Letter | Published:

Microscope Stands

Nature volume 88, pages 412413 (25 January 1912) | Download Citation



MICROSCOPISTS will have experienced a feeling of satisfaction that, what they might anticipate would be a carefully reasoned consideration of the respective merits of Continental and English microscopes, had been provided for them in the issue of NATURE of December 21 last, but their satisfaction must have been considerably modified when they had finished reading the article in question. The subject is admittedly one of considerable difficulty, but no good purpose is to be served by giving the opinions of those, if one may judge from the opinions expressed, who are only able to see from the point of view of the producer, the user not being considered. Apparently the intention is to state the matter from each side: the first and second sections, therefore, treat of the characteristics and advantages of the English and Continental types respectively, while the third and concluding section would presumably be a careful comparison of these two types. In point of fact, the latter is nothing but a eulogy of the productions of Continental houses, and, if the concluding sentence is to be accepted, there is nothing left for English producers but to retire from the field and leave them in undisputed possession.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Author information


  1. King's College (University of London), Strand, W.C.

    • J. E. BARNARD


  1. Search for J. E. BARNARD in:

About this article

Publication history





By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.