APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.

Under this head I place some articles which could not be embodied in this work; but which it may nevertheless be expedient to place within the reach of certain readers. Among the articles referred to is the theory of electricity, which I first published in 1848, and which has been approved by the spirit of Franklin, and, in obedience to his advice, inserted in this volume. Unfortunately, there are but few persons sufficiently acquainted with the phenomena which form its basis, and the technical language employed by professed electricians, to find it agreeable to study the subject in question; but they may qualify themselves to do so by studying the elementary works on this branch of science.

Although the subjoined letter has been published in various channels, as well as in a separate pamphlet, I deem it proper to record it in this work, as, otherwise, many who may see the one might not see the other. It will be perceived that the substance of my second letter has been already incorporated in the preceding pages, (714to 776.) Of course it is to the first letter that I now allude, and which I intend to record here.

Reverend and Dear Sirs: Having, from my youth, been on friendly terms with the clergy of the Episcopal Church, within the pale of which I was born and christened; having, in fact, had among the clergy of that church some excellent friends and relatives,—it has been a source of regret that I have not been able to see doctrines deeply affecting the happiness of mankind in the same light. I am, however, fully sensible of the kindness and courtesy with which I have been treated by clergymen in general, and especially by those of the church above designated. I have always been under the belief that in no part of the globe, nor at any period of human history, has a priesthood existed as moral, as sincere, and trulypious as those of my country; and among that priesthood, I believe, none have stood higher in these qualifications than such as are of the Episcopal Church.It is happy for me that of late I have, in one respect, found myself more in accordance with the Christian clergy: I allude here to the awakening of perfect confidence in the immortality of the soul. There was on this subject, heretofore, this difference between my sentiments and those of my clerical friends, that while I hoped for a future state, I was no less skeptical respecting the evidence of witnesses who lived some thousand years ago than of those who have, in modern times, alleged themselves to have witnessed supernatural manifestations. I required in the former case, no less than in the latter, intuitive proof; or the consistent testimony of independent observers having sufficient sense, knowledge, and integrity to make reliable witnesses.Happily, in the case of Spiritualism, both of these tests have been afforded to me, so that I now believe in a future state no less firmly than the orthodox Christian.Like St. Paul, in the case of Christianity, I entered upon the investigation of Spiritualism with a view to refutation; but the very instruments which I contrived to accomplish that object produced the opposite effect.If human testimony is not to be taken when advanced by contemporaries known to be conscientious, truthful, and well informed, how is it to be relied on with respect to those of whom we know nothing available beside what their own writings mention?I am prepared to submit a communication respecting the spirit world from my father, sanctioned by a convocation of spirits, whose approbation was manifested by means which no mortal could pervert.The practical influence on my mind has been to make me far more happy, to remove all fear of death, and to render me more watchful as to my deportment in life. I know that my sainted parents, and other relatives and friends, my children who died in infancy, are around me, witnessing every act and exercising a limited power over my safety and my health.Mourning for the dead now seems to be groundless, and at all events can be indulged only upon selfish considerations. But who would grieve deeply at a transient separation, even for years, from friends made happier by the change, when sure of a happy reunion ultimately?No evidence of any important truth in science can be shown to be more unexceptionable than that which I have received of this glorious fact, that heaven is really “at hand,” and that our relatives, friends, and acquaintances who are worthy of happiness, while describing themselves as ineffably happy, are still progressing to higher felicity; and while hovering aloft in our midst, are taking interest in our welfare with an augmented zeal or affection, so that, by these means, they may be a solace to us, in despite of death.As the reverend clergy of the Episcopal Church are about to meet in Philadelphia, I deem it my duty to afford them an opportunity of hearing the evidence on which I rely; and which, withdue effort, they can have subjected to their own intuition.Should the clergy deem it expedient to listen to my exposition, I shall be ready to answer any queries which may be made.I am aware that there may be considerations which may justify theclergy in declining to hear me. I have never, in my own case, deemed it wise to seek abstract right at the expense of practical evil. I would not urge persons in certain official stations to become converts to Spiritualism, lest it should, by consequent unpopularity, interfere with their usefulness, as in the case of Judge Edmonds; and a like objection must arise as to the conversion of clergymen, so far as to bring their convictions in competition with their professional vocation. Orthodox Christians are generally educated to believe not only that the revelation on which they rely is true, but that no other can be justifiable. Hence they are evidently displeased that spiritualists should allege themselves to have come by other means to that belief in immortality which is admitted on all sides to be the greatest comfort under the afflictions to which temporal life is liable.There is, moreover, this discordancy in doctrine: Agreeably to Scripture, man is placed here for probation, and is liable to beeternallypunished if he prove delinquent. According to Spiritualism, man is placed here for progression, and when he goes to the next world, still will have the opportunity to progress, however wicked he may be when he departs this life.It is conceived by spiritualists that if, as the orthodox allege, God be omnipotent, he can make his creatures to suit his will; if he be omniscient, he must know what they are when made; and if he be prescient, he can foresee what they will be, and consequently cannot have the smallest conceivable motive for exposing them to probation.I foresee that it may not be deemed expedient to take any notice of this letter; but whatever may be the result in this way, does not interfere with the propriety of my putting it in your power to avail yourselves of my offer; since I have a sanction from a higher source, the spirit of the immortal Washington, the proofs of whose communion with me I am prepared to submit to any respectable inquirers.I am aware that this language would, a few years ago, have made me attach the idea of insanity to the author; but this cannot, nevertheless, in the slightest degree, be deducible from it now, from the notorious fact that the same monomania is never entertained by any two persons, and inmy hallucination, if itbe such, there are a multitude of participators. That is to say, there are a multitude of persons of every grade who believe that they have communicated with their spirit friends, as I have with mine; and who, like me, have believed themselves to have held communion with the spirits of some of the most distinguished men who have departed this life. A faith in the miracles of the New Testament may as well be adduced as insanity as belief in spiritual manifestations under these circumstances.The fact that manifestations have been made and truthfully described has been admitted by the Catholic Church, but are ascribed to Satanic agency.Let the doctrines of Spiritualism, and those of the church in question, be compared, in order to determine which owes most to Satan.The existence of a devil being admitted, was there ever a more fertile source of diabolical intolerance than the idea that a peculiar belief being necessary to save men’s souls from hell fire, any temporal evil to which mortals might be subjected to coerce belief, would be as justifiable as the forcible extirpation of an incipient cancer from the body of a child unwilling to submit to the operation? If ever there was a devil’s agency,it may be seen in the auto-da-fé, the Inquisition, and the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day.Of the same devilish character was the execution of Servetus by Calvin, or the persecution of the Quakers and witches by the Puritans.Respectfully, your well-wisher,Robert Hare.

Reverend and Dear Sirs: Having, from my youth, been on friendly terms with the clergy of the Episcopal Church, within the pale of which I was born and christened; having, in fact, had among the clergy of that church some excellent friends and relatives,—it has been a source of regret that I have not been able to see doctrines deeply affecting the happiness of mankind in the same light. I am, however, fully sensible of the kindness and courtesy with which I have been treated by clergymen in general, and especially by those of the church above designated. I have always been under the belief that in no part of the globe, nor at any period of human history, has a priesthood existed as moral, as sincere, and trulypious as those of my country; and among that priesthood, I believe, none have stood higher in these qualifications than such as are of the Episcopal Church.

It is happy for me that of late I have, in one respect, found myself more in accordance with the Christian clergy: I allude here to the awakening of perfect confidence in the immortality of the soul. There was on this subject, heretofore, this difference between my sentiments and those of my clerical friends, that while I hoped for a future state, I was no less skeptical respecting the evidence of witnesses who lived some thousand years ago than of those who have, in modern times, alleged themselves to have witnessed supernatural manifestations. I required in the former case, no less than in the latter, intuitive proof; or the consistent testimony of independent observers having sufficient sense, knowledge, and integrity to make reliable witnesses.

Happily, in the case of Spiritualism, both of these tests have been afforded to me, so that I now believe in a future state no less firmly than the orthodox Christian.

Like St. Paul, in the case of Christianity, I entered upon the investigation of Spiritualism with a view to refutation; but the very instruments which I contrived to accomplish that object produced the opposite effect.

If human testimony is not to be taken when advanced by contemporaries known to be conscientious, truthful, and well informed, how is it to be relied on with respect to those of whom we know nothing available beside what their own writings mention?

I am prepared to submit a communication respecting the spirit world from my father, sanctioned by a convocation of spirits, whose approbation was manifested by means which no mortal could pervert.

The practical influence on my mind has been to make me far more happy, to remove all fear of death, and to render me more watchful as to my deportment in life. I know that my sainted parents, and other relatives and friends, my children who died in infancy, are around me, witnessing every act and exercising a limited power over my safety and my health.

Mourning for the dead now seems to be groundless, and at all events can be indulged only upon selfish considerations. But who would grieve deeply at a transient separation, even for years, from friends made happier by the change, when sure of a happy reunion ultimately?

No evidence of any important truth in science can be shown to be more unexceptionable than that which I have received of this glorious fact, that heaven is really “at hand,” and that our relatives, friends, and acquaintances who are worthy of happiness, while describing themselves as ineffably happy, are still progressing to higher felicity; and while hovering aloft in our midst, are taking interest in our welfare with an augmented zeal or affection, so that, by these means, they may be a solace to us, in despite of death.

As the reverend clergy of the Episcopal Church are about to meet in Philadelphia, I deem it my duty to afford them an opportunity of hearing the evidence on which I rely; and which, withdue effort, they can have subjected to their own intuition.

Should the clergy deem it expedient to listen to my exposition, I shall be ready to answer any queries which may be made.

I am aware that there may be considerations which may justify theclergy in declining to hear me. I have never, in my own case, deemed it wise to seek abstract right at the expense of practical evil. I would not urge persons in certain official stations to become converts to Spiritualism, lest it should, by consequent unpopularity, interfere with their usefulness, as in the case of Judge Edmonds; and a like objection must arise as to the conversion of clergymen, so far as to bring their convictions in competition with their professional vocation. Orthodox Christians are generally educated to believe not only that the revelation on which they rely is true, but that no other can be justifiable. Hence they are evidently displeased that spiritualists should allege themselves to have come by other means to that belief in immortality which is admitted on all sides to be the greatest comfort under the afflictions to which temporal life is liable.

There is, moreover, this discordancy in doctrine: Agreeably to Scripture, man is placed here for probation, and is liable to beeternallypunished if he prove delinquent. According to Spiritualism, man is placed here for progression, and when he goes to the next world, still will have the opportunity to progress, however wicked he may be when he departs this life.

It is conceived by spiritualists that if, as the orthodox allege, God be omnipotent, he can make his creatures to suit his will; if he be omniscient, he must know what they are when made; and if he be prescient, he can foresee what they will be, and consequently cannot have the smallest conceivable motive for exposing them to probation.

I foresee that it may not be deemed expedient to take any notice of this letter; but whatever may be the result in this way, does not interfere with the propriety of my putting it in your power to avail yourselves of my offer; since I have a sanction from a higher source, the spirit of the immortal Washington, the proofs of whose communion with me I am prepared to submit to any respectable inquirers.

I am aware that this language would, a few years ago, have made me attach the idea of insanity to the author; but this cannot, nevertheless, in the slightest degree, be deducible from it now, from the notorious fact that the same monomania is never entertained by any two persons, and inmy hallucination, if itbe such, there are a multitude of participators. That is to say, there are a multitude of persons of every grade who believe that they have communicated with their spirit friends, as I have with mine; and who, like me, have believed themselves to have held communion with the spirits of some of the most distinguished men who have departed this life. A faith in the miracles of the New Testament may as well be adduced as insanity as belief in spiritual manifestations under these circumstances.

The fact that manifestations have been made and truthfully described has been admitted by the Catholic Church, but are ascribed to Satanic agency.

Let the doctrines of Spiritualism, and those of the church in question, be compared, in order to determine which owes most to Satan.

The existence of a devil being admitted, was there ever a more fertile source of diabolical intolerance than the idea that a peculiar belief being necessary to save men’s souls from hell fire, any temporal evil to which mortals might be subjected to coerce belief, would be as justifiable as the forcible extirpation of an incipient cancer from the body of a child unwilling to submit to the operation? If ever there was a devil’s agency,it may be seen in the auto-da-fé, the Inquisition, and the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day.

Of the same devilish character was the execution of Servetus by Calvin, or the persecution of the Quakers and witches by the Puritans.

Respectfully, your well-wisher,Robert Hare.

Addressed to the President of the Association for the Advancement of Science, at their meeting, August 18, 1855.

Having addressed the subjoined letter to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the standing committee resolved that the subject did not fall sufficiently within the objects of the Association to allow even of its being read to the meeting. In the instance of my letter to the Episcopal clergy, it was stated that its acknowledgment by them was not expected; and after this impression was verified, I admitted that, in their not replying, the interest of the church was best consulted. In the present case I admit that the harmony of the Association was perhaps best consulted in not recognising that the objects of the Association involved the duty of allowing certain facts to be stated before it, which are at war with the received doctrines of science, no less than with those of revelation.

During the Dark Ages, the so-called word of God (but really the words of ignorant propagandists) had taken such hold of the proper domain of science, that it was heresy to assert the rotundity of this planet, or that the sun did not revolve about it diurnally. But at this time science has established itself upon the domain claimed for religious truth, so that between the positive science of the atheist Comte and the dogmatic opinions of the orthodox savan, there is no room for the germ of Spiritualism to shoot up.

It seems to me that, in due courtesy and liberality, the standing committee might have had my letter read to the meeting, and have let the members judge whether it should be acknowledged. But I place it on record in this volume, and leave the propriety of their having neglected to acknowledge it to be estimated hereafter in this world, as it has already been in the world of spirits, as respects its influence on the estimation of the parties.

I am aware, however, that every man in society is more or less apeon, and that there is no small analogy between the situation of many holding worldly pre-eminence and that of the poor apothecary of Shakspeare.Conscience and reason are ever under the control of expediency. Those who live in society must be governed by the hearts and heads of others as well as their own: unless they are quite sure that the cause of truth will suffer by their silence, they should not speak to give others umbrage. I always considered it my duty not to do any thing which would injure the institution of which I was a member for nearly thirty years. Doubtless, the sachems of the Association did what they thought best, as probably I should have done, had I been situated as they were, and holding their opinions.

In the letter as actually sent to the Association, I introduced the arguments founded on Dr. Bell’s observations, (111,287,864,) also the facts and reasoning submitted in the Supplemental Preface. I shall, of course, leave the reader to recur to those passages, and introduce here only the other portions of my letter:

To the President of the Association for the Advancement of Science:Dear Sir: Being engaged in putting a work to press, I am sorry to be unable to be present at the meeting of the Association on the 15th inst.When I was at the last meeting, I stated an experiment made with the greatest care and precision, which proved the existence of a power independent of any possible or conceivable mortal agency; and I had on that occasion an opportunity of experiencing the fate of the Dutch ambassador who first made the king of Ava acquainted with the fact that bodies of water can be frozen so as to enable people to walk on a solidified aqueous surface. It was a disease of the mind in either case.But let no one apply to his soul the self-complacent unction that it was my hallucination, not bigoted ignorance, that originated that diagnosis. Since that time, the fact of movements being made intelligibly, without any perceptible or assignable mortal aid, has been verified hundreds of times by others; while under my own intuition it has been reiterated many times, the experiment which I adduced having been repeated with every imaginable precaution and instructive variation. * * * * *About two years have elapsed, since I erroneously sanctioned Farraday’s explanation of the manifestations, in ascribing them to involuntary muscular action. This arose from my being, no less than that philosopher, so utterly incredulous and intolerant of any idea of spiritual agency in any of the phenomena of nature, excepting those which I ascribed to God, that I did not take the possible agency of spirits into view; but having been obliged to admit the facts conceded by Dr. Bell, (287,) and having received interesting and intellectual communications of which he has not been informed, I cannot, with him, stop half-way: nor could he, were he to have the interesting communications with his spirit friends which I have had with mine.There has been a time when religion repressed science; and it would seem that at the present era science is to revenge itself by repressing religious truth, by sanctioning indirectly the alleged manifestations of antiquity, while deriding those of the present time; believing on miracles told by no one knows who, yet denying the allegations of eye-witnesses known to be truthful; while straining at spiritual gnats, swallowing scriptural camels.With high esteem, your well-wisher,Robert Hare.

To the President of the Association for the Advancement of Science:

Dear Sir: Being engaged in putting a work to press, I am sorry to be unable to be present at the meeting of the Association on the 15th inst.

When I was at the last meeting, I stated an experiment made with the greatest care and precision, which proved the existence of a power independent of any possible or conceivable mortal agency; and I had on that occasion an opportunity of experiencing the fate of the Dutch ambassador who first made the king of Ava acquainted with the fact that bodies of water can be frozen so as to enable people to walk on a solidified aqueous surface. It was a disease of the mind in either case.

But let no one apply to his soul the self-complacent unction that it was my hallucination, not bigoted ignorance, that originated that diagnosis. Since that time, the fact of movements being made intelligibly, without any perceptible or assignable mortal aid, has been verified hundreds of times by others; while under my own intuition it has been reiterated many times, the experiment which I adduced having been repeated with every imaginable precaution and instructive variation. * * * * *

About two years have elapsed, since I erroneously sanctioned Farraday’s explanation of the manifestations, in ascribing them to involuntary muscular action. This arose from my being, no less than that philosopher, so utterly incredulous and intolerant of any idea of spiritual agency in any of the phenomena of nature, excepting those which I ascribed to God, that I did not take the possible agency of spirits into view; but having been obliged to admit the facts conceded by Dr. Bell, (287,) and having received interesting and intellectual communications of which he has not been informed, I cannot, with him, stop half-way: nor could he, were he to have the interesting communications with his spirit friends which I have had with mine.

There has been a time when religion repressed science; and it would seem that at the present era science is to revenge itself by repressing religious truth, by sanctioning indirectly the alleged manifestations of antiquity, while deriding those of the present time; believing on miracles told by no one knows who, yet denying the allegations of eye-witnesses known to be truthful; while straining at spiritual gnats, swallowing scriptural camels.

With high esteem, your well-wisher,Robert Hare.

Speculation touching Electric Conduction and the nature of Matter. By Farraday.

Having expressed my objections to Farraday’s inferences respecting matter, &c., I feel that justice requires that I should submit the article which drew forth my strictures. At this time, when electricity and matter are scrutinized with a view to understand the analogous, but different, entities of the spirit world, the ideas of an experimental investigator so eminently successful, must be of interest to readers:

Light and electricity are two great and searching investigators of the molecular structure of bodies, and it was, while considering the probable nature of conduction and insulation in bodies not decomposable by the electricity to which they were subject, and the relation of electricity to space contemplated as void of that which, by the anatomist, is called matter, that considerations, something like those which follow, were presented to my mind.If the view of the constitution of matter, already referred to, be assumed to be correct, and I may be allowed to speak of the particles of matter and of the space between them (in water, or in the vapour of water, for instance) as two different things, then space must be taken as the only continuous part, for the particles are considered as separated by space from each other. Space will permeate all masses of matter in every direction like a net, except that, in place of meshes, it will form cells, isolating each atom from its neighbours, and itself only being continuous.Then take the case of a piece of shellac, a non-conductor, and it would appear at once, from such a view of its constitution, that space is an insulator, for if it were a conductor, the shellac could not insulate, whatever might be the relation as to conducting power of its material atoms; the space would be like a fine metallic web penetrating it in every direction, just as we may imagine of a heap of siliceous sand having all its pores filled with water, or as we may consider of a stick of black wax, which, though it contains an infinity of particles of conducting charcoal diffused through every part of it, cannot conduct, because a non-conducting body (a resin) intervenes and separates them one from another like the supposed space in the lac.Next take the case of a metal, platinum or potassium, constituted, according to the atomic theory, in the same manner. The metal is a conductor; but how can this be, except space be a conductor, for it is the only continuous part of the metal, and the atoms not only do not touch, (by the theory,) but, as we shall see presently, must be assumed to be a considerable way apart. Space, therefore, must be a conductor, or else the metals could not conduct, but would be in the situation of the black sealing-wax referred to a little while ago.But if space be a conductor, how then can shellac, sulphur, &c. insulate? for space permeates them in every direction. Or, if space be an insulator, how can a metal or other similar body conduct?It would seem, therefore, that in accepting the ordinary atomic theory,space may be proved to be a non-conductor in non-conducting bodies, and a conductor in conducting bodies; but the reasoning ends in this, a subversion of that theory altogether, for if space be an insulator, it cannot exist in conducting bodies, and if it be a conductor, it cannot exist in insulating bodies. Any ground of reasoning which tends to such conclusions must in itself be false.In connection with such conclusions, we may consider shortly what are the probabilities that present themselves to the mind, if the extension of the atomic theory which chemists have imagined be applied in conjunction with the conducting powers of metals. If the specific gravity of the metals be divided by the atomic numbers, it gives us the number of atoms, upon the hypothesis, in equal bulks of the metals. In the following table the first column of figures expresses nearly the numbers of atoms in, and the second column of figures the conducting power of, equal volumes of the metals named:Atoms.Conducting power.1·00gold6·001·00silver4·661·12lead0·521·30tin1·002·20platinum1·042·27zinc1·802·87copper6·332·90iron1·00So here iron, which contains the greatest number of atoms in a given bulk, is the worst conductor excepting one. Gold, which contains the fewest, is nearly the best conductor; not that these conditions are in inverse proportions, for copper, which contains nearly as many atoms as iron, conducts better still than gold, and with above six times the power of iron. Lead, which contains more atoms than gold, has only about one-twelfth of its conducting power; lead, which is much heavier than tin and much lighter than platina, has only half the conducting power of either of these metals. And all this happens among substances which we are bound to consider at present as elementary or simple. Whichever way we consider the particles of matter and the space between them, and examine the assumed constitution of matter by this table, the results are full of perplexity.Now let us take the case of potassium, a compact metallic substance with excellent conducting powers—its oxide or hydrate a non-conductor; it will supply us with some facts having very important bearings on the assumed atomic construction of matter.When potassium is oxidized, an atom of it combines with an atom of oxygen to form an atom of potassa, and an atom of potassa combines with an atom of water, consisting of two atoms of oxygen and hydrogen, to form an atom of hydrate of potassa, so that an atom of hydrate of potassa contains four elementary atoms. The specific gravity of potassium is 0·865, and its atomic weight 40·; the specific gravity of cast hydrate of potassa, in such a state of purity as I could obtain it, I found to be nearly 2; its atomic weight, 57. From these, which may be taken as facts, the following strange conclusions flow: A piece of potassium contains less potassium than an equal piece of the potash formed by it and oxygen. We may cast into potassium oxygen, atom for atom, and then again both oxygen and hydrogen in a twofold number of atoms, and with all theseadditions the matter shall become less and less, until it is not two-thirds of its original volume. If a given bulk of potassium contains 45 atoms, the same bulk of hydrate of potassa contains 70 atoms nearlyof the metal potassium, and, besides that, 210 atoms more of oxygen and hydrogen. In dealing with assumptions, I must assume a little more for the sake of making any kind of statement; let me therefore assume that in the hydrate of potassa the atoms are all of one size and nearly touching each other, and that in a cubic inch of that substance there are 2800 elementary atoms of potassium, oxygen, and hydrogen; take 2100 atoms of oxygen and hydrogen, and the 700 atoms of potassium remaining will swell into more than a cubic inch and a half; and if we diminish the number until only those containable in a cubic inch remain, we shall have 430, or thereabout. So a space which can contain 2800 atoms, and among them 700 of potassium itself, is found to be entirely filled by 430 atoms of potassium, as they exist in the ordinary state of that metal. Surely, then, under the suppositions of the atomic theory, the atoms of potassium must be very far apart in the metal,i. e.there must be much more of space than of matter in that body; yet it is an excellent conductor; and so space must be a conductor, but then what becomes of shellac, sulphur, and all the insulators? for space must also, by the theory, exist in them.Again, the volume which will contain 430 atoms of potassium, and nothing else while in the state of metal, will, when that potassium is converted into nitre, contain very nearly the same number of atoms of potassium,i. e.416, and also then seven times as many, or 2912 atoms, of nitrogen and oxygen beside. In carbonate of potassa, the space which will contain only the 430 atoms of potassium as metal, being entirely filled by it, will, after the conversion, contain 256 atoms more of potassium, making 686 atoms of that metal, and in addition 2744 atoms of oxygen and carbon.These and similar considerations might be extended through compounds of sodium and other bodies, with results equally striking, and indeed more so, when the relations of one substance, as oxygen and sulphur, with different bodies are brought into comparison.I am not ignorant that the mind is most powerfully drawn by the phenomena of crystallization, chemistry, and physics generally to the acknowledgment of centres of force. I feel myself constrained, for the present, hypothetically to admit them, and cannot do without them; but I feel great difficulty in the conception of atoms of matter which in solids, fluids, and vapours are supposed to be more or less apart from each other, with intervening space not occupied by atoms, and perceive great contradictions in the conclusions which flow from such a view.If we must assume at all, as indeed in a branch of knowledge like the present we can hardly help it, then the safest course appears to be to assume as little as possible; and in that respect the atoms of Boscovich appear to me to have a great advantage over the more usual notion. His atoms, if I understand aright, are mere centres of forces or powers, not particles of matter in which the powers themselves reside. If in the ordinary view of atoms, we call the particle of matter away from the powersa, and the system of powers or forces in and around itm, then in Boscovich’s theoryadisappears, and is a mere mathematical point, while in the usual notion it is a little, unchangeable, impenetrable piece of matter, andmis an atmosphere of force grouped around it.In many of the hypothetical uses made of atoms, as in crystallography, chemistry, magnetism, &c., this difference in the assumption makes little or no alteration in the results; but in other cases, as of electric conductors, the nature of light, the manner in which bodies combine to produce compounds, the effect of forces, as heat or electricity, upon matter, the difference will be very great.Thus, referring back to potassium, in which as a metal the atoms must, as we have seen, be, according to the usual view, very far apart from each other, how can we for a moment imagine that its conducting property belongs to it any otherwise than as a consequence of the properties of the space, or, as I have called it above, them? So also its other properties in regard to light, or magnetism, or solidity, or hardness, or specific gravity, must belong to it, in consequence of the properties or forces of them, not those of thea, which, without the forces, is conceived of as having no powers. But then, surely, themis thematterof the potassium, for where is there the least ground (except in a gratuitous assumption) for imagining a difference in kind between the nature of that space midway between the centres of two contiguous atoms, and any other spot between these centres? A difference in degree or even in the nature of the power consistent with the laws of continuity I can admit, but the difference between a supposed little hard particle and the powers around it, I cannot imagine.To my mind, therefore, theaor nucleus vanishes, and the substance consist of the powers orm; and indeed what notion can we form of the nucleus independent of its powers? All our perception and knowledge of the atom, and even our fancy, is limited to ideas of its powers; what thought remains on which to hang the imagination of anaindependent of the acknowledged forces? As mind just entering on the subject may consider it difficult to think of the powers of matter independent of a separate something to be calledthe matter, but it is certainly far more difficult, and indeed impossible to think of or imagine thatmatterindependent of the powers. Now, the powers we know and recognise in every phenomena of the creation, the abstract matter in one; why, then, assume the existence of that of which we are ignorant, which we cannot conceive, and for which there is no philosophical necessity?Before concluding these speculations, I will refer to a few of the important differences between the assumption of atoms consisting merely of centres of force like those of Boscovich, and that other assumption of molecules of something specially material, having powers attached in and around them.With the latter atoms a mass of matter consists of atoms and intervening space; with the former atoms matter is everywhere present, and there is no intervening space unoccupied by it. In gases the atoms touch each other just as truly as in solids. In this respect the atoms of water touch each other, whether that substance be in the form of ice, water, or steam; no mere intervening space is present. Doubtless, the centres of force vary in their distance one from another, but that which is truly the matter of one atom touches the matter of its neighbours.Hence matter will becontinuousthroughout, and in considering we have not to suppose a distinction between its atoms and any intervening space. The powers around the centres give these centres the properties of atoms of matter; and these powers again, when many centres by their conjoint forces are grouped into a mass, give to every part of that mass the properties of matter. In such a view all the contradiction resulting from the consideration of electric insulation and conduction disappears.The atoms may be conceived of as highlyelastic, instead of being supposed excessively hard and unalterable in form; the mere compression of a bladder of air between the hands can alter their size a little, and the experiments of Cagniard la Tour carry on this change in size until the difference in bulk at one time and another may be made several hundred times. Such is also the case when a solid or a fluid body is converted into vapour.With regard also to theshapeof the atoms, and, according to the ordinary assumption, its definite and unalterable character, another view must now be taken of it. An atom by itself might be conceived of as spherical or spheroidal, or where many were touching in all directions, the form might be thought of as a dodecahedron, for any one would be surrounded by and bear against twelve others, on different sides. But if an atom be conceived to be a centre of power, that which is ordinarily referred to under the termshape, would now be referred to the disposition and relative intensity of the forces. The power arranged in and around a centre might be uniform in arrangement and intensity in every direction outward from that centre, and then a section of equal intensity of force through the radii would be a sphere; or the law of decrease of force from the centre outward might vary in different directions, and then the section of equal intensity might be an oblate or oblong spheroid, or have other forms; or the forces might be disposed so as to make the atom polar; or they might circulate around it equatorially or otherwise, after the manner of imagined magnetic atoms. In fact, nothing can be supposed of the disposition of forces in or about a solid nucleus of matter, which cannot be equally conceived with respect to a centre.In the view of matter now sustained as the lesser assumption, matter and the atoms of matter would be mutually penetrable. As regards the mutual penetrability of matter, one would think that the facts respecting potassium and its compounds, already described, would be enough to prove that point to a mind which accepts a fact for a fact, and is not obstructed in its judgment by preconceived notions. With respect to the mutual penetrability of the atoms, it seems to me to present in many points of view a more beautiful, yet equally probable and philosophic, idea of the constitution of bodies than the other hypotheses, especially in the case of chemical combination. If we suppose an atom of oxygen and an atom of potassium about to combine and produce potash, the hypothesis of solid, unchangeable, impenetrable atoms places these two particles side by side in a position easily, because mechanically, imagined, and not unfrequently represented; but if these two atoms be centres of power, they will mutually penetrate to the very centres, thus forming one atom or molecule, with powers either uniformly around it or arranged as the resultant of the powers of the two constituent atoms; and the manner in which two or many centres of force may in this way combine, and afterward, under the dominion of stronger forces, separate, may in some degree be illustrated by the beautiful case of the conjunction of two sea waves of different velocities into one, their perfect union for a time, and final separation into the constituent waves, considered, I think, at the meeting of the British Association at Liverpool. It does not, of course, follow from this view that the centres shall always coincide; that will depend upon the relative disposition of the powers of each atom.The view now stated of the constitution of matter would seem to involve necessarily the conclusion that matter fills all space, or, at least, all space to which gravitation extends, (including the sun and its system,) for gravitation is a property of matter dependent on a certain force, and it is this force which constitutes the matter. In that view matter is not merely mutually penetrable, but each atom extends, so to say, throughout the whole of the solar system, yet always retaining its own centre of force. This, at first sight, seems to fall in very harmoniously with Massotti’s mathematical investigations and reference of the phenomena of electricity, cohesion, gravitation, &c. to one force in matter, and also again with the old adage “matter cannot act where it is not.” But it is no part of my intention to enter into such considerations as these, or what the bearings of this hypothesis would be on the theory of light and the supposed ether. My desire has been rather to bring certain facts from electrical conduction and chemical combination to bear strongly upon our views regarding the nature of atoms and matter, and so to assist in distinguishing in natural philosophy our real knowledge—i. e.the knowledge of facts and laws—from that, which, though it has the form of knowledge, may, from its including so much that is mere assumption, be the very reverse.

Light and electricity are two great and searching investigators of the molecular structure of bodies, and it was, while considering the probable nature of conduction and insulation in bodies not decomposable by the electricity to which they were subject, and the relation of electricity to space contemplated as void of that which, by the anatomist, is called matter, that considerations, something like those which follow, were presented to my mind.

If the view of the constitution of matter, already referred to, be assumed to be correct, and I may be allowed to speak of the particles of matter and of the space between them (in water, or in the vapour of water, for instance) as two different things, then space must be taken as the only continuous part, for the particles are considered as separated by space from each other. Space will permeate all masses of matter in every direction like a net, except that, in place of meshes, it will form cells, isolating each atom from its neighbours, and itself only being continuous.

Then take the case of a piece of shellac, a non-conductor, and it would appear at once, from such a view of its constitution, that space is an insulator, for if it were a conductor, the shellac could not insulate, whatever might be the relation as to conducting power of its material atoms; the space would be like a fine metallic web penetrating it in every direction, just as we may imagine of a heap of siliceous sand having all its pores filled with water, or as we may consider of a stick of black wax, which, though it contains an infinity of particles of conducting charcoal diffused through every part of it, cannot conduct, because a non-conducting body (a resin) intervenes and separates them one from another like the supposed space in the lac.

Next take the case of a metal, platinum or potassium, constituted, according to the atomic theory, in the same manner. The metal is a conductor; but how can this be, except space be a conductor, for it is the only continuous part of the metal, and the atoms not only do not touch, (by the theory,) but, as we shall see presently, must be assumed to be a considerable way apart. Space, therefore, must be a conductor, or else the metals could not conduct, but would be in the situation of the black sealing-wax referred to a little while ago.

But if space be a conductor, how then can shellac, sulphur, &c. insulate? for space permeates them in every direction. Or, if space be an insulator, how can a metal or other similar body conduct?

It would seem, therefore, that in accepting the ordinary atomic theory,space may be proved to be a non-conductor in non-conducting bodies, and a conductor in conducting bodies; but the reasoning ends in this, a subversion of that theory altogether, for if space be an insulator, it cannot exist in conducting bodies, and if it be a conductor, it cannot exist in insulating bodies. Any ground of reasoning which tends to such conclusions must in itself be false.

In connection with such conclusions, we may consider shortly what are the probabilities that present themselves to the mind, if the extension of the atomic theory which chemists have imagined be applied in conjunction with the conducting powers of metals. If the specific gravity of the metals be divided by the atomic numbers, it gives us the number of atoms, upon the hypothesis, in equal bulks of the metals. In the following table the first column of figures expresses nearly the numbers of atoms in, and the second column of figures the conducting power of, equal volumes of the metals named:

So here iron, which contains the greatest number of atoms in a given bulk, is the worst conductor excepting one. Gold, which contains the fewest, is nearly the best conductor; not that these conditions are in inverse proportions, for copper, which contains nearly as many atoms as iron, conducts better still than gold, and with above six times the power of iron. Lead, which contains more atoms than gold, has only about one-twelfth of its conducting power; lead, which is much heavier than tin and much lighter than platina, has only half the conducting power of either of these metals. And all this happens among substances which we are bound to consider at present as elementary or simple. Whichever way we consider the particles of matter and the space between them, and examine the assumed constitution of matter by this table, the results are full of perplexity.

Now let us take the case of potassium, a compact metallic substance with excellent conducting powers—its oxide or hydrate a non-conductor; it will supply us with some facts having very important bearings on the assumed atomic construction of matter.

When potassium is oxidized, an atom of it combines with an atom of oxygen to form an atom of potassa, and an atom of potassa combines with an atom of water, consisting of two atoms of oxygen and hydrogen, to form an atom of hydrate of potassa, so that an atom of hydrate of potassa contains four elementary atoms. The specific gravity of potassium is 0·865, and its atomic weight 40·; the specific gravity of cast hydrate of potassa, in such a state of purity as I could obtain it, I found to be nearly 2; its atomic weight, 57. From these, which may be taken as facts, the following strange conclusions flow: A piece of potassium contains less potassium than an equal piece of the potash formed by it and oxygen. We may cast into potassium oxygen, atom for atom, and then again both oxygen and hydrogen in a twofold number of atoms, and with all theseadditions the matter shall become less and less, until it is not two-thirds of its original volume. If a given bulk of potassium contains 45 atoms, the same bulk of hydrate of potassa contains 70 atoms nearlyof the metal potassium, and, besides that, 210 atoms more of oxygen and hydrogen. In dealing with assumptions, I must assume a little more for the sake of making any kind of statement; let me therefore assume that in the hydrate of potassa the atoms are all of one size and nearly touching each other, and that in a cubic inch of that substance there are 2800 elementary atoms of potassium, oxygen, and hydrogen; take 2100 atoms of oxygen and hydrogen, and the 700 atoms of potassium remaining will swell into more than a cubic inch and a half; and if we diminish the number until only those containable in a cubic inch remain, we shall have 430, or thereabout. So a space which can contain 2800 atoms, and among them 700 of potassium itself, is found to be entirely filled by 430 atoms of potassium, as they exist in the ordinary state of that metal. Surely, then, under the suppositions of the atomic theory, the atoms of potassium must be very far apart in the metal,i. e.there must be much more of space than of matter in that body; yet it is an excellent conductor; and so space must be a conductor, but then what becomes of shellac, sulphur, and all the insulators? for space must also, by the theory, exist in them.

Again, the volume which will contain 430 atoms of potassium, and nothing else while in the state of metal, will, when that potassium is converted into nitre, contain very nearly the same number of atoms of potassium,i. e.416, and also then seven times as many, or 2912 atoms, of nitrogen and oxygen beside. In carbonate of potassa, the space which will contain only the 430 atoms of potassium as metal, being entirely filled by it, will, after the conversion, contain 256 atoms more of potassium, making 686 atoms of that metal, and in addition 2744 atoms of oxygen and carbon.

These and similar considerations might be extended through compounds of sodium and other bodies, with results equally striking, and indeed more so, when the relations of one substance, as oxygen and sulphur, with different bodies are brought into comparison.

I am not ignorant that the mind is most powerfully drawn by the phenomena of crystallization, chemistry, and physics generally to the acknowledgment of centres of force. I feel myself constrained, for the present, hypothetically to admit them, and cannot do without them; but I feel great difficulty in the conception of atoms of matter which in solids, fluids, and vapours are supposed to be more or less apart from each other, with intervening space not occupied by atoms, and perceive great contradictions in the conclusions which flow from such a view.

If we must assume at all, as indeed in a branch of knowledge like the present we can hardly help it, then the safest course appears to be to assume as little as possible; and in that respect the atoms of Boscovich appear to me to have a great advantage over the more usual notion. His atoms, if I understand aright, are mere centres of forces or powers, not particles of matter in which the powers themselves reside. If in the ordinary view of atoms, we call the particle of matter away from the powersa, and the system of powers or forces in and around itm, then in Boscovich’s theoryadisappears, and is a mere mathematical point, while in the usual notion it is a little, unchangeable, impenetrable piece of matter, andmis an atmosphere of force grouped around it.

In many of the hypothetical uses made of atoms, as in crystallography, chemistry, magnetism, &c., this difference in the assumption makes little or no alteration in the results; but in other cases, as of electric conductors, the nature of light, the manner in which bodies combine to produce compounds, the effect of forces, as heat or electricity, upon matter, the difference will be very great.

Thus, referring back to potassium, in which as a metal the atoms must, as we have seen, be, according to the usual view, very far apart from each other, how can we for a moment imagine that its conducting property belongs to it any otherwise than as a consequence of the properties of the space, or, as I have called it above, them? So also its other properties in regard to light, or magnetism, or solidity, or hardness, or specific gravity, must belong to it, in consequence of the properties or forces of them, not those of thea, which, without the forces, is conceived of as having no powers. But then, surely, themis thematterof the potassium, for where is there the least ground (except in a gratuitous assumption) for imagining a difference in kind between the nature of that space midway between the centres of two contiguous atoms, and any other spot between these centres? A difference in degree or even in the nature of the power consistent with the laws of continuity I can admit, but the difference between a supposed little hard particle and the powers around it, I cannot imagine.

To my mind, therefore, theaor nucleus vanishes, and the substance consist of the powers orm; and indeed what notion can we form of the nucleus independent of its powers? All our perception and knowledge of the atom, and even our fancy, is limited to ideas of its powers; what thought remains on which to hang the imagination of anaindependent of the acknowledged forces? As mind just entering on the subject may consider it difficult to think of the powers of matter independent of a separate something to be calledthe matter, but it is certainly far more difficult, and indeed impossible to think of or imagine thatmatterindependent of the powers. Now, the powers we know and recognise in every phenomena of the creation, the abstract matter in one; why, then, assume the existence of that of which we are ignorant, which we cannot conceive, and for which there is no philosophical necessity?

Before concluding these speculations, I will refer to a few of the important differences between the assumption of atoms consisting merely of centres of force like those of Boscovich, and that other assumption of molecules of something specially material, having powers attached in and around them.

With the latter atoms a mass of matter consists of atoms and intervening space; with the former atoms matter is everywhere present, and there is no intervening space unoccupied by it. In gases the atoms touch each other just as truly as in solids. In this respect the atoms of water touch each other, whether that substance be in the form of ice, water, or steam; no mere intervening space is present. Doubtless, the centres of force vary in their distance one from another, but that which is truly the matter of one atom touches the matter of its neighbours.

Hence matter will becontinuousthroughout, and in considering we have not to suppose a distinction between its atoms and any intervening space. The powers around the centres give these centres the properties of atoms of matter; and these powers again, when many centres by their conjoint forces are grouped into a mass, give to every part of that mass the properties of matter. In such a view all the contradiction resulting from the consideration of electric insulation and conduction disappears.

The atoms may be conceived of as highlyelastic, instead of being supposed excessively hard and unalterable in form; the mere compression of a bladder of air between the hands can alter their size a little, and the experiments of Cagniard la Tour carry on this change in size until the difference in bulk at one time and another may be made several hundred times. Such is also the case when a solid or a fluid body is converted into vapour.

With regard also to theshapeof the atoms, and, according to the ordinary assumption, its definite and unalterable character, another view must now be taken of it. An atom by itself might be conceived of as spherical or spheroidal, or where many were touching in all directions, the form might be thought of as a dodecahedron, for any one would be surrounded by and bear against twelve others, on different sides. But if an atom be conceived to be a centre of power, that which is ordinarily referred to under the termshape, would now be referred to the disposition and relative intensity of the forces. The power arranged in and around a centre might be uniform in arrangement and intensity in every direction outward from that centre, and then a section of equal intensity of force through the radii would be a sphere; or the law of decrease of force from the centre outward might vary in different directions, and then the section of equal intensity might be an oblate or oblong spheroid, or have other forms; or the forces might be disposed so as to make the atom polar; or they might circulate around it equatorially or otherwise, after the manner of imagined magnetic atoms. In fact, nothing can be supposed of the disposition of forces in or about a solid nucleus of matter, which cannot be equally conceived with respect to a centre.

In the view of matter now sustained as the lesser assumption, matter and the atoms of matter would be mutually penetrable. As regards the mutual penetrability of matter, one would think that the facts respecting potassium and its compounds, already described, would be enough to prove that point to a mind which accepts a fact for a fact, and is not obstructed in its judgment by preconceived notions. With respect to the mutual penetrability of the atoms, it seems to me to present in many points of view a more beautiful, yet equally probable and philosophic, idea of the constitution of bodies than the other hypotheses, especially in the case of chemical combination. If we suppose an atom of oxygen and an atom of potassium about to combine and produce potash, the hypothesis of solid, unchangeable, impenetrable atoms places these two particles side by side in a position easily, because mechanically, imagined, and not unfrequently represented; but if these two atoms be centres of power, they will mutually penetrate to the very centres, thus forming one atom or molecule, with powers either uniformly around it or arranged as the resultant of the powers of the two constituent atoms; and the manner in which two or many centres of force may in this way combine, and afterward, under the dominion of stronger forces, separate, may in some degree be illustrated by the beautiful case of the conjunction of two sea waves of different velocities into one, their perfect union for a time, and final separation into the constituent waves, considered, I think, at the meeting of the British Association at Liverpool. It does not, of course, follow from this view that the centres shall always coincide; that will depend upon the relative disposition of the powers of each atom.

The view now stated of the constitution of matter would seem to involve necessarily the conclusion that matter fills all space, or, at least, all space to which gravitation extends, (including the sun and its system,) for gravitation is a property of matter dependent on a certain force, and it is this force which constitutes the matter. In that view matter is not merely mutually penetrable, but each atom extends, so to say, throughout the whole of the solar system, yet always retaining its own centre of force. This, at first sight, seems to fall in very harmoniously with Massotti’s mathematical investigations and reference of the phenomena of electricity, cohesion, gravitation, &c. to one force in matter, and also again with the old adage “matter cannot act where it is not.” But it is no part of my intention to enter into such considerations as these, or what the bearings of this hypothesis would be on the theory of light and the supposed ether. My desire has been rather to bring certain facts from electrical conduction and chemical combination to bear strongly upon our views regarding the nature of atoms and matter, and so to assist in distinguishing in natural philosophy our real knowledge—i. e.the knowledge of facts and laws—from that, which, though it has the form of knowledge, may, from its including so much that is mere assumption, be the very reverse.

It is to be regretted that the memoir of the Rev. Mr. Whewell could not be quoted, being long and obscure. His opinions, it is conceived, have been stated fairly, (1796.)

The principal motive, without which the other motives would not have prevailed, is, that having had an interview with the spirit of Franklin expressly to have his advice, it was given decidedly in favour of publication.

There is no door in the temple of science which is so easy of access as that which leads to the department of electricity. The illustrations usually given at a popular lecture may, at the same time, amuse an infant, instruct a student, and yet perplex a profound philosopher. As associated with the phenomena of thunder and lightning, at one time attributed to the bolt of omnipotent Jove, no consequences of scientific research are so awful and sublime: coupled with the magnetic electric telegraph, no other result so miraculous. Whilevis inertiæwould keep all nature instatu quo, whether at rest, or like our planet in motion with a velocity fifty times as great as that of a cannon ball: while gravitation tends like the clock weight to produce a definite action and,per se, never to act again: electricity, with a protean diversity of power, appears to be the great instrument of all those changes by which the quiescent influence of the properties above mentioned, is modified in the mundane sphere of chemistry and of life.

Every tyro is aware of the wonderful property imparted to electrics by friction—to the tourmaline by heat; and that the same process, on a large scale, will produce sparks, ignition, combustion, deflagration, and destroy animal life by an instantaneous shock. It is notorious that these wonderful powers may all be imparted to a naked pane of glass, while the charge thus imparted is really only two opposite and equal affections, capable of neutralizing each other by due communication. Known also is it, that properties, to a certain extent similar, may be found in a pile of pairs of heterogeneous metals, with the additional power of electrolysis, or, in other words, of resolving chemical compounds into their ingredients, (1376.) It is well known that, by these means, water, long and almost religiously considered as one of the four elements of the universe, can be decomposed into two kinds of air; that the earths and alkalies have been resolved into metals and oxygen; and that there is scarcely any chemical compound consisting of two elements, which may not, when in aqueous solution or in fusion by heat, be directly or indirectly decomposed by electrolysis, as explained in the note to page 384.

These multifarious feats of electricity have caused it to be contemplated as the source of every thing mysterious in nature. It is not surprising, therefore, that those who, through the accessibility of electricity, had become partially acquainted with electrical phenomena, should view it as the source of spiritual manifestations; while those who have a more extensive knowledge of the nature and extent of electrical jurisdiction should perceive at once that the phenomena in question do not fall within its sphere.

After the discovery, by Oersted, of the previously unsuspected reaction between galvanized wire and a magnetic needle, those who had resorted to either one or two fluids to explain electrical phenomena, found themselves completely at fault. Yet the language originated by Franklin has been still employed conventionally. This, though not misleading adepts, introduces confusion in the minds of those who have merely reached the ante-chamber of the electrical department.

Under these circumstances, I deem it expedient to republish the exposition of electrical theory which I first laid before the scientific world in 1848.

I hope that those who endeavour to refer spiritual manifestations or animal magnetism to electricity, in any of its modifications, will study this exposition of my views.

Though, as already stated, there appears to be, for the spirit world, appropriate elements, distinct from those of this mundane world, there is, nevertheless, a correspondence. We mortals can best prepare ourselves to understand the elements of that world by understanding our own. From an idea ofourlight andourvital air, we may by analogy conceive of theirs as a preliminary to any further knowledge.

The following theory has been submitted to the spirit of Franklin, who fully approved of it, and fully admitted the validity of the reasons assigned by me for substituting this new exposition of electricity for that which goes under his celebrated name.

1. It appears, from the experiments of Wheatstone, that the discharge of a Leyden jar, by means of a copper wire, takes place within a time so small, that were the transfer of a fluid from the positive to the negative surface requisite for its accomplishment, a current having a velocity exceeding two hundred thousand miles in a second would be necessary.

2. The only causes for the velocity of an electric current, according to Franklin, are the repulsion between the particles of the electric fluid of which it has been assumed to consist, and the attraction between those particles and other matter. These forces are alleged to concur in distributing the supposed fluid throughout space, whether otherwise void, or partially occupied by conducting solids or fluids. Hence, when between two or more spaces, surfaces, or conducting masses, there is an unequal distribution of the electric fluid, the equilibrium is restored whenever a communication is opened by means of a sufficiently conducting medium. Agreeably to this view of the subject, there seems to be a resemblance between the supposed effort of the electrical fluid to attain a state of equable diffusion, and that which would exist in the case of a gas confined in adjoining receivers, so as to be more dense within one than within the other; for, however the subtilty of the supposed electric fluid may exceed that of any gas, there seems to be an analogy as respects the processes of diffusion which must prevail. But on opening a communication between cavities in which any aeriform fluid exists, in different degrees of condensation, the density must lessen in one cavity and augment in the other, with a rapidity which must diminish gradually, and become evanescent with the difference of pressure by which it is induced. Far from taking place in an analogous manner, electrical discharges are effected with an extreme suddenness, the whole of the redundancy being discharged at once, in a mode more like the flight of a bullet, projected with infinite velocity, than that of a jet gradually varying in celerity from a maximum to a minimum.

3. So far, in fact, is an electrical discharge from displaying the features which belong to the reaction of a condensed elastic fluid, that agreeably to the observations of our distinguished countryman Henry, the result is more like the vibrations of a spring, which, in striving to regain its normal position, goes beyond it. The first discharge between the surfaces of a Leyden jar is not productive of a perfect equilibrium. The transfer ofdifferent polarities goes beyond the point of reciprocal neutralization, producing a state, to a small extent, the opposite of that at first existing; and hence a refluent discharge ensues, opposite in direction to the primary one. But even this does not produce an equilibrium, so that a third effort is made. These alternate discharges were detected by means of the magnetism imparted to needles exposed in coils of copper wire.[59]

4. Supposing one or more rows of electrical particles, forming such a filament of electricity as must occupy the space within a wire of great length, to be made the medium of discharge to a Leyden jar; agreeably to the hypothesis of one fluid, the electrical filament must be attracted at one end of the wire and repelled at the other, as soon as its terminations are brought into due communication with the coatings of the jar. Yet the influence of the oppositely-charged surfaces of the jar cannot be conceived to extend to those portions of the electricity which are remote from the points of contact, until they be reached by a succession of vibrations. Hence, it is inconceivable that every particle in the filament of electric matter can be made at the same time to move, so as to constitute a current having the necessary velocity and volume to transfer, instantaneously, the electricity requisite to constitute a charge. Even the transmission of the impulses, in such an infinitesimal of time, seems to be inconceivable.

5. In reply to these objections, it has been urged by the Franklinians that a conductor being replete with electricity, as soon as this fluid should be removed at one end, it ought to move at the other. This might be true of a fluid if incompressible, but could not hold good were it elastic. A bell wire moves at both ends when pulled only at one; but this would not ensue were a cord of gum-elastic substituted for the wire.

6. But if the flow of one fluid, with the enormous velocity inferred, be difficult to conceive, still more must it be incomprehensible that two fluids can rush with similar celerity, from each surface of the jar, in opposite directions, through the narrow channel afforded by a wire; especially as they are alleged to exercise an intense affinity; so that it is only by a series of decompositions and recompositions that they can pass each other.

7. That agreeably to the theory of Dufay, equivalent portions of the resinous and vitreous fluids must exchange places during an electrical discharge, will appear evident from the following considerations: One surface being redundant with vitreous and deficient commensurately of resinous electricity, and the other redundant with the resinous and deficient of the vitreous fluid, it is inevitable that, to restore the equilibrium, there must be a simultaneous transfer of each redundancy to the surfaces wherein there is a deficiency of it to be supplied. If, after decomposing a large portion of the neutral compound previously existing on the surface of the jar, and transferring the ingredients severally in opposite directions, so as to cause each to exist in excess upon the surface assigned to it, should the redundancies, thus originated, be neutralized by meeting in the discharging rod, neither surface could recover its quota of the electrical ingredient of which it must have been deprived agreeably to the premises.

8. This calls to mind the fact that no evidence has been adduced of the existence of anytertium quid, arising from the union of the supposed electricities, founded on any property displayed by their resulting combination in the neutral state. It must, if it exist, constitute an anomalousmatter, destitute of all properties, and of the existence of which we have no evidence, besides that founded on the appearance and disappearance of its alleged ingredients.

9. But however plausibly the discharges consequent to making a conducting communication from one electrified mass or surface to another mass or surface in an opposite state, may be ascribed to accumulations either of one or of two fluids, neither, according to one theory nor the other, is it possible to account satisfactorily for the stationary magnetism with which steel may be endowed, nor the transitory magnetism, or power of dynamic induction, acquired by wires transmitting galvanic discharges.

10. For the most plausible effort which has been made for the purpose of reconciling the phenomena of electro-magnetism with the theory of two fluids, or with that of one fluid so far as these theories are convertible, we are indebted to Ampere.

11. According to the hypothesis advanced by this eminent philosopher, the difference between a magnetized and an electrified body is not attributable to any diversity in the imponderable matter to which their properties are respectively due, but to a difference in the actual state or distribution of that matter. Statical polarity is the consequence of the unequal distribution of the two electric fluids whose existence he assumes; while magnetical polarity is the consequence merely of the motion of those fluids, which, in magnets, are supposed to gyrate in opposite directions about each particle of the mass. These gyrations are conceived to take place only in planes at right angles to the axis of the magnet; so that, in a straight magnet, the planes of the orbits must be parallel to each other.[60]

12. The aggregate effect of all the minute vortices of the electrical fluids, in any one plane, bounded by the lateral surfaces of the magnet, is equivalent externally to one vortex, since, in either case, every electric particle on that surface will so move as to describe tangents to a circle drawn about the axis of the magnet. When the electrical vortices of the pole of one magnet conflict in their direction with those of another, as when similar magnetic poles are approximated, repulsion ensues; but if the vortices are coincident in direction, as when dissimilar poles are near, attraction takes place. When a current through a galvanized wire[61]concurs in direction with the magnetic vortices, as above described, attraction ensues; repulsion resulting when it does not so concur. Hence, the magnet, if movable, will strive to assume a position in which its electrical currents will not conflict with those of the wire on one side more than on the other; also the wire, if movable, will strive so to arrange itself so as to produce the same result, which can arrive only when the needle is at right angles to the wire, and its sides consequently equidistant therefrom.

13. Electric currents will produce magnetic vortices, and, reciprocally, magnetic vortices will produce electric currents. Hence the magnetism imparted to iron by galvanic spirals, and the Farradian currents produced by magnetized iron within spirals not galvanized.

14. Ampere’s theory has, in a high degree, the usual fault of substituting one mystery for another; but, on the other hand, it has, in an equallyhigh extent, the only merit to which any theory can make an indisputable claim: I mean that of associating facts so as to make them more easy to comprehend and to remember, enabling us, by analogy, to foresee results, and thus affording a clue in our investigations. Evidently, the author of this theory was guided by it in his highly interesting and instructive contrivances; and Professor Henry ascribes his success in improving the electro-magnet to the theoretic clue which he had received from Ampere.

15. Nevertheless, the postulates on which this Amperean hypothesis is founded appear to me unreasonable. They require us to concede that about every atom of a permanent magnet a process is going on analogous to that generally admitted to exist in a galvanic circuit, where two fluids pass each other in a common channel by a series of decompositions and recompositions, (7.) In the galvanic circuit this process is sustained by chemical reaction; but without any coenduring cause, how is it to be sustained permanently in a magnet? Is it reasonable to assume that the heterogeneous constituents of an imaginarytertium quidare perpetually separating only to reunite? (8.)[62]

16. In cases of complex affinity, where four particles, A B C D are united into two compounds A B, C D, it is easy to conceive that, in obedience to a stronger affinity, A shall combine with C, and B with D: but, without any extraneous agency, wherefore, in any one compound, should a particle A quit a particle B, in order to unite with another particle of the same kind; or wherefore should any one B quit one A, in order to combine with another A?

17. That such a process should take place in consequence of the inductive agency of a similar process already established in a magnet or galvanized wire were difficult to believe; but it would seem utterly incredible that the mosttransientinfluence of such induction should be productive of such permanent electrolytic gyration as has been above specified. Moreover, it is inconceivable that the particles of any matter should, as required by this hypothesis,merely by being put into motion, acquire a power of reciprocal repulsion or attraction of which it were otherwise destitute.

18. The vortices being assumed to take place about each atom, cannot severally occupy an area of greater diameter than can exist between the centres of any two atoms. Of course, the gyratory force exercised about the surface of a magnet by the aggregate movements of the vortices cannot extend beyond the surface more than half the diameter of one of the minute areas of gyration alluded to. Wherefore, then, do these gyrations, when similar in direction, from their concurrence approach each other; when dissimilar in direction, from contrariety move away, even when situated comparatively at a great distance?

19. I should consider Ampere’s theory as more reasonable were it founded upon the existence of one fluid; since, in that case, vortices might be imagined without the necessity of supposing an endless and unaccountable separation and reunion of two sets of particles; not only devoid of any property capable of sustaining their alleged opposite gyrations, but actually endowed with an intense reciprocal attraction which must render such gyrations impossible. But even if grounded on the idea of one fluid, this celebrated hypothesis does not seem to me to account forthe phenomena which it was intended to explain. If distinct portions of any fluid do not attract or repel each other when at rest, wherefore should they either attract or repel each other when in motion? Evidently mere motion can generate neither attraction nor repulsion. Bodies projected horizontally gravitate with the same intensity, and consequently, in any given time, fall to the earth through the same perpendicular distance, whether moving with the celerity of a cannon ball, or undergoing no impulse excepting those arising from their own unresisted weights.

20. The objections which are thus shown to be applicable in the case of liquids, of which the neighbouring particles are destitute of the reaction requisite to produce the phenomena requiring explanation, must operate with still greater force where ethereal fluids are in question, of which the properties are positively irreconcilable with the phenomena. According both to Franklin and Dufay, bodies, when similarly electrified, should repel each other; yet in point of fact, collateral wires, when subjected to similar voltaic discharges, and of course similarly electrified, become reciprocally attractive, while such wires, when dissimilarly electrified by currents which are not analogous, become reciprocally repulsive.

21. Agreeably to Ampere, an iron bar, situated within a coil of wire subjected to a galvanic current, is magnetized, because the current in the wire is productive of an electrical whirlpool about every particle of the metal. When the iron is soft, the magnetism, and of course the gyrations of which its magnetism consists by the premises, cease for the most part as soon as the circuit through the coil is broken; but when the iron is in the more rigid state of hardened steel, the gyrations continue for any length of time after the exciting cause has ceased.

22. This theory does not explain wherefore the hardening of the steel should cause the gyration to be more difficult to induce, yet more lasting when its induction is effected. Evidently the metallic particles must take some part in the process; since it is dependent for its existence and endurance upon their nature and their state. Yet no function is assigned to these particles. In fact, it is inconceivable either that they can participate in, or contribute to, the supposed gyration.

23. The electrical fluid in an iron bar cannot form a vortex about each particle, all the vortices turning in one direction, without a conflict between those which are contiguous. In order not to conflict with each other, the alternate vortices would have to turn in different directions, like interlocking cog-wheels in machinery. But in that case, if magnetism be due to currents, the magneto-inductive influence of one set would neutralize that of the other. Again, how can a current, excited by a battery in one circuitous conductor, cause, by dynamic induction, a current in theopposite direction, through another conductor parallel to the first, but insulated therefrom? How can a current of quantity in a ribbon coil[63]give rise to one of intensity in a coil of fine wire, rushing of course with a velocity commensurate with the intensity thus imparted?

24. From the preceding considerations, and others which will be stated, it follows that it has been erroneously inferred that the only difference between galvanic and frictional electricity is dependent on quantity and intensity. It must be evident that there is a diversity in the nature of these affections of matter, sufficient to create a line of demarcation between them.

25. Having stated my objections to the electrical theories heretofore advanced, it may be proper that I should suggest any hypothetical views which may appear to me of a character to amend or to supersede those to which I have objected. But however I may have been emboldened to point out defects which have appeared to me to be inherent in the theories heretofore accredited, I am far from presuming to devise any substitute which will be unobjectionable. I am fully aware that there is an obscurity as respects the nature and mutual influence of chemical affinity, heat, light, electricity, magnetism, and vitality, which science can only to a minute extent dispel.

26. The hypothesis which I now deem preferable is so much indebted to the researches and suggestions of Farraday and others, that, were it true, I could claim for myself but a small share of the merit of its origination. That sagacious electrician employs the following language: “In the long-continued course of experimental inquiry, in which I have been engaged, this general result has pressed upon me constantly—namely, the necessity of admitting two forces or directions of force, combined with the impossibility of separating these two forces or electricities from each other.” (Experimental Researches, 1163.)[64]

27. Subsequently, (1244,) after citing another proof of the inseparability of the two electric forces, he allegesit to be“another argument in favour of the view that induction and its concomitant phenomena depend upona polarity of the particles of matter!”

28. The grounds upon which I venture to advance a theory are as follows:

The existence of two heterogeneous polar forces acting in opposite directions, and necessarily connate and coexistent; yet capable of reciprocal neutralization, agreeably to the authority of Farraday and others: the polarity of matter in general, as displayed during the crystallization and vegetation of salts: also as made evident by Farraday’s late researches, and the experiments and observations of Hunt: the very small proportion of the space in solids, as in the instance of potassium and other metals, which are apparently occupied by the ponderable atoms; while, agreeably to the researches and speculations of Farraday, (rightly interpreted,) the residual space must be replete with imponderable matter: the experiments and inferences of Davy and others, tending to sanction the idea that an imponderable ethereal fluid must pervade the creation: the perfect identity of the polarizing effects, transiently created in a wire by subjection to a galvanic discharge, with those produced by the permanent polarizing power of a steel magnet: the utter heterogeneousness of the powers of galvanic and frictional electricity, as respects ability to produce sparks before contact, and likewise of the polarities which they respectively produce: and superficiality of electricity proper during discharge as well as when existing upon insulated surfaces, as demonstrated by atmospheric electricity when conveyed by telegraphic wires, agreeably to Henry; the sounds observedseverally by Page, Henry, and Mairran, as being consequent to making and breaking a galvanic circuit through a conductor, or magnetizing or demagnetizing by means of surrounding galvanized coils.

29. It has been most sagaciously pointed out by Farraday that four hundred and thirty atoms, which form a cube of potassium in the metallic state, must occupy nearly six times as much space as the same number of similar atoms fill, when existing in a cube of hydrated oxide of potassium of the same size; which, beside seven hundred metallic atoms, must hold seven hundred atoms of hydrogen and fourteen hundred of oxygen—in all two thousand eight hundred atoms; whence it follows that, in the metallic cube, there must beroomfor six times as many atoms as it actually holds.

30. With all due deference, I am of opinion that this distinguished philosopher has not been consistent in assuming that, agreeably to the Newtonian idea of ponderable atoms, the space in potassium not replete with metal must be vacant; since, according to facts established by his researches, or resulting therefrom, an enormous quantity both of the causes of heat and of electricity exists in metals. Moreover, agreeably to his recent speculations, those causes must consist of material, independent, imponderable matter, occupying the whole of the space in which their efficacy is perceptible. To the evolution of the imponderable matter thus associated, the incandescence of a globule of potassium on contact with water, may be ascribed, since it is the consequence of the displacement of such matter by the elements of water, which, in replacing it, converts the metal into the hydrated oxide called caustic potash.

31. The existence both of the causes of electricity and heat in metals is likewise confirmed by the fact that the inductive influence of a magnet is sufficient to cause all the phenomena of heat, electrolysis, and magnetism, as exemplified by the magneto-electric machine. The existence of the cause of heat in metals is also evident from the ignition of an iron rod when hammered, or the deflagration of wire by the discharge of a Leyden battery.

32. The superiority of metals as electrical conductors may be the consequence of the pre-eminent abundance of imponderable matter entering into their composition, as above alluded to in the case of potassium.

33. Graham, in his Elements, treating of electricity, alleges that the “great discoveries of Farraday have completely altered the aspect of this department of science, and suggests that all electrical phenomena whatever involve the presence of matter.” Unless the distinguished author from whom this quotation is made intended to restrict the meaning of the word matter to ponderable matter, there was no novelty in the idea that electrical phenomena involve the presence of matter, since the hypotheses of Franklin and Dufay assume the existence of one or more imponderable material fluids. But, on the other hand, if the meaning of the wordmatteris only to comprise that which is ponderable, the allegation is inconsistent with the authority cited. According to the researches of Farraday, there is an enormous electrical power in metals, and, according to his speculations, such powers must be considered as imponderable materialprinciples, pervading the space within which they prevail, independently of any ponderable atom acting as a basis for material properties; the existence of such atoms being represented as questionable.

34. It having been shown that in electrical discharges there cannot reasonably be any transfer of matter, so as to justify the idea of their being effected either by one current or by two currents, the only alternative seems to be that the phenomena are due to a progressive affection of the conducting medium, analogous in its mode of propagation to waves, as in the case of liquids, or the aërial or ethereal undulations to which sound and light are ascribed. (1, 2, 3, &c.)

35. The idea intended to be conveyed by the word wave, as applied in common to the undulatory affections above mentioned, and that which is conceived to be the cause of the phenomena usually ascribed to one or more electrical currents, requires only that there should be a state of matter, which, while it may be utterly different from either of those which constitute the waves of water, light, or sound, may, nevertheless, like either, pass successively from one portion of a mass to another.

36. The affection thus designated may be reasonably distinguished from other waves, as awave of polarization, since the wire acts, so long as subjected to the reiterated discharges of a voltaic series, as if it were converted into innumerable small magnets, situated like tangents to radii proceeding from its axis.

37. But if a polarizable medium be requisite to electrical discharges, since they pass through a space when devoid ofponderablematter, there must be someimponderablemedium through which they can be effected. Hence we have reason to infer that there is an imponderable existing throughout all space, as well as within conductors, which is more or less the medium of the opposite waves essential to electric discharges. Quoting his own language, Davy’s experiments led him to consider “that space, (meaning void space,) where there is not an appreciable quantity of this matter, (meaning ponderable matter,) is capable of exhibiting electrical phenomena:” also that such phenomena “are produced by a highly subtile fluid or fluids.” Moreover, that “it may be assumed, as in the hypothesis of Hooke, Euler, and Huyghens, that an ethereal matter susceptible of electrical affections fills all space.”

38. Agreeably to the suggestions above made, all ponderable matter which is liable to be electrifiedinternallyby electrical discharges, may be considered as consisting of atoms composed of imponderable ethereo-electric particles in a state of combination with ponderable particles, analogous to that which has been supposed to exist between such particles and caloric when causing expansion, liquidity, or the aëriform state. Atoms, so constituted of ethereal and ponderable particles, may be designated as ethereo-ponderable atoms.[65]

39. A quiescent charge of frictional electricity, only affecting the superficies of any ponderable mass with which it may be associated, and having no influence upon the component ethereo-ponderable atoms severally, is not to be ascribed to redundancies or deficiencies of the ethereal matter, but to different states of polarization produced in different sets of the particles of such matter existing about the electrifiable bodies.[66]During the action of an electrical machine, these particles are polarized by the opposite polarities transiently induced in the surfaces subjected to friction; one set of particles going with the electric, the other remaining with the rubber.

40. The particles thus oppositely polarized, severally divide their appropriate polarities with other ethereal matter surrounding the conductors, and this, when insulated, is retained until a further polarization results from the same process. Thus are the ethereo-electric atmospheres respectively surrounding the positive and negative conductors oppositely polarized, and consequently charged to the degree which the machine is competent to induce. Under these circumstances, if a conducting rod be made to form between them a communication, by touching each conductor with one of its ends, the polarities of the ethereo-electric atmospheres by which they are severally surrounded propagate themselves, by a wave-like process, over and more or less through the rod, according to its nature and dimensions, so as to meet intermediately, and thus produce reciprocal neutralization.

41. When the oppositely polarizing waves, generated by friction, as above described, are by means of a conducting communication transmitted to the surface of a coated pane, the two different portions of the electro-ether there existing are severally polarized in opposite ways, one being endowed with the properties usually called vitreous, or positive, the other with those usually called resinous, or negative. In fact, the two polarized atmospheres thus created, may be conveniently designated as the “two electricities,” and alluded to in the language heretofore employed in treating of phenomena, agreeably to the hypothesis which assumes the existence of heterogeneous fluids instead of heterogeneous polarities.

42. Of course it will follow, that the oppositely polarized ethereal atmospheres thus produced, one on each surface of the electric which keeps them apart, must exercise toward each other an attraction perfectly analogous to that which has been supposed to be exercised by the imaginary heterogeneous electric fluids of Dufay. The electro-ether[67]being elastic,a condensation over each of the charged surfaces, proportionable to the attractive force must ensue; while over the surface of an electrified conductor, the similarly polarized atoms, not being attracted by those in an oppositely polarized atmosphere beneath the surface, tend, by their reciprocally repulsive reagency, to exist further apart than in a neutral state. Hence, the electro-ether, as it exists over the surface of an insulated conductor, is rendered rarer, while, as existing over the surfaces of charged panes or Leyden jars, it must be in a state of condensation.[68]And, consequently, while the space perceptibly electrified by the charge of a conductor, for equal areas and charging power, is much more extensive than the space in which the charge of a coated pane is perceptible, the striking distance being likewise much greater; yet upon any body, successively subjected to a discharge from each, the effect will be more potent when produced by means of the pane.

43. In proportion as a wire is small in comparison with the charge which it may be made the means of neutralizing, the conducting power seems to be more dependent on the sectional area,[69]and less upon the extent of surface. The reciprocal repulsion of the similarly polarized ethereal particles must tend always to make them seek the surface, but at the same time their attraction for the ethereo-ponderable particles composing the wire has the opposite effect, and tends to derange these from their normal polar state of quiescence. Commensurate with the extent in which this state is subverted, is the resulting heat, electrolytic power, and electro-magnetic influence. The phenomena last mentioned are, however, secondary effects consequent to the participation of the ethereo-ponderable matter in the undulations resulting from the statical discharge.

44. Such effects, making allowance for the extreme minuteness of the time occupied by the process, are probably, in all cases, proportional to the degree in which the ponderable matter is effected, up to the point at which it is dissipated by deflagration; but the duration of a statical discharge being almost infinitely minute for any length of coil which can conveniently be subjected thereto, the electro-magnetic and other effects of a statical discharge are not commensurate with the intensity of the affection of the wire.

45. There is, in fact, this additional reason for the diversity between the electro-magnetic power of a statical discharge, as compared with that of the voltaic series: any wire which is of sufficient length and tenuity to display the maximum power of deflagration by the former, cannot serve for the same purpose in the case of the latter. Moreover, the form of a helix closely wound, so that the coatings may touch, which is that most favourable for the reiteration of the magnetic influence of the circuit upon an iron rod, cannot be adopted in the case of statical discharges of high intensity, since the proximity of the circumvolutions would enable the ethereal waves, notwithstanding the interposition of cotton or silk, to crosssuperficially from one to the other, parallel to the axis of the included iron, instead of pursuing the circuitous channel afforded by the helix with the intensity requisite to the polarization of the ponderable atoms.

46. The intensity of the excitement produced by different electrical machines is estimated to be as the relative lengths of the sparks which proceed from their prime conductors respectively. Admitting that the relative intensity were merely as the length of the spark, not as the square of that length, still there would be an infinite difference between the intensity of a voltaic series and that of electrical machines, if measured by this test. Large electrical machines, like that at the Polytechnic Institution, London, give sparks at twenty inches and more; while, agreeably to Gassiott’s experiments, a Groves’s battery of 320 pairs, in full power, would not, before contact, give a spark atany distance, however minute. It follows, that, as respects the species of intensity which is indicated by length of sparks, or striking distance, the difference between the electricity of the most powerful voltaic series and electrical machines is not to be represented by any degree ofdisparity; it proves that galvanism proper and electricity proper are heterogeneous.

Back to IndexNext