The writer in Engineering, whoever he may be, appears to be a sort of literary Rip Van Winkle, just waking out of a long sleep; and he cannot get the idea through his head that it is possible that a technical journal can become a vehicle of popular information to the mass of mankind, instead of being the organ of a small clique of professional engineers or wealthy manufacturers, such as seems to hold control of the columns of Engineering, and who use it either to ventilate their own pet schemes and theories, or to advertise, by illustration and otherwise, in the reading columns, a repetition of lathes, axle-boxes brakes, cars, and other trade specialities, which can lay little or no claim to novelty. It is, furthermore, a crying sin in the estimation of our English critic that American technical journals do not separate their advertisements from the subject matter; and he thinks that when Yankee editors learn that trade announcements are out of place in the body of a journal, they will see how to make their journals pay by making them higher priced. Now we venture to say, without intending to give offence, that Yankee editors understand their business quite as well as do English editors; and it is presumable, at least, that they know what suits their readers on this side, much better than do English editors. We venture to suggest—modestly, of course—that journalism in the two countries is not the same, and should the editor of Engineering undertake to transfer his system of intellectual labor to this side of the Atlantic, he would not be long in making the discovery that those wandering Bohemian engineers, who, he tells us, are in sorrow and heaviness over the short-comings of American technical journals, would turn out after all to be slender props for him to lean upon. We think it probable, however, that with a little more snap, a journal like Engineering might possibly attain a circulation, in this country, of 500 or 1000 copies weekly.
Why, American engineers have scarcely yet been able to organize themselves into an association for mutual advancement in their profession, much less to give the reading public the benefit of their experience and labors! This fact alone ought, of itself, to satisfy Engineering that no such journal could profitably exist in this country. Whenever our American engineers are ready to support such a journal, there will be no difficulty in finding a publisher.
Engineering, in its casual reference to the various technical journals of America, omits to name our leading scientific monthly, but introduces with just commendation a venerable cotemporary, now upwards of three score years of age. Now, it is no disparagement of this really modest monthly to say, that perhaps there are not sixty hundred people in the States who know it, even by name; and so far as the use of "scissors and paste" are made available in our technical journals, we venture the assertion that the editorial staff expenses of the Scientific American are as great, if not greater, than those of Engineering. The question, however, is not so much one of original outlay, but which of the two journals gives most for the money. In this very essential particular, and with no intention to depreciate the value of Engineering, we assert, with becoming modesty, that the Scientific American occupies a position which Engineering will never be able to attain.
THE SHERMAN PROCESS.
When people boast of extraordinary successes in processes the details of which are kept profoundly hidden from public scrutiny, and when the evidences of success are presented in the doubtful form of specimens which the public has no means of tracing directly to the process, the public is apt to be skeptical, and to express skepticism often in not very complimentary terms.
For a considerable time, the public has been treated to highly-colored accounts of a wonderful metallurgic process whereby the best iron and steel were said to be made, from the very worst materials, almost in the twinkling of an eye. This process has been called after its assumed inventor, or discoverer, the "Sherman Process." The details of the process are still withheld, but we last week gave an extract from an English contemporary, which throws a little light upon the subject.
The agent relied upon to effect the remarkable transformation claimed, is iodine, used preferably in the form of iodide of potassium, and very little of it is said to produce a most marvellous change in the character of the metal.