Views of the Theory of Galvanism, 167 



pable of producing current-electricity. I myself have drawn 

 a similar conclusion from a series of facts, which I made known 

 through the Phil. Mag. some time ago. 



Fechner now asserts that the phaenomena alluded to do 

 not prove the least thing in favour of the chemical theory. 

 Although the results of my late researches have, indeed, shown 

 (see L.&E. Phil. Mag., No. 74, 1838,) that inactive iron, being 

 voltaically associated with platina and put into nitric acid, pro- 

 duces a weak current, which, as it seems, is quite independent 

 of any chemical action, I nevertheless maintain that Faraday 

 and myself were fully entitled to draw the inference mentioned. 

 Hereafter I shall give my reasons for doing so. In support of 

 his sweeping assertion, Fechner says that he and Wetzlar had 

 satisfactorily proved, that the modification which iron under- 

 goes in nitric acid renders that metal more negative than it is 

 in its natural state. The fact that a highly negative metal 

 neither precipitated copper from a solution of blue vitriol, nor 

 was affected by nitric acid, nor produced a perceptible current 

 when voltaically combined with platina, could not therefore 

 be considered as irreconcilable with Volta's theory, &c. With 

 all deference to M. Fechner's great abilities and merits as a 

 philosopher, and particularly as an electrician, I cannot make 

 up my mind, as already stated, to submit myself to his judge- 

 ment. As to Mr. Faraday, I do not know whether he is pre- 

 pared to acknowledge the fallacy of his reasonings, but I 

 strongly doubt [whether] he is. The reasons which determine 

 me to insist upon my former opinions are as follows. 



The assertion of M. Fechner, according to which iron, by 

 assuming its peculiar condition, becomes a highly negative 

 body, has, if translated into the language of the chemical 

 theory, no other meaning than this ; — that iron becomes a metal 

 less oxidable than it is in its natural state. Fechner's view 

 of the case implies to a certain degree a hypothetical expla- 

 nation of the non-oxidability of iron, whilst I confine myself 

 to stating facts, and the order in which certain phaenomena 

 succeed to one another. But let us for a moment grant the 

 existence of electrical relations of bodies to one another, such 

 as supposed by the voltaists; and if we further admit that by 

 some means or other, for instance, by a peculiar action of 

 nitric acid, iron can be changed from an electro-positive metal 

 into a negative one, it is to be asked why such a change is ef- 

 fected by making common iron the anode of a current. Ac- 

 cording to my experiments, iron, whilst acting the part of the 

 positive electrode of a pile, does not throw down the smallest 

 particle of copper out of a solution of blue vitriol, and allows 

 oxygen to be disengaged just as platina does. Agreeably 



