458 Mr. Clarke in reply to Mr. Saxton. 



accused of being disingenuous ; but I have not proposed or at- 

 tempted such a history. 



" In Paris I was told by Professor Pouillet that there was as 

 much difference between my machine and Newman's (meaning 

 Saxton's) as there was between the latter and Pixii's. The same 

 words nearly were used in London by Dr. D. B. Reid, Messrs. 

 Sturgeon, Leithead, and BachhofFner; and in Dublin the same 

 remark was made by Professor Lloyd and Dr. Apjohn, the 

 former of whom, although previously in possession of Mr. 

 Saxton's machine, purchased one of mine, and the latter has 

 actually entrusted to me one of Mr. Saxton's to be altered ac- 

 cording to my principle of construction for the Royal College 

 of Surgeons, Ireland. Mr. Saxton next proceeds to state 

 that until December 1835, he had not added the double arma- 

 ture, whereas I sold three of my machines with double arma- 

 tures in the April preceding. 



" Mr. Saxton goes on to state that his first idea of the double 

 armature suggested itself to him on his seeing Count di Pre- 

 devalli's machine in November 1833. From the same source 

 I derived my idea, but certainly before Mr. Saxton, in as much 

 as I had the machine in my hands before he had ever seen it. 

 I was then in the employment of Watkins and Hill, to whom 

 this machine was sent on its coming from Paris to be put in 

 order, and I was the person in whose hands it was placed. 

 I attended it at the Gallery, and can assuredly state that the 

 machine did not exhibit the effects stated by Mr. Saxton. It 

 did not charge the Leyden jar. The electrometer, or rather 

 the electroscope, was affected, because the jar had been pre- 

 viously charged with dry electricity, and the residual electri- 

 city was the cause of the effect attributed by Mr. Saxton to 

 the magnetic machine. Again, if the idea occurred in 1833, 

 why did he not put it in practice until 1835 ? The truth is, it 

 was not until after he had seen my machines with the double 

 armatures, and after he saw the effects produced by a dwarf 

 machine of my making, under the directions of Charles Payne, 

 Esq., deposited in the Adelaide Gallery, as contrasted with 

 his gigantic instrument. I can, moreover, fearlessly call on 

 Dr. Faraday to bear me out in my statement that he himself 

 told me the machine as constructed by me gave more powerful 

 shocks than any he had previously seen. 



With respect to Mr. Saxton's observations of the cause of 

 the difference between the states which are generally termed 

 quantity and intensity, I beg leave to offer one or two remarks. 

 He states that the investigations of Dr. Henry of Philadel- 

 phia, Mr. Jennings, and Dr. Faraday fully proved that the 

 spark is best obtained from a magneto-electric coil when short ! 



