in con- 
nection with this subject. 
The warning is the most applicable to those who are 
now misled by a plausible but false analogy. They look 
at the progress made in other things, the mighty achieve- 
ments of modern Science, and therefore infer that the 
eleCtric light — even though unsuccessful hitherto — may be 
improved up to practical success, as other things have been. 
A great fallacy is hidden here. As a matter of faCt the pro- 
gress made in eleCtric lighting since Mr. Starr’s death, 
thirty-one years ago, has been very small indeed. As regards 
the lamp itself no progress whatever has been made. I am 
satisfied that Starr’s continuous carbon stick, properly 
managed in a true vacuum, or an atmosphere free from oxy- 
gen, carbonic oxide, carbonic acid, or other oxygen com- 
pound, is the best that has yet been placed before the 
public for all purposes where exceptionally intense illumina- 
tion (as in lighthouses) is not demanded. It is the steadiest, 
the cheapest, and least glaring in proportion to the amount 
of light it radiates. It has not been “ pushed ” like other 
devices, simply because it is nobody’s exclusive property. 
Comparing eleCtric with gas lighting, the hopeful believers 
in progressive improvement appear to forget that gas making 
and gas lighting are as susceptible of further improvement as 
eleCtric lighting, and that, as a matter of faCt, its practical 
progress during the last forty years is incomparably greater 
than that of the eleCtric light. I refer more particularly to 
the practical and crucial question of economy. The by- 
products, the ammoniacal salts, the liquid hydrocarbons, 
and their derivatives, have been developed into so many 
useful forms by the achievements of modern chemistry, that 
these, with the coke, are of sufficient value to cover the 
whole cost of manufacture, and leave the gas itself as a 
volatile residuum that costs nothing. It would actually and 
