254 STATE BOAED OF AGEICULTURE. 



he continues as follows: "Thus, the general proposition is demonstrated that 

 electricity resides on the surface of bodies, not penetrating to any sensible 

 depth ; hence the capacity for electricity will be proportionate to the area of 

 surface. It must be pointedly inculcated, however, that this remark only ap- 

 l^lies to electricity in a static or motionless condition. Where electric currents 

 are concerned, the power of a conductor to transmit a given charge is propor- 

 tionate to the mass of conductor of equal conducting power. This is a circum- 

 stance of great practical importance ; on its comprehension is based the con- 

 struction of slightning rod." — [Scoliern's Chemistry, p. 226. 



But as Mr. Lanphere does not seem to relish European authorities, I will give 

 him a few quotations from eminent American authorities. 



Henry Morton, president of Stevens' technological institute of New Jersey, 

 says: "Conduction in dynamic electricity resembles in all respects the same 

 action in the statical condition of the fluids. On account of the inappreciable 

 condensation of a current, the conductor does not act mainly by its surface, but 

 by its entire section." — [Johnson's Universal Cyclopedia, p. 1513. 



In order to settle the precise points of dispute between Mr. Lanphere and 

 myself, I wrote to three professors in as many eminent colleges in our land, — 

 men whose opinions are everywhere received as authority by really scientific 

 men. From the fact that they are actively engaged in teaching this science, 

 we are assured that they are fully informed on the latest facts and opinions on 

 this subject. 



As I wrote in almost the same words to all of these professors, I will save 

 space by giving only one copy of my letter, aiz. : the one I sent to Prof. Loomis, 

 who is professor of natural philosophy and astronomy in Yale college, and 

 author of a treatise on meteorology that is used in most of the colleges as a text- 

 book on this subject. The Yale professor of natural philosophy and author of 

 a standard work on meteorology would probably be as good authority on conduc- 

 tion of electricity as any quoted by Mr. L. Prof. Loomis knows something 

 about lightning rods, as is shown by his replies to my questions in the following 

 letter. I give his answer to each question with the emphasis which he himself 

 employed. 



Lansixg, Mcarcli 7, 1876. 



Prof. Loomis, — Dear Sir: — Pardon a stranger for Intruding on your time and taxing 

 your patience. I ask your opinion as a leading authority on meteorology, on the 

 subject of conduction of atmospheric electricitj'. Enclosed you will find a slip con- 

 taining the opinions of Faraday, Miller, Deschanel, and De la Kive, on the points 

 involved; hut these European authorities are called in question hy an aggrieved 

 lightning-rod dealer, and I wish to obtain the views of a few leaders in science in this 

 country. Will you favor me with brief answers to the following questions: 



1. Are Faraday, Miller, De la Eive, and Deschanel correct in their teachings that a 

 current of electricity is not conducted by mere surface action? Yes. 



2. Does increased surface (as in a tube), give increased power of conduction of 

 lightning? No. 



3. Will a tube afford better conduction than a solid bar of the same diameter? No. 

 Pardon me for asking such questions, but I do it in behalf of public health, and the 



protection of the tnasses against lightning and lightning-rod peddlers. 



Very Eespectfully, E. C. Kedzie. 



In a jiostscript Prof. Loomis adds: "Statical electricity resides wholly on 

 the surface of the conditctor ; but the capacity of a conductor to convey a cur- 

 rent of electricity is proj)ortioned to the area of a cross-section. 



E. Looms." 



The next letter was from E. S. Snell, professor of mathematics and natural 

 philosophy in Amherst College : 



