The Whig standard., 1843-12-22
SourH LEICESTER, Mass, Dec. 18th l843.

South LEICESTER, MASS, Dec. 18th 1913
To R. PATTEN:-Sr: A correspondent has for
we find some remarks relative to the merits Of Spec
tace lenses and your signature is attached to the
article take the liberty to reply to an emana
ton from your oavn optical knowledge You have
come out before an enlightened community with
dissertation on visual optics, in which you have
chosen to make mention of the Perfoca or Parabola
lenses in such manner, that, admitting your state
ments to be correct we must be imposters We now
assert that your bofT0oed knowledge in optics has led
YOU into tissue of false assertions and untenabe
sumplions. Your remarks on the surfaces Of Menis-
Gus lenses, would argue that sphere can be more
spherical The mention of a greater degree of
sphericity when the subect-matter under discussion
is sphere, is too absurd for moments investigation
Your assertion that Ellipses converge the rays
of light to perfect focus is alse and must be pre-
dicated through your lamentable ignorance of the
subject you have attacked Permit me to inform you
sir, that, when section Of an ellipsoid of revou-
ton, whose semi-transversc axis and eccentricity
satisfy given proportion, is obtained, parallel rays
,uiH be convegcd to perfect tocss And as to your
statement that Mcnscus lenses converge rays the
same as double convex lenses" allow us to remark
that in no the action of the lenses the same
The proprietor Of any school book on optics, will ex-
plain this to your satfaction You quote "Dr Brew
ster on the Menscus lense." The DIR. was an Euro
pean optcian, and consequently nfallible. Never.
theless we contend that Menscus lenses whose SUI
faces bear proper proportion to each other are cor
rectors of Chomatic and spherical alteration. Were
the eye placed in the foci Of the specacles and
the object viewed in the other any lense Of imperfect
curvature would give distorted figure. And double
conrer lenses allpa do but the eye never in the
spectaces used in such POSITIONS the rays received
through the lense parallel as those that enter the
obiect-glass of telescopes and the eye, always be-
ing far within the foc of the lense is not sensible Of
Observation-Disclosures or otherwise. In this view of
the case the learned Doctors remarks have force
You ask" Is it not preposterous to apply piece of
bent glass 7" sc. In this question-you assume that
our glass bent-you dared not assert that they cere
bent though you no doubt intended to have your re-
marks convey such an dea Our glasses are not bent
into their form they are ground into the form in
which they are sold; and, in reply to your comment
on their evil tendency in long use would refer you
to Professor Silliman, DR.. Mcclellan, and host Of
scientific men, whose names have been cheerfully
rendered and can be seen ut our agents Office. If
you had been at all conversant in OPTICS you would
never have made the asscrtion at the close of your
article that he general conviction is that double
convex and lenses are the best for the eye"
Those forms have been worn from mecessity and
even European opticians have exhausted their inge-
nuity to produce the form you havs taken upon YOU
to repudiate Years of toll has been consumed by
us to produce the parabola curve. We are Ameri-
cans who acknowledge no superior in our art in the
old world nor have we CLEANED our knowledge from
its masters. With eur own hands have we fashioned
according to our minds, and the result is before
the public. We have produced an article that the
genius Of Europe attempted in vain Our lenses of
all kinds bid Defiance in density of material, and
brilancy of finish, to all competitors; and when an
ocian attacks their reputation, will be ready to
give the rationale Of their action.
dec 2I-eo3t HENRY M. PAINE s. Co.