On this page
- Departments (1)
-
Text (6)
-
256 THE LEADER. [No. 312, Saturday,
-
4Llutnltllt
-
^ ¦s s&ss^^
-
In one of Ms splendid fantasias of style...
-
There are obstinate men who never know, ...
-
THOMAS BAIKES, ESQ., AT LABSE. JL Portio...
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
256 The Leader. [No. 312, Saturday,
256 THE LEADER . [ No . 312 , Saturday ,
4llutnltllt
ICiferntait
^ ¦S S&Ss^^
^ ¦ s s & ss ^^
In One Of Ms Splendid Fantasias Of Style...
In one of Ms splendid fantasias of style De Qthn cev spoke of the JVafcon of London , because the word city was too inexpressive for the grandeur of the impression which London made upon him . In the opening to hisftew work , the Great World of London , Mr . Henry Mayhew has occasion tocotnmenton the phrase of a French economist , who says " Londres n ' est plus «« e ville : c ' est we province couverte de maisons , " hut , Mr . Mayhbw shows that no province of England or France is comparable to it . " Not only does London contain twice as many souls as the most extensive division of the French empire , bvit it houses upwards of a quarter of a million more individuals than any one county in Great Britain . " Besides , why speak of provinces when many kingdoms are considerably smaller ? not in area , but in population ; Hanover , Saxony , or Wurtemburg , for instance . Oat of every thousand individuals on the face of the earth—at least of what tlie Greeks called " voice-dividing *
" bread-eating" individuals—two are Londoners !; To classify , describe , and moralise on the various aspects such a nation presents is a task of enormous difficulty . Mr . Mayhew has many qualifications for the tastf * and his first instalment promises well .
There Are Obstinate Men Who Never Know, ...
There are obstinate men who never know , or will not know \ vben they are beaten . Qf course this obstinacy is much , reproved . We give everything a baxt namei wlxen it does not serve our purpose j what would be firmness in us , is obstinacy in . our opponents jwnat would be the patient adherence to the cause of truth ( the cause being bur own ) is the blindness of vanity when the cause is against us . M . Louis Figuier is ail obstinate man . He does not know when / he is beaten ; driven from . the field be declares himself victorious . We" have from time to time kept our readers informed of bis experiments and arguments in contradiction of Cr . A . tfDE Bernard ' s theory of the sugarfoiling Junction of the liver . Our last report was the decision of the Academy 6 fSciences against him . He las returned to the charge . In the last number of the Anndles des Sciences Naturelies there is aMemoire by him detailing fresh experiments , the upshot of which he believes to be decisive in his favour . The same number also contains a note from . Clause Bernard ,
explaining M . Figijier ' s ; error . To scientific readers , this discussion is of great interest , not so much with reference to the point at issue—for we believe Bernard ' s discovery to be real—but with reference to the extreme caution necessary in all- physiological inquiries , owing to the excessive complexity of the organism and the conditioas in which it acts . To upset old theories is unhappily the main pursuit of scientific men . Substitution is as much the process of scientific evolution as it is of organic evolution . One never feels quite sure of any theory ; not even of gravitation . And Edinburgh has indeed recently produced a rebellious intellect who is very far from , convinced of the truth , of the gravitation theory . One J . A . S . ( he gives no name ) has published a tiny pamphlet entitled The Structure qf
Matter , Cause of Gravitation , and Nature and Laws of Electricity , with new Explanations of Chemical Phenomena , ( Edinburgh , Myles McPhail ) . Very few , we imagine , will be tempted to look into a pamphlet bearing so ambitious a title . Yet it is really worth looking into . The author sees the difficulty of the current hypothesis ; which is at any rate better than blind acceptance . His own hypothesis is , that the atoms or molecules of matter are minute spherical shells highly elastic and capable , like the soap bubble , of expansibility and contraction . The theory of atomic attraction he regards as an extraordinary fallacy ; and few thinking men have ever felt quite comfortable
ra accepting it , so that the attempts to explain attraction and repulsion upon some other principle have been sand-numerous . In our " sallet days" vexed problem vexed ws ' greatly , and we once fancied we had found a solution ; we " woke and found 'twas fancy ' s dream . " The difficulty is this : two atoms are said to attract each other ( and hence cohesion ) , but they are also said to repel each other ( and hence no two atoms ever touch ) : within the spaces thus made by the repulsive force heat may intervene , and forcing the particles still wider asunder , cause the solid tp expand , to become liquid , and to become vapour . Hereupon J . A . S . remarks : — To explain , as ia now very gravely done , that a bar of metal is expanded , by its atoinS " repelling each other , is to explain that two molecules of matter may irepol each , other , bo as to cause the intervention of space between them , and yet after their expansion to re-tain their juxtaposition "by a law ofcoheaivo attraction , alreftdy . -vjlolated , which prevents their separation from being permanent as well as complete . Thia explanation involve * a orudo contradiction in both the law of repulsion and the' Jaw of attraction ^ implying that the attraction of cohesion boa lepa power when two molecules ore in contact than when they are thus separated , oth erwise it would prevent theseparating influence of repulsion ; « nd [ What tlie Wfw ; ,, o ^ repulsion hqs leea power over the law of cohesion when it has thus overcome it , tfcan when it required to conquer it in all tho closer cohesion of contaot . ^ iflojLn ^ pf . fact the explanation hus confessedly nothing but aujpposition to rest *&» . TO , ^^ paost illogical attempt to aseign a hypothetical oauge to an observed W * ^ , 'WpW- nxoleoulea can repel each other , without effecting a comploto aopara-W ^ ' ' ^ . < ^ 4 ^ ° " \ 8 , * h ° * " > lid they compose to molecular powder , io a hyperbole ^ S . ^ T ^^ . P ^ . ^^ A ®* wbi ° h wo make the supporters of such a theory wolrffift v ^ WMfding to all the cognate principles » na analagoue laws of matter , it is 1 Kjp % t in meohamical merit or physical possibility . 2 ^ 8 $ ^^ $ ^ ^ ° . ^* 9 "dready suggested , that the primitive molecules or X ^ i ? in ^ 2 * L ? < WfiBfy * ° ? extremely minutely globular sheila capable of luffWy «« ww 4 Slfttio " o * contraction , wb at once dlaaoW tho diflloulty we havo just
encountered . For while electricity is found to permeate and lie contained in all b-odies , we have only to suppose this subtle element to be contained in these elastic shells , and to have the power , ly its increase or diminution , to expand or oontract them , and the whole mystery vanishes before us . It is easy to understand that the increase of electricity in the molecular shells will expand the entire body they compose , and that the decrease of it will occasion a proportionate contraction . Of course it will occur that spherical molecular shells must ha-re mtersectices between them , and the question is thence suggested , how are these . interseefcices filled ? But it must be kept in view that the shells we have sue gested are highly elastic , and it is more than probable therefore that , as all bodies have to resist a surrounding pressure on their surfaces , the molecular shells of which bodies are composed will , "by this universal external pressure , be flattened into polyhedral forms , of different numbers of sides , to suit their circumstances for the time , whether of compound or elementary arrangement , and that such »
inecnanical result of pressure will exclude the intersectice 3 between the atoms tfbich woxild otherwise arise from their sphericity of form . This is an explanation which , would not apply to the existing theory of solid spherical atoms while the fact that intersectiees would inevitably occur beetween Buoh solid atoma ' aad the question as to how they are filled forms an obstruction in the general apl jplicability of that theory which it ia impossible to surmount . And in support of the hypothesis he adduces these facts : — ¦ 1 . That a body undergoing expansion swells out uniformly or molecularly , and does not display any decrease in the contiguity of its component matter nor any increase of perosity thereby . 2 . That no elementary body in a Btate of expansion has ever revealed intersectices between its atoms . 3 . That while all bodies contain , electricity , and no cavity has ever been discovered between their molecules within which this electricity can be contained , while the electricity is manifestly contained in some way interior to the matter of the body , it must toe contained within the rnolecles
because , 4 . If the eleetricity were contained in any other way , it would by its increase , - especially in the case of Gases evolved by explosion , produce a visible widening of intersectiees between and separation of atoms , and a consequent reduction of the matter to molecular powder . "We do not expect our readers to adopt the hypothesis of J . A .. S , but they maybe curious to look at this pamphlet , and see how he works out his views
Thomas Baikes, Esq., At Labse. Jl Portio...
THOMAS BAIKES , ESQ ., AT LABSE . JL Portion of the Journal kept by the late Thomas Raikes , Esq ., from 1831 to 1847 , comprising Sketches of Social and Political Life in London and Parts . Tols . _ I . and II . Longmans and Go . Thomas Raikes , Esq ., as represented in the frontispiece to these volumes , was a portly gentleman , with a timid intellect , and a " proper sense of his position . " As represented in his journal he was a feeble gossip , profoundly prejudiced and stupendously credulous , a sort of well-dressed chiffonier of tittle-tattle , who > fancying himself an aristocrat , affected all the airs of a dowager . Being admitted , by virtue of certain passwords , into political society , to White ' s , the Carlton , the dinner-table at Apsley House , the evening colloquies of ambassadors , and the conspiracies of ministers expectant , be saw a good deal of the game , heard , now and then , a clever thing , and * bein
g- intensely consequential , recorded Ibis proceedings day by day in a diary , one-half of which was worth printing , and a few things in which are worth remembering .- It starts between two great events , the passing of the Reform . Bill and the Belgian revolution . On the latter subject Mr ; Raikes pronounced himself in private , in pages of solemn prolixity ; but tlie Reform Bill wrung from him a- succession of groaning prophecies , equal to the silliest ever uttered by superannuated peers , or by the oracles of the Duchess of Salisbury . " What is the people ? What has the people always been ? " ejaculates the sycophant of White ' s , " The most capricious , the most cruel , the most ungrateful class of society ?* ' " They have got their reform . What will be their next war cry ? The repeal of the Corn Lbv ^ which will reduce the income from land one-half , will that satisfy them ? No ! Then comes —< - — annual parliaments , the ballot . "
This is the purport of Mr . Raikes ' s incoherences . He seems , to- have been a diner-out , regarded by no one as a politician , but by all the highbred Tory set , as a clubbable gossip , clever at spreading alarms , scandals , epigrams , and the light lampoons of Toryism . His editor , whose task has been limited to the insertion of a few explanatory notes , and to the substitution in necessary cases of initials for proper names , allows the whole tide of Mr . Raikes ' s garrulous confessions to flow upon the public , with masses of _ commonplace unsuppressed , and a scattered archipelago of anecdotes floating in a redundance of prosy or hysterical twaddle . What we have to do with such a book is to select , to quote some of the sayings preserved , and to ask the reader , in . table-talk style , did you ever hear this ?—Talleyrand ' s hons mots always fly about . His friend Montrou has been subject of late to epileptic fits , one of which attacked him lately after dinner at Talleyrand's . While ho lay on the floor in convulsions , scratching tho carpet with his hands , his benign host remarked with . J a sneor , " ( Jest qv , * U meparait qu'ilvent absolttment descendre . "
Or as bad as this : —• Monday , 6 th . —Joke of Holmes in the House of Commons . When Mr . Morrison , the member for Leicester , who , being a haberdasher , had made himself conspicuous by a speeoh on the foreign glove question , came up to him , and asked if ho could get him a pair for the evening . "Of whafc , " said Holmes , " gloves or stoolcinga ? ' Be it remembered that the author of tins entry was the son of ft merchant , but , be it also observed , " a wholesale , " From that eminence ho flings the sarcasm at the retail haberdasher . " A new Tory Club , the Cnrlton ,
haa just been formed , " writes Mr . Raikes , in April , 1832 , " for which Lord Kensington ' s bouse , in Carlton Gardens , has just been bought . " He pays the subscription of the elect , becomes a Cavlton , and joins with tlie loud talkers against a creation of peers to carry the Reform BiU—• ' an atrocious coup d'etat meditated by Lord Grey against tho privileges of that House . " But what if King William had been a man with a secret will , had p erceived the turbulence of the nation , had come down upon the peers and commons together , had imprisoned some , exiled others , abolished the rights of all , and reigned over a mute Senate and an emasculated aristocracy ? WouUl that have been " an atrociou . coujn dVtat ? ' * Yet the journals of Thomas Rmkcs
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), March 15, 1856, page 16, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_15031856/page/16/
-