Burning Fluids—Newell's Wire Gauze Lamp

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


On page 160, we presented some extracts from an article taken from the Haverhill " Ga zette," Mass., on the subject of Burning Fluids I and Newell's Lamp. The article stated that holes were made in the lid of said lamp at the suggestion of Dr. Jackson, of Boston. Mr. Newell has written us a letter asserting that : this is not true, and Dr. Jaekson himself has also called upon us, and stated that he never made such a suggestion. The statement, then, in the Haverhill " Gazette " is not reliable. Before we made any remarks on the article referred to, we examined the list of patent claims to discover whether—mdash;as was therein alleged—mdash;Isaac Jennings, of New York City, had invented a Wire Gauze Lamp to prevent explosions, in 1836; we could not discover then, as we stated, and have not since, any claim set up for using wire gauze in a lamp like that of Mr. Newell's. We have discoun tenanced the use of the common burning fluids in houses where there are servants or children. The most ingenious lamps and feeders may be employed, but careless and timorous persons will sometimes spill the fluid, and we have seen more than one explosion caused by such means, independent of lamp or vessel contain ing the fluid. There is no fluid, however, so clean and beautiful for artificial illumination, as that of a mixture of alcohol and turpentine distilled together. We have been informed by a friend in Boston, that no turmeric colored fluids were sold there, but a mixture of alco holic solutions and resins. This gentleman uses a hydro-carbon fluid, mixed with diluted alcohol, which affords an enduring and beau tiful light, although containing 20 per cent, of water, which lessens its dangerous qualities, but which, at the same time, detracts from its illuminating powers. If sold, however, at a price, in proportion to its cost; such a fluid is preferable to a more concentrated one. This gentleman, who is a distinguished chemist, has submitted Newell's Lamp to several severe tests, and although strongly prejudiced against the use of burning fluid, he says the said lamp under no condition failed to prevent an explosion.

Scientific American Magazine Vol 8 Issue 22This article was published with the title “Burning Fluids—Newell's Wire Gauze Lamp” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 8 No. 22 (), p. 173
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican02121853-173a

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe