As recorded in his own report of the experiment in question, he had been attempting to create silica crystals by permitting a fluid medium, containing hydrochloric acid and a solution of potassium silicate, to pass through a lump of iron oxide, when:
On the fourteenth day from the commencement of this experiment I observed through a lens a few small whitish excrescences or nipples, projecting from about the middle of the electrified stone. On the eighteenth day these projections enlarged, and struck out seven or eight filaments, each of them longer than the hemisphere on which they grew.If these creatures were indeed acari(i.e. mites), then they were arachnids, not insects, but far more important than their taxonomy is their apparent origin - spontaneously generated from non-living matter, in a solution typically much too caustic to sustain any from of life.
On the twenty-sixth day these appearances assumed the form of a perfect insect, standing erect on a few bristles which formed its tail. Till this period I had no notion that these appearances were other than an incipient mineral formation. On the twenty-eighth day these little creatures moved their legs. I must now say that I was not a little astonished. after a few days they detached themselves from the stone, and moved about at pleasure.
In the course of a few weeks about a hundred of them made their appearance on the stone. I examined them with a microscope, and observed that the smaller ones appeared to have only six legs, the larger ones eight. These insects are pronounced to be of the genus acarus, but there appears to be a difference of opinion as to whether they are a known species; some assert that they are not.
I have never ventured an opinion on the cause of their birth, and for a very good reason - I was unable to form one. The simplest solution of the problem which occurred to me was that they arose from ova deposited by insects floating in the atmosphere and hatched by electrical action. Still I could not imagine that an ovum could shoot out filaments, or that these filaments could become bristles, and moreover I could not detect, on the closest examination, the remains of a shell ...
I next imagined, as others have done, that they might originate from the water, and consequently made a close examination of numbers of vessels filled with the same fluid: in none of these could I perceive a trace of an insect, nor could I see in any other part of the room.
Far from receiving the scientific acclaim that he might have expected from such a sensational result, however, Crosse was subjected to such vitriolic tirades from his peers that he chose to retire from public life, shunned by - and shunning - the world. Yet when fellow electrical researcher W. H. Weeks repeated Crosse's experiments, carefully ensuring that all possible external sources of acari had been excluded from his apparatus, he too succeeded in producing living acari. Even eminent physicist Sir Michael Faraday revealed that he had obtained similar results with some of his own experiments. In 1909, Charles E. Benham urged scientists to repeat Crosse's work to solve this mystery once and for all, but his plea was not heeded. More than 90 years later, the riddle of Crosse's acari remains unexplained.
Perhaps Crosse was just a careless worker who had failed to isolate his apparatus's contents from external contamination. But what if he really did discover the miraculous secret of creating life from the inanimate? A fraud or a Frankenstein?
You can get a discussion on Crosse's acari here.








