ll the operations of the arts, and
the most rational for scientific amusement. Exact in its
process, sure in its results, varied in its operations,
without limits in its applications and its views, severe and
geometrical in its reasoning, there is scarcely any human
occupation which it does not enlighten, and upon the
perfection of which it may not have great influence. It
bestows great enjoyment to every class of individuals: and
who would not be ambitious of becoming acquainted with a
science which enlightens almost every species of human
knowledge?"

Imagine for a moment the effect of such an enthusiastic proclamation
of the powers of chemistry on the readers of the Magazine! It would
be and no doubt was contagious, with the consequence that our science
was called upon to aid infant industries. Cutbush was far-visioned and
dreamed of the development of our Country's national resources. He had
the spirit of Woodhouse, Seybert and others, who, too, were actuated
for our Country's welfare, for its development physically and
spiritually, and how better could this be accomplished than through
the medium of science, and in large measure by chemical science?

In his historical resume Cutbush mentions some

"of the philosophers who have ... cultivated and enriched the
new theory of chemistry with discoveries which will forever
give immortality to their names, we have to notice Aikin,
Babington, Bancroft, Beddoes, Blagdon, Cavendish, Chenevix,
Crichton, Cruickshank, Davy, Lord Dundonald, Lord Dundas,
Fordyce, Garnett, Hatchett, Henry, Higgins, Hope, Howard,
Kirvan, Bishop of Llandaff, Murray, Nicholson, Pearson,
Tennant, Tilloch, Thompson, Wedgwood, and Wollaston; and
Achard, Crell, Gilbert, Gren, Goetling, Humboldt, Hermbstadt,
Klaproth, Lowitz, Richter, Scherer, Tromsdorff, Westrumb,
Wiegleb, Bertholet, Chaptal, Fourcroy, Lagrange, Guiton, Van
Mons, Proust, Sequin, Vauquelin, etc., etc."

To the modern chemist these names probably represent little. Perhaps a
few sound familiar, but the majority are unknown to him. For instance,
who would be apt to say much about the Bishop of Llandaff, who wrote
to Henry, author of one of the earliest and most delightful texts:

"CAMBRIDGE, Oct. 28, 1787."

"Sir--

"Allow me to return you my thanks of the obliging manner in
which you conveyed to me the kind notice, which the Literar