seen. We are happy to see Photographing on paper brought before the
public. Daguerreotypists should call and see Mr. W's. specimens, as well
also those produced by Messrs. Bertha, Wehnest, Beekman & Brothers, who
have been for some time past successfully practising in the art of "Sun
Drawing."
* * * * *
A. Morand has recently made very extensive additions to his former
establishment in Chatham street. We now find him lighting his subjects by
a large and well arranged sky-light.
* * * * *
Correspondence.
S. D. Humphrey, Esq.,
Dear Sir:--I would fain give my testimony in favor of your excellent
Journal, which is to the Daguerreian, as a guide to the traveller, and
pilot to the untaught mariner. It needs but to meet his eye for him to
appreciate its value and secure its aid, while following in his misty
pathway.
I have long since learned that "experience is the best teacher," but now
since the advent of the Journal, all who would be relieved of difficulties
incident to Daguerreian life, may find the cause of _atmospheric
troubles--bad light--poor subjects--clouded results_, &c., reflected on
its pages, and thus, by close application, prevent the many evils which so
frequently attend them, and thereby learn that "an ounce of prevention is
better than a pound of cure."
But there are those in the business who do not seem to discover any
difference between the profile on the school-boy's slate, and the best
"aqua-tinta" engraving. _They_ never have any trouble in producing
_perfect_ results at _every_ sitting, and _that_ for the sum of one dollar
or fifty cents. No wonder the writer of the article on Daguerreotypes
in No. 5 of the Journal, says "_Daguerreians_ are not _artists_, nor
Daguerreotypes works of _Art_, but _mere wonders of Nature_."
When Daguerreians adopt the motto--"Good pictures and fair prices,"
they may lay claim to the enviable name of Artist, and not before. The
Daguerreian art is the most difficult art to practise with _perfect_
success, that has ever yet been discovered. A _perfect_ Daguerreotype
is the result of a series of the most careful, delicate and complicated
experiments ever conceived of by the human mind.
I have been considerably amused in perusing the Journal, in reading
communications from sources where I am acquainted. They remind me of the
old adage--"All is not gold that glitters," for they appear to far better
advantage in print, than as _Artists_. But enough of this. In conclusion,
permit me to speak of a method of copying pictures, which, if new to any
of your readers, they will find it well worthy of the trial. I find,
by placing the picture to be copied where the rays of the sun may fall
obliquely upon the plate, all reflection is thrown off, and the image
appears in the camera, clear and distinct, even if the original be very
faint. It also shortens the time of exposure to from one to five seconds.
Respectfully yours,
Jas. Bennett Sykes.
Owego, March 4, 1851.
Note.--We think this is rather sharp firing, but, as it is already met
by the "Artists" referred to, we give it. We do like _spice_, and well
seasoned articles, but don't get too personal. A man may have been born in
a _stable_, but it is no _sign he is a horse_. We hope the above from Mr.
S. was not prompted by "a spirit of rivalry and animosity," but rather for
the good of all, as no doubt it will so prove. Give us a _pop_ from the
other side. [Ed.
* * * * *
Daguerreian Journals Lost.--The following Telegraph Dispatch was received
at the Daguerreian Journal Office on the 13th.
"What is the reason of your not sending me my Journals? W. S Gear."
The following was our answer forwarded per mail on the same day.
Daguerreian Journal Office,
New York, March 13th, 1851.
Dear Sir:--Your Telegraph Dispatch came to hand. In answer,--I do send a
Journal directed to you as often as published. The last was mailed last
Friday, i.e. the February 15th number, that being the last out. I find
it takes nearly as many to furnish the Post Offices as my subscribers;
however, I try it again and send one to-day.
Respectfully,
S. D. Humphrey.
W. S. Gear.
We wish that the persons, wishing the Daguerreian Journal would furnish
us with their names--("no questions asked") and they can have a copy
forwarded,--thereby our _honest_ subscribers would receive their Journal
regularly. We do know that we put the Journal in the Post Office--but we
don't know _why_ so many of our subscribers do not receive them. There
is no doubt but that our Journal is valuable, and should be in the hands
of all, yet it is with us as with most brother editors, we are unable to
furnish copies gratuitously.
* * * * *
AMMONIA.
Ammonia should be a perfectly colorless liquid; when concentrated its
specific gravity should be 0·9. It must have a pure ammonial odor, and
must volatilize without any residue. It must not become troubled when
mixed with alcohol, or lime water, otherwise it contains carbonate of
ammonia. Neither must it for the same reason, become troubled when tested
with a solution of chloride of barium; this is the best test for carbonate
of ammonia. Care is to be taken to observe the action of the test on its
first addition, for after the mixture has been exposed to the air for a
few minutes, a troubling necessarily ensues, because the ammonia abstracts
carbonic acid from the atmosphere.
When super-saturated with nitric acid, and tested with a solution of
_nitrate of silver_, it must give no white precipitate; otherwise it
contains sal-ammoniac. It must give no precipitate with a solution of
chloride of barium, otherwise it contains sulphuric acid, in which
case, the precipitate will be invisible in nitric acid. It must give
no precipitate with a solution of oxalic acid or superoxalate of
potash; otherwise it contains lime. When saturated with nitric acid and
tested with a solution of yellow prussiate of potash, it must give no
precipitate; otherwise it contains copper. When mixed with its weight of
oil of vitriol, it must not become brown or black; otherwise it contains
empyreumatic oil. As it is quite difficult to obtain ammonia entirely free
from carbonate of ammonia, or to preserve it in that state, the employment
of ammonia containing a small portion of the carbonate is admissible in
the practice of the Daguerreotype.
* * * * *
An Army of Subscribers.--It is computed that the regular subscribers to
the _New York Sun_, standing side by side, and each occupying eighteen
inches space, would form a line _seventeen miles, fourteen rods, and three
yards long_. Standing with arms extended, and occupying six feet each,
they would reach _sixty-eight miles, fifty-eight rods and one yard_, &c.
&c.--_Sun._
Let us see if we also cannot get up some astonishing statistics: The
regular subscribers to the _New York Tribune_, standing in single file,
each holding fast to the other's coat-tail, would form a line 176 miles,
7 rods and one yard long. Allowing that each could hop, skip and jump the
distance of 4 yards, their simultaneous performance of this feat would
extend from Cape Horn to Baffins Bay. Supposing they all sneezed at once,
the vibration of the air would overthrow the spire of Trinity Church. In
reading the 48 columns of our double sheet every morning, the distance
travelled by their eyes would reach twice round the earth. There! Is that
enough?--_Tribune._
Wonder if the Tribune's calculations is made from the actual measurement
of the "tail" of the "old white coat?" If so its not fair, for Horace has
the advantage over the modern fashion.
* * * * *
Strange Announcement.--We see by a Georgia exchange, that some one in that
State is taking "Daguerreotypes as low as seventy-five cents." Our Devil
says "Barnum is after the _wonder_, and intends having him early this
Spring."
* * * * *
EXAMPLES OF THE DIVISIBILITY OF MATTER.
All that has been written in support of what is termed the "Infinite
Divisibility of Matter," has been advanced with an oversight of certain
axiomatic principles which immediately decide the question in the
negative. Indeed, it would suffice to say that there can be no such thing
as a division of matter into an infinite number of parts simply because
there can be no such thing as an infinite number of any thing. Number
is essentially finite, and although, in imagination, it can be extended
indefinitely, it never can be positively infinite, at any period of
futurity, from the very fact that we can always conceive of its being
extended still farther. Even as an ideal extension of parts, it has always
a beginning and an end, at any given time we may assume for measuring
it, and is, therefore, never infinite in itself at any time. In this
respect it differs essentially from infinite space, which having no parts,
is positively infinite at all times. Number is a convenient instrument
wherewith to obtain an idea of infinite space, or of infinite duration,
on account of its capacity for endless extension or continuation; and it
is because we can ideally extend and continue it forever, without even
approximating to a measurement of space and duration, that we discover
the latter to be absolutely infinite, and number to be absolutely
finite. We discover that between the capacity for endless extension and
endless extension itself, there is a manifest and decided difference.
Under any circumstances, therefore, the term infinite, as applied to
the divisibility of matter, is unphilosophical and improper. All the
matter in the universe is finite, and if it were to be doubled, or
quatrilliontupled, every instant of time, to all eternity, it would never
become infinitely extended. And, by the same rule, it can never become
infinitely subdivided.
If, however, by the term "infinite divisibility," as applied to matter, is
merely meant its capacity for interminable subdivision, then the question
resolves itself either into one of speculative fancy or of practical
fact. If the former, then it must be admitted that, by an effort of the
imagination, we can conceive of such a divisibility beyond any assignable
limits. But if we regard the question as a practical one, it immediately
becomes too absurd for serious attention, since it is evident that
human power, limited in all things, must be so in producing artificial
subdivisions of matter. However unlimited, therefore, the capacity of
matter may be for divisibility, that of human beings, in relation to it,
must be narrow indeed. When chemists, therefore, and other philosophers,
speak of the divisibility of the present ultimate atoms of matter, they
must, however unconsciously, regard them in relation to human ability,
and thus far the question may become one of experiment. But the question
as to whether matter can actually be subdivided indefinitely and without
end, is one readily answered in the negative, by the known inability of
mankind to continue an endless experiment of this kind. The whole question
therefore, concerning the illimitable divisibility of matter, which has
been discussed from the earliest period of science to the present day, is
frivolous, fruitless, and irrational.
As matter now exists, not only its ultimate atoms, but even its
constituent molecules, are as inconceivably minute, as its aggregations
are vast. Taking an exemplification, from organic matter, we find that
a single drop of a strong solution of indigo, in which at least 500,000
parts are rendered distinctly visible by the microscope, colors 1,000
cubic inches of water, and as this quantity of water is at least half a
million of times greater than the drop of indigo solution, the particles
of indigo must be smaller than 2,500,000,000,000, the twenty-five hundred
millionth part of a cubic inch. If we dissolve a particle of silver,
of 0.01 of a cubic _line_, in size, in nitric acid, it will render
distinctly milky 500 cubic inches of a clear solution of common salt; and,
consequently, the magnitude of each particle of silver thus divided and
diffused, must be somewhat less than the billionth part of a cubic _line!_
So great a number as a billion being but imperfectly conceivable, it may
render the idea of this minute division more distinct, by stating that to
count a single billion of seconds, by a watch, every day and night without
ceasing, would require 31,675 years. In gilding silver wire, it is found,
by calculation, that a grain of gold is spread over 1,400 square inches;
and as, when examined by a microscope, the gold upon the thousandth part
of a linear inch is distinctly visible, it is demonstrated that gold may
be divided into particles of at least the billionth, 400 millionth, of a
square inch in size, and retain the color and all other characteristics
of a California prize. If a grain of copper be dissolved in nitric acid,
and then in water of ammonia, it will give a decidedly violet color to
392 cubic inches of water; and, therefore, if there was but one particle
of copper in each portion of the water of the size of a grain of sand, of
which one million make a cubic inch, it would show that the original grain
of copper had become divided into 392 particles.
This extreme tenuity of matter, however, is far surpassed in some examples
which may be adduced from organic sources. It is upon authentic record
that an Irish girl has spun linen yarn, of which one pound was 1,432
English miles in length, and of which, therefore, 17 pounds and 13 ounces
would have girt this world; and yet less than the 127 millionth part of
this thread would have been distinctly visible, and must have contained
other filaments still finer, each of which must have been composed of an
indefinite number of smaller particles, themselves, in all probability of
complex organization, and containing certainly, minuter atoms of carbon,
besides those of gaseous matter.
If we employ the microscope, far greater wonders of divisibility than
these appear, even in the complex organization of animal life. Ehrenberg
has shown that tripoli, a mineral much used in the arts, is entirely
composed of the siliceous shells of the microscopic animalcula, known
as infusiorials, and that a single cubic inch of it contains at least
_forty-one thousand millions_ of these shells!--about fifty times as many
individuals as there are of human beings on the globe. Yet each of these
minute animals lived and fed; had digestive and circulative systems,
with blood possessing globules as large, probably, in proportion, as
those of ours, besides nerves of sensation and inclination, with brains
belonging to them, together with muscles and every other mechanical
apparatus for the extremely active locomotion and propagation which they
so interestingly exhibit. And every new improvement in the microscope
reveals new races of animals, apparently created for their own enjoyment,
and of which millions heaped on millions, would be utterly invisible to
the unaided eye.--These facts prove that things are great and small only
by comparison with each other, and not in relation to infinity, with which
no comparison can be instituted. And they prove, moreover, that vain,
boastful, and bigoted man, is not the sole object of creation, nor of the
profound benevolence, contrivance and design, with which it is universally
replete.--_Art's Echo._
* * * * *
IRON--ITS NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL COMBINATIONS WITH CARBON.
The question is often asked, what constitutes the difference between
wrought iron, cast iron and steel?
Cast Iron, when viewed under favorable circumstances, by the help of a
microscope will be found to be a mechanical aggregation of molecules of
_iron and carbon_; and the relative position of these particles may be
illustrated by a pile of cannon balls as usually arranged in navy yards,
each alternate ball being iron and carbon (charcoal).
If a mass of cast iron be heated until softened, and then _puddled_
(squeezed), the carbon will be forced to the surface, and will there
combine with the oxygen of the atmosphere, forming carbonic acid or
carbonic oxide gases, and thus pass off. When all the carbon has been
parted with, the mass is called Wrought Iron, and may then be welded,
when at proper heat, but cannot be melted--_the hottest blast furnace
will not melt wrought iron_. Wrought iron at red heat combines rapidly
with oxygen, and becomes oxide of iron--thus a joint of stove-pipe thrown
into a furnace will never melt, but by contact with atmosphere will
change into oxide of iron, and thus be practically lost. This operation
is technically called _burning_. If a piece of wrought iron be surrounded
by carbon (charcoal) finely pulverized, and the whole enclosed in a sheet
iron vessel to exclude the air, and this placed for a sufficient length
of time in a furnace constructed for the purpose, the iron will imbibe
an atomic quantity of carbon, and become Steel. This process is called
_cementation_, and steel so made can be melted as readily as cast iron.
Thus it will be seen that both cast iron and steel are combinations
of iron and carbon, and in the same proportions, but not in the same
state of combination. In cast iron, the carbon and iron are a mere
_mechanical combination_, while in steel the iron and carbon are combined
_chemically_.--Wrought iron, when pure, is free from carbon, and its
ductility, toughness, &c., are due to the absence of carbon, sulphur,
phosphorus, and other substances, with which it is occasionally pervaded.
The French chemists are experimenting, and occasionally succeeding by
accident, in causing heated iron to take the carbon from carbonic acid and
other gases containing carbon, and thus becoming steel more rapidly, and
at less cost, than when made by the process of cementation. Mr. Dixon,
of Jersey City, has succeeded in making steel direct from the Adirondack
iron ore, while Peter Cooper, Esq., Mr. Dickinson, and others, are
manufacturing wrought iron direct from the iron ores of New-Jersey without
first forming the pig or cast iron, and of course at less expense, as the
saving of fuel is very great.
The process of _case-hardening_, or changing the immediate surface of
iron utensils into steel, is readily performed by covering their surfaces
with such organic substances as contain carbon as a constituent, and then
subjecting them to high heat for short spaces of time--thus the roller
of a paper or sugar mill may be case-hardened by a coating of prussiate
of potash, or of leather chips, and then subject the whole to high heat,
excluded from atmospheric influences. By this process the gelatine and
other constituents of the leather are reduced to carbon, and this enters
the surface particles of the iron, converting them into steel. Many
hypotheses are offered for this action, and among others, that "_the
ultimate particles of matter are always in motion_," admitting the ingress
of particles travelling in smaller orbits between them. The friends of
this hypothesis offer as proof, that a fresh cast sash-weight when broken
is a gray mass, while one taken from an old building, and broken, is
beautifully crystalline, from the centre to the outside, like speculum
metal. A freshly drawn piece of tin pipe when suddenly bent opposite the
ear gives no crackling sound, and if broken has no crystalline structure,
but if left at rest for one hour it has both. Barbers often tell us that
razors get tired of shaving, but if laid by for thirty days they will then
shave well. By microscopic examination it is found that the _tired razor_,
from long stropping by the same hand and in the same directions, has the
ultimate particles or fibres of its surface or edge all arranged in one
direction, like the edge of a piece of cut velvet; but after a month's
rest, these fibres re-arrange themselves heterogeneously, crossing each
other and presenting a saw-like edge, each fibre supporting its fellow,
and hence cutting the beard, instead of being forced down flat without
cutting, as when laid by. These and many other instances are offered by
the friends of the hypothesis named, to prove that the ultimate particles
of matter are always in motion, and they say that in the process of
welding, the absolute momentum of the hammer causes an entanglement of
orbits of motion, and hence a re-arrangement, as in one piece; indeed, in
the cold state, a leaf of gold laid on a polished surface of steel, and
stricken smartly with a hammer, will have its particles forced into the
steel so as to permanently gild it at the point of contact.
The oxidation of metals is equally curious, and the length of time
necessary for the formation of an infinitesimal coating of oxide is less
than the one-thousandth of a second. This fact may be readily proved: a
clean surface of steel, free from oxide, when brought in contact with
mercury (quicksilver) will amalgamate, but if the least oxide be upon
the surface no such effect will take place. Prepare a trough containing
quicksilver, and place a bar of steel above it, and within one inch or
less of the surface of the quicksilver--break this bar with a smart blow
from a hammer, so that the blow which breaks it shall at the same time
force the broken ends into the quicksilver, and although the time occupied
by the ends in passing through one inch of atmosphere before reaching the
surface of the quicksilver will be immeasurably short, still they will be
so oxidized as not to amalgamate with the mercury; if, however, the bar
of steel be confined at its ends below the surface of the quicksilver,
and then be broken _upwards_, by a lever applied to its centre, the ends
of the broken bar will be beautifully amalgamated before reaching the
atmosphere above. The reason for the success of the last named experiment
is doubtless due to the absence of oxide of iron, when broken beneath the
surface of the mercury. J. J. MAPES.
* * * * *
New Weigh-lock at Albany.--A writer in the _Courier and Enquirer_ gives a
description of the great weigh-lock that has just been erected at Albany,
for the purpose of ascertaining the tonnage of canal boats.
Heretofore long and vexatious delays have been the result, while now, a
boat is brought into the lock, and in a time which would have scarcely
sufficed in other days to have ascertained the weight of a small parcel,
the unerring register on the beam, has registered its weight, and the
record is on the books of the office. The weigh-lock is directly on the
side of, and attached to the large canal, and is adapted to the use of
such boats as shall hereafter be built, when the locks throughout the
entire length of the canal shall be of the uniform enlarged size.
* * * * *
Daguerreotyping in London.--In a recent letter from J. E. Mayall, dated
London, February 11th, he writes in his postscript:--"While I write this
letter we have the gas lighted in the streets--1 o'clock P.M., and I write
by gas-light."
We must confess that the Daguerreotypists are in the "Fog" enough in this
country, but if "Old Sol" should get blocked up at that early hour, we
don't know what would become of our "Foggy" Daguerreotypists here.
* * * * *
The ground side of the "Ground Glass" should face the lenses.
* * * * *
Mercury baths should always be kept covered with some porous wood, in
order that the mercurial vapors cannot escape in the room.
* * * * *
QUICK STUFFS.
We have endeavored to guard against giving useless receipts, thereby
saving our Daguerreotypes a tax which would prove in most instances of
no benefit. As many have requested us to publish a variety of receipts
for Quicks. We give them with but little comment. We will number each
combination:
No. 1. Take pure rain or distilled water, one quart filtered through paper
into a bottle having a ground glass stopper, and add one and a half ounces
of chloride of iodine for warm weather, or little less for cold weather.
The reason of this is obvious, from the fact that during the warm summer
day, the bromine is far more volatile than in a winter day. To the above
add one ounce of best American bromine, and shake well. Now, with care, to
prevent, as far as possible, the escape of gas, add, drop by drop, thirty
drops of aqua ammonia, shaking well the mixture at each drop.