The Whig standard. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1843-1844, 1843-12-25
sourH LEICESTER, Mass, Dec. 18th 1843.

SourH LEICESTER, Mass, Dec 18th I843
To n. PATTEN:-Sir: A correspondent has for
warded us copy Of the Wing Standard, wherein
we find some remarks relative the merits Of Spec
tace lenses and your signature is attached to the
article we take the liberty to reply to it
ton from your o,cn optical knowledge You have
come out before an enlightened community with
a dissertation on visual optics, in which you have
chosen to make mention Of the Perfocal or Paraboa
lenses, in such manner, that, admitting your state
ments to be correct we must be imposters. We now
assert that your boTo,ced knowledge in optics has led
you into tissue Of false assertions and untenable as
sumptions. Your remarks the surfaces Of Menis-
Gus lenses, would argue that sphere can be more
spherical. The mention of greater degree of
sphercity" when the subect-mattcr under discussion
is sphere is too absurd for moments investigation.
Your assertion that Elpses converge the rays
Of light to perfect focus is false, and must be pre-
Dictated through your lamentable ignorance Of the
subject you have attacked Permit me to inform you,
sir that, when section Of an ellpsod Of revolu-
ton, whose semi-transverse axis and eccentrcity
satisfy given proportion, is obtained parallel rays
,oiH be conuerged to perfect focus And as ia your
statement that Menscus lenses converge rays :" the
same as double convex lenses,' allow us to remark
that in no case the action OF the lenses the same.
The proprietor Of any school book on optics, will ex
Main this to your satifacton You quote "Dr. Brew
ster on the Meniscus lensc." The DIR. was an Euro
pean optcian, and consequently infalibe. Never
theless, we contend that Menscus lenses whose sui
faces bear proper proportion to each other are cor
rectors of Chomatc and spherical alteration. Were
the eye placed in the foci Of the spectaces and
the object viewed in the other any lense Of imperfect
curvature would give distorted figure And double
corer lenses acas but the eye never in the use
Of spectacles used in such postions the rays received
through the tense parallel as those that enter the
obiectglass of telescope; and the eye, always be-
ing far within the foc of the lense is not sensible of
Observation-Disclosures otherwise In this view of
the case the learned Doctors remarks have force.
You ask" Isit not preposterous to apply piece of
bent CLASP SIC. In this question-you assume that
our glass is bentyou dared not assert that they
bent though you no doubt intended to have your
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 us and can be ut our agents Offices If
vol, had been at all conversant in optics, you would
never have made the assertion at the close or your
article. that 1.-THE general conviction that double
convex and concave lenses the best for the eye
Those forms have been worn from necsssits and
even European opticians have exhausted THAR inge
nuity to produce the form you havs taken upon you
to rcpudate 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 own hands have we fashioned
according to own minds, and the result is before
the public We have produced an article that the
genius Of Europe attempted in vain Our lenses Of
I ali kinda bid defiance, in density Of material and
brilliancy Of fuish to all competitoys and when an
s optic ~ 9saS: se 81 mex sstiSs.
dec 2l--eo3t HENRY M. PAINE Co.