Mr Faraday's Reply to Dr John Davijs Remarks, Sfc. 37 



mentioned in these extracts, two inferences respecting the heroes 

 may be drawn, — that they are never taken in abundance except 

 during fine weather; and that their absence from the surface 

 during storms, is not sufficient to protect them from serious 

 and even fatal injury. — (The figures of this Beroe are repre- 

 sented in Plate I. See last page of this Number.) 



Reply to Dr John Davy''s Remarks on Certain Statements by 

 Mr Faraday, contained in his " Researches ofi Electricity,'^ in 

 the Edinburgh Philosophical Journal for October \ 835. By 

 Michael Faraday, D. C. L., F. R. S., &c. &c. * 



The secretary of the Royal Society having mentioned to me 

 the preceding paper, I requested a sight of it, that I might, as 

 soon as possible, correct any error in the papers to which it re- 

 ferred, and of which it might make me conscious ; and having 

 read it, I am induced to hope the present note may accompany 

 Dr Davy's observations. 



I do not know that 1 have any right to suppose Dr Davy 

 generally does not understand me in my papers, and yet some- 

 thing of this kind must have occurred ; for instance, the new 

 law of conduction referred to in my Fourth Series, is not even 

 now evident to him, and therefore I think I cannot have erred 

 in supposing Sir Humphry Davy unacquainted with it. The law 

 is, that all substances decomposable by the pile are in the fluid 

 state conductors, and in the solid state nonconductors, of the 

 electricity of the voltaic battery (393, 394, 404, 407, 413, 505, 

 676, 679, 697, &c.). The more careful examination of this 

 law in other parts of my printed Researches shews that no bo- 

 dies but electrolytes have this relation to heat and electricity, 

 the few exceptions which seem to occur being probably only ap- 

 parent (690, &c.). That the title of law, therefore, is merited, 

 and that this law was not known to Sir Humphry Davy, are, I 

 think, justifiable conclusions, notwithstanding Dr Davy's remarks. 

 As to Priestley's results with the electric machine, they really 

 have nothing to do with the matter. 



• Reprinted, from the London and Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, at 

 request of Dr Faradav.— Edit. 



