Mr. Stephen Gray, of the Charter-House, having observed some irregular particles within a glass globule, and finding that they appeared distinct and prodigiously magnified when held close to his eye, concluded, that if he placed a globule of water, in which there were any particles more opake than the water, near his eye, he should see those particles distinctly and highly magnified. This idea, when realized, far exceeded his expectation. His method was, to take on a pin a small portion of water which he knew had in it some minute animalculæ; this he laid on the end of a small piece of brass wire, till there was formed somewhat more than an hemisphere of water; on applying it then to the eye, he found the animalculæ most enormously magnified; for those which were scarce discernible with his glass globules, with this appeared as large as ordinary sized peas. They cannot be seen in day-time, except the room be darkened, but are seen to the greatest advantage by candle-light. Montucla observes, that when any objects are inclosed within this transparent globule, the hinder part of it acts like a concave mirror, provided they be situated between that surface and the focus; and that by these means they are magnified three times and an half more than they would be in the usual way. An extempore microscope may be formed, by taking up a small drop of water on the point of a pin, and placing it over a fine hole made in a piece of metal; but as the refractive power of water is less than that of glass, these globules do not magnify so much as those of the same size which are made of glass: this was also contrived by Mr. Gray. The same ingenious author invented another water microscope, consisting of two drops of water, separated in part by a thin brass plate, but touching near the center; which were thus rendered equivalent to a double convex lens of unequal convexities.
Dr. Hooke describes a method of using the single microscope, which seems to have a great analogy to the foregoing methods of Mr. Gray. “If you are desirous,” says he, “of obtaining a microscope with one single refraction, and consequently capable of procuring the greatest clearness and brightness any one kind of microscope is susceptible of; spread a little of the fluid you intend to examine, on a glass plate, bring this under one of your microscopic globules, then move it gently upwards, till the fluid touch the globule, to which it will soon adhere, and that so firmly, as to bear being moved a little backwards or forwards. By looking through the globule, you will then have a perfect view of the animalculæ in the drop.”[11]
[11] Hooke’s Lectures and Conjectures, p. 98.
Having laid before the reader the principal improvements that have been suggested, or made in the single microscope, it remains only to point out those instruments of this kind, which, from the mode in which they are fitted up, seem best adapted for general use; the peculiar advantages of which, as well as the manner of using them, will be described in the [third chapter] of this work.
Fig. 1. [Plate VI.] A botanical microscope, contrived by Dr. Withering.
Fig. 2. [Plate VI.] A botanical microscope, by Mr. B. Martin, being the most universal pocket microscope.
Fig. 3. [Plate VI], represents that which was used by M. Lyonnet for dissecting the cossus.
Fig. 5. [Plate VI.] The tooth and pinion microscope, which is now generally substituted in the room of Wilson’s. Fig. 1. [Plate II. B].
Fig. 1. [Plate VII. B]. The aquatic microscope used by Mr. Ellis for investigating the nature of coralline, and recommended to botanists by Mr. Curtis, in his valuable publication, the “Flora Londinensis.”
Fig. 7. [Plate VIII.] A botanical magnifier, or hand megalascope, which by the different combinations of its three lenses produces seven different magnifying powers; when the three are used together, they are turned in, and the object viewed through the apertures in the sides.