Quoted by W. Rutherford, 'On the Freezing Microtome. A Reply to Mr Lawson Tait', Journal of Anatomy and Physiology 10 (1) (1875), pp. 178-185.
Description:

'Mr Lawson Tait makes the remarkable statement in the last number of this Journal (IX. 250), that "of Prof. Rutherford's apparatus I have always heard it said, that it either never completely freezes the tissue, or that the complete freezing lasts for so short a time as to be of little use." I have only to say in reply to this that the identical microtome figured and described by me in the Lancet has been constantly used by my assistants and myself for more than two years without its ever having been discovered that it "never completely freezes the tissue, or that the complete freezing lasts for so short a time' as to be of little use." On the contrary, the apparatus is used with the greatest success for providing a great class of practical histology with something like two hundred sections of the retina, the same number of unhardened lymphatic gland, and other soft organs. Moreover, at the recent meeting of the British Medical Association held in Edinburgh, I showed the very instrument described in the Lancet. In the presence of Professor Struthers of Aberdeen, Dr Martyn of Bristol, and a number of other gentlemen, I froze a piece of intestine, and then sliced it. The freezing was complete, and the sections were made within fifteen minutes from the commencement, although the air of the room was warm. I then quoted Mr Lawson Tait's statement to the witnesses of my method and asked them to judge for themselves.

It is indeed amusing to read the first paragraph of that communication of this newly-fledged histologist (lib. cit.) "If I may take the directions given in Foster and Balfour's Elements of Embryology as being an exposition of the most recent methods of section-cutting, I can only-feel that I have, by patient endeavours, been able to achieve a success which is not much known beyond the limited circle of those who have seen my work. I therefore hasten to describe some improvements I have made in the methods of section-cutting, which seem to me to constitute as important an advance over the rude hardening and imbedding processes, as the results obtained by them were superior to the sections made by double knives [note: 'The italics are mine']."It is instructive to see how Mr Tait "hastens" to acquaint his learned friends with his success so little "known beyond the limited circle of those who have seen his work." I leave them to adopt what methods they like best, but they will doubtless be as much surprised as I have been to see this attempt of Mr Tait's to make it appear that he is the inventor of the method which constitutes "so important an advance."

Mr Tait is careful to tell us (p. 250) that "before the appearance of Prof. Rutherford's instrument (July, 1873), I had had one almost identical in use for many months, but I have since had to modify it very much on account of repeated failures." I will charitably suppose that Mr Tait is in ignorance of my apparatus described in this Journal in May, 1871. He can extend his "many months" beyond that date if he likes. I will also charitably suppose that he is ignorant of the fact that Mr Needham described and figured in the Monthly Journal of Microscopical Science for June, 1873 (ix. 258), a modification of my microtome devised by Mr McCarthy, which in some respects closely resembled that which Mr Tait described six months ago. If Mr Tait continues his "patient endeavours," however, he will probably "achieve" a still greater "success," when he succeeds in comprehending why it is that as the result of my experience I recommend the following to histologists as worthy of their attention.' (179-180)

 

There is another practical point worthy of mention. If it be desired to freeze a tissue that has been previously immersed in spirit, place it for a night in a large beaker of ordinary water. By the morning the amount of spirit contained in the tissue will be so small that it will not interfere with the freezing. Also this: at the end of a day wash the instrument in water, to get rid of the salt in the freezing-box. This obvious and simple expedient at once gets rid of what Mr Tait is pleased to term one of the "great faults" of my apparatus - to wit, the accumulation of salt in the freezing-box. His ingenuity in finding faults appears to considerably surpass his ability in devising improvements.

The process which I have described is really very simple, and can at any time be seen in my laboratory. There are two main points which should be noted. 1. The simplification of the process of freezing and cutting frozen tissues by means of the freezing microtome, so as to render this process readily available for histological purposes - that is my invention. 2. The use of an imbedding fluid which when frozen will cut like a piece of cheese instead of splintering to pieces, as frozen water does. That fluid is a solution of ordinary gum, and for this valuable suggestion I am indebted to my former assistant, Dr Pritchard, of King's College. Mr Tait places water in the well outside the tissue to be frozen. So did I four years ago, suggesting, however, that probably a better supporting fluid would be found. Mucilage is that fluid, and although I stated all this two years ago in the Lancet referred to by Mr Tait, he has evidently never tried it, otherwise he would scarcely have recommended the use of water instead of it. So much for Mr Tait's "patient endeavours" by which he "has been able to achieve a success which is not much known beyond the limited circle of those who have seen his work," and, his "hastening to describe his improvements" (!).' (184-185)